Evidently the message of Easter is on the same level as sharp objects, horror movies, and rollercoaster rides as “not suitable for children.”  After reviewing the Sunday School lessons for the 5-year olds in their church, leaders at a church in Raleigh, NC decided to change the focus of Easter “because of the graphic nature of the Easter story and the crucifixion specifically.” 

Instead of teaching the children about the cross and the resurrection, the church decided to focus on the Last Supper, “when Jesus shared a meal and spent time with people He loved.”  The church leaders believed that “the crucifixion is simply too violent.”  At the end of the letter the leaders expressed that such efforts were taken for the purpose of “preparing preschoolers to know God’s love personally.” 

The letter goes on to advocate their decision for removing the Easter story by arguing that they are seeking to “build a foundation for that eventual decision by focusing on God’s love and telling preschoolers that ‘Jesus wants to be my friend forever.’”

In other words, these church leaders somehow think that leaving out the actually story of Easter is somehow better for children.  While I am not saying one should go into graphic detail with children concerning the beatings and bodily mutilation that Jesus experienced, you cannot lead anyone, even children, to “know God’s love personally” by bypassing the cross and the empty grave. 

To substitute the greatest message ever told [albeit a violent one] by teaching the Lord Supper as “Jesus spends time with people He loved” so you should be like Jesus and spend time with people you love [which is an extremely problematic interpretation of the Lord’s Supper by itself] is to raise a future generation that will not understand what it means to “take up a cross.” 

In fact, this is exactly the kind of Jesus most people want, namely a Jesus that “hangs out” with us because he “loves us personally.”  He is a lot more comfortable that way.  A Jesus, however, that hangs on a bloody cross, is placed in a borrowed tomb, and walks out of a cold, dead grave serves as a constant reminder of the punishment our sin demanded. 

All throughout the New Testament the gospel writers proclaim to young and old the glory of a humiliating cross and the hope of a gloomy tomb (Acts 2:36-39).  The Bible gives parents and church leaders the tremendous responsibility to raise a generation that finds their identity in a Jewish man who “for the hope set before Him endured the cross” (Hebrews 12:2). 

As the parent of an almost 3-year old and a minister of the gospel of Jesus Christ, I have not been given the freedom or flexibility to offer my son, or my congregation, an “alternate ending” or “replacement version” of the Easter story.  For to ignore the cross and resurrection, at any age, is to ignore the only way my son, or my congregation, can “know God’s love personally.” 

So this Easter tell the story, the whole story.  Tell about the man who is God in the flesh, even if it is hard to understand.  Tell about the man who gave his life on a Roman cross, even if it is slightly graphic.  Tell about a man who walked out of a borrowed Palestinian tomb, even if it is hard to believe.  For any other version is simply “not suitable for children.”   

Pastor Wes

If you like some of the previous posts about seeing the gospel throughout the biblical narrative, then I recommend Grame Goldsworthy's book "According to Plan."  This is an excellent book for those who are interested in understanding how to study Scripture, how to see typology in the OT, and how to view the unfolding narrative of Scripture.  This is one of those books that I have basically highlighted something on every page. 

More posts and things to come...

Pastor Wes

BTW...if you have any topic requests, please submit them to me at wfeltner@tbcdecatur.org.

When we think about the gospel we are often quick to jump to John 3:16 or some other New Testament reference.  It is easy for us to view the New Testament as the "gospel" and the Old Testament as "law."  While I understand the reasoning for this, the gospel is presented to us throughout the Old Testament and if we miss it, we will miss what the Old Testament ultimately about. 

The Old Testament is not a collection of "character studies" or "moral lessons" that teach us how we are to live or not to live.  The Old Testament is a narrative of people, events, and situations that are pointing us to a single man...Jesus Christ.  If we fail to see Jesus in the Old Testament narrative, if we fail to see the proclamation of the gospel throughout the pages of the Old Testament, we miss the entire point.  In light of the Incarnation, we are able to look back and see what the Old Testament narrative was telling us all along. 

Take for example 1 Samuel 4-5, the story about the capture of the Ark of the Covenant by the Philistines.  We often teach this text as though we should be obedient unlike Israel, or to turn to God rather than the symbols of God, or how God is more powerful than Dagon (the Philistine god).  And yet to do so (though not inaccurate) would miss what this text is foreshadowing. 

Notice the elements of this narrative.

1)  A sinful, rebellious people (1 Samuel 2:12-4:4).  Israel is defeated in battle because they had disobeyed the Lord.  God had promised them in Deut 28 that if they obeyed He would grant them victory, but if they disobeyed He would deliver them into the hands of their enemies.  In 1 Samuel 2 we find the sons of Eli, who were leaders in the nation of Israel, are blaspheming against Yahweh and He tells Samuel that He is going to judge them for it.  As a result, Israel is defeated in battle with 4,000 men dead on the battlefield. 

