United We Stand, Divided We Fall

Once again this morning, Allistair Begg got me thinking. On his radio program, Truth for Life, he noted that many groups with differing theology often attempt to unite in support of a good cause, or in objection to an immoral cultural view.

For example, Begg pointed out that Muslims and Christians are "united" in their pro-life, anti-abortion stance. But this unity is only surface-level. And since it is only surface-level (based on issues of morality - symptoms - rather than on issues of theology - the disease), Begg suggests that our so-called unity is a myth, a warm and fuzzy feel-good sensation that makes us think we're on the right path. How often do we find ourselves treating the symptoms rather than fighting the disease?!

Modern Culture thinks, "If we unite to battle the symptoms (moral issues), we can overcome our division (theology)." But the opposite is true. That which divides (theology) can never be overcome by uniting to fight the symptoms (moral issues).

This is false:
United on issues of morality, we stand; divided on issues of morality, we fall.

This is true:
United in theology, we stand; divided in theology, we fall.

The ministry of Answers in Genesis is so good at realizing this. They don't fight the symptoms that we call humanism, abortion, homosexuality, moral relativism, etc. Instead they fight the theology. They fight evolution and support Biblical Creation. United in matters of theology, we stand. For God is able to make us stand (Romans 14:4).

Catholics Debating Evolution and ID

The title link opens a story about Pope Benedict engaging in a casual conversation with some of his former students on the topic of evolution theory.

The article typical bashes Protestant Fundamentalists who support that silly truth called creationism - that the Bible accurately depicts a young-earth creation. But I find it interesting that the Catholics are discussing this. Raised in the Catholic church and school system, I was indoctrinated with evolution, never taught the Biblical view even as myth, and, since it was not popular during my school days, never shown anything to do with Intelligent Design. Catholicism has largely embraced evolution theory in the past, and the Pope's calling ID to attention may be a small step in the right direction. In other words, at least the leader of a large group of people claiming to worship their Creator (Catholics) is actually trying to persuade that large group of people that there is a Creator.

Nevertheless, this effort, like that of the SBC in hiring ID expert William Dembski, falls far short of "zeal with knowledge." It is a shame that the vast majority of Christians (self-proclaimed and/or the real thing) just yield to the popular thought of the day - rather than holding fast to the strong and true Word of God.

We have years because the earth goes around the sun.
We have months based on the lunar cycles.
We have days because the moon goes around the earth.
We hours hours based on light and the lunar cycle.
We have minutes and seconds for the same reason.

But why, pray tell, do we have weeks? Weeks have absolutely nothing to do with anything astonomical. Weeks are Biblical, and that alone. Here are 10 passages from the Bible that give reason for our week.

Exodus 20:8-11 says:

Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you
shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD
your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or
daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien
within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the
sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the
LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Romans 14 Bible Study Preview

We will study Romans 14 on Tuesday. It's a great passage in which Paul deals with life application issues that to this day come up between Christians. Not to take anything away from chapters 12 and 13, but this chapter in Paul's lifestyle-application portion of his letter to the Romans addresses the moral and ethical dilemmas that we face daily. Here is the text - in the order we will study it - along with some things to consider.

1Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.... 10You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11It is written: ‘‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord, ‘every knee will bow before Me; every tongue will confess to God.’’ [Isaiah 45:23] 12So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God. 13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way.

We'll look at verses 1-4 and 10-13 together. It's a big chunk, and there's lots here worthy of discussion. Paul begins by telling the Roman Christians to accept those with weak faith. What does that mean? Next question: What are the disputable matters that Paul mentions here? Verses 2-3 give us an illustration of foods. The Jewish Christians of Paul's day were probably abstaining from meat that had been sacrificed to pagan idols. The Gentile Christians didn't care where the meat had been. They were hungry - and thankful to have it! Paul says that the Jewish Christians should not condemn the Gentiles in this matter. And the Gentiles shouldn't look down on the Jewish Christians for not enjoying their Christian liberty more fully. Mutual respect is the principle. Verse 4 ties in to verses 10-13 very well. Paul gives the illustration of a household servant. The one judging this servant is not the head of the household, so he or she needs to avoid judging. It's not his or her place. But that's not to say there isn't a place for correction and guidance in the truth. How do we keep the balance in this regard? Paul transitions from attitude towards one another to behavior towards one another. And finally, Paul tells us to keep in mind the bigger picture. Eating and drinking is a little thing. We will all face judgment and give an account of our lives to God. That's a big thing!

5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that He might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

Verses 5-9 offer another illustration - that of observing feast days. This is not the Lord's Day / Sabbath. Paul here is talking again about the typical practice of Jewish Christians to continue their traditional feast day observances compared to the Gentile Christians lack of feast day observances. Notice Paul's phrase in verse 5: "Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind." That's a very important statement, as some Christians use it as license to sin - since they are "convinced that what they are doing is not wrong. We'll talk about this more on Tuesday. But that's not the only important statement in this passage. Paul adds, "If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord." Being fully convinced in our own minds is not enough, because our minds struggle with sin. Our decisions must also be to the Lord or for the Lord. We are free to serve Christ and His Body - the Church. Here is a summary of how to make choices on "disputable matters:" (1) Be fully convinced that it is right, (2) be fully convinced that it is glorifying to God, and (3) be fully convinced that it is benficial to the Body of Christ.

14As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food [or nothing] is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died.... 20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall. 22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

We'll look at v14-15 together with v20-23. What makes something unclean? Motive and conscience! Yet how does this keep truth objective? If motive and conscience is what matters, what is to keep truth from becoming subjective? Read 1 Corinthians 8 as a parallel to this chapter, and notice the importance that God places on the edification (sanctification) of the Body of Christ. Everything we do AFFECTS the Body, so everything we do MUST be for the edification of the Body. That's easy to understand, but it's sure hard to put into practice. Verses 20-23 again call us to consider our consciences. We must not ignore them, but at the same time, we must realize that our consciences require constant training and correction. Our consciences are hardly infallible. Only by being transformed by the renewal of our minds will we be able to discern the will of God in every circumstance (Romans 12:1-2).

16Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil.

V16 gets its own treatment. When it comes to life's "disputable matters," be as lenient as possible; but when it comes to doctrine and the clear teaching of Scripture, don't give an inch. If we are displaying the fruits of the Spirit and somehow offending our brothers by so doing, we must not cease to display the fruits of the Spirit. Let our brothers be offended - living the truth on essentials is essential.

17For the Kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men. 19Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification.

V17-19 will aptly wrap up our study of the chapter. Paul has labored to address the little things. But he says these things are not the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter is this: We are free in Christ not merely to eat or not eat, but to live to righteousness (1 Peter 2:24), share God's peace (John 14:27), and experience the fullness of God's joy (John 15:11). And we do these things not because God needs us to, but because the Body of Christ needs us to. We exist for one another to experience mutual edification and sanctification. Verrse 19 concludes: "Let us therefore make every effort to do whatever leads to peace and to mutual edification."

What to make of Greg Boyd?

Take a trip to this blog and read the recommended NY Times article. Watch the video too, and consider what we learn from Boyd. He is considered by most to be radical - a propnent of Open Theism, that God either does not know the furture or that God only knows that part of the future that is knowable. There are major concerns here. But in this article and video, Boyd at least calls us as evangelical Christians to think about our nationalism. In Romans 13, Paul commands us to give respect and honor to those deserving of respect and honor. Does Boyd think our nation's leaders (especially the military) are undeserving of these tributes? Where do we draw the line between idolatry and honor?