2)  An external solution to sin (1 Samuel 4:3-9).  Rather than repenting of their sin, Israel turns to the Ark of the Covenant as their source of strength.  Rather than remembering what God had told them in Deut 28, they turn to a symbolic representation of God's presence for deliverance.  When the ark is brought from Shiloh, the nation rejoices with great shouting, so much so the Philistines become afraid and prepare for battle.

3)  The wages of sin is death (1 Samuel 4:10-11).   What was the outcome of this "sure thing?"  There are 30,000 soldiers dead on the battlefield.  The text shows us here how sin and rebellion always leads to death, something that goes back as far as the Garden of Eden. 

4)  God in captivity (1 Samuel 4:12-17).  As a result of their defeat, the ark of God (which represented the presence of God) was captured by the Philistines, taken to Ashdod, and placed in the temple.  The God of Israel was symbolically made to look humiliating as though the god of the Philistines was greater than Yahweh. 

5)  Do not be afraid, for you have borne a son (1 Samuel 4:19-22).  When word returns that the ark has been captured, not only does Eli die but his daughter-in-law goes into labor and delivers a son.  The text uses the same language that would later be spoken to a Jewish virgin, "Do not be afraid, for you have borne a son."  However, unlike Immanuel (God with us), this child was named Ichabod (God had departed). 

6)  But on the third day (1 Samuel 5:1-4).  The Philistines placed the ark of God before Dagon as an expression of victory over Yahweh.  The next day (day two) they find that Dagon had fallen over face-first on the ground.  On the following day (day 3), they find that Dagon has fallen over again, except this time his head has fallen off, a foreshadowing of the "crushing of the head" (Genesis 3:15) that our Lord would do to His enemy after walking out of a Palestinian tomb.

7)  An anointed King (2 Samuel 5:17-19).  A day comes when the anointed king of God (David), one who was marked out by the spirit of God, returns and defeats the Philistines (the enemies of God). 

8)  The presence of God with His people (2 Samuel 6:1-2).  The result of this victory is that the ark of God is returned to the people of God. 

The narrative is not ultimately about "don’t be like Israel."  It is not about "you need to be more obedient."  The narrative is pointing us to our need for a Savior.  We are a rebellious people (#1) who seek to earn our own salvation (#2) and deserve death (#3).  As a result of our sin God sent His son (#5) who was made a captive to the enemy of God (#4) and humiliated by a cross.  For three days it looked as though the enemy of God was victorious and that God was defeated, but on the third day (#6) Jesus crushed the head of the god of this world.  A day will come when this anointed King will come again to defeat the enemies of God (#7) and the presence of God will be with the people of God for eternity (#8).

What we see in 1 Samuel 4 is not just the telling of a historically event in the life of Israel.  It is not a story for us to glean moral lessons from to help us with our daily living. Rather, what we see in 1 Samuel 4 is the gospel of Jesus Christ.  
 

Pastor Wes

Many from our Sunday night Bible Study (“Seeing Christ in all of Scripture”) have asked me to post some of my notes.  Here is an overview of a few of the things we have been studying and looked at this past Sunday.  If you would like a more thorough description feel free to email me. 

Main Point: The Old Testament is a narrative of literal people and literal events but only foreshadow what God is ultimately doing, namely progressively guiding us towards one man…Jesus Christ. The entire OT is longing for, pointing towards, and drawing us closer to the anointed One of God, who Paul says fulfills all the promises of God. (2 Cor 1:19-20)

Old Testament types of Christ (a partial list)

Gen 3:15 promises an offspring
Jesus is that offspring (Gal 3:16)

Exodus 4:22 Israel is God's firstborn
Jesus is God's firstborn (Col 1:15)

Gen 17:10 Covenant sign of circumcision
Circumcision points to Christ (Col 2:11-12)

Exodus 26 Israel is given a temple
Jesus says He is the temple (Jn 2:19)

Exodus 19 Israel is given a priesthood
Jesus is the priesthood (Heb 4:15, 5:6, 8:1)

Deut 8:2 Israel is 40 yrs in the wilderness
Jesus is 40 days in the wilderness (Matt 4:1)

Israel is promised a New Covenant (Jer 31)
Jesus is that New Covenant (Heb 10)

Is 45 Israel is God's chosen people
Jesus is God's chosen (Matt 3:16, 12:18)

Hosea 11:1 Israel is brought from Egypt
Jesus is brought from Egypt (Matt 2:15)

Ezekiel 19 Israel is a fruitless vineyard
Jesus is the true Vine (John 15)

Joshua 4 Israel comes out of the Jordan
Jesus comes up from the Jordan (Matt 3:13)

Exodus 12:5 A spotless male lamb is to be sacrificed
Jesus is the male Lamb of God (Jn 1:29)

Gen 12/15 Abraham promised land
Jesus inherits the earth (Matt 28)

Gen 12/15 Abraham promised a people
Jesus is the Israel of God (Gal 3)

2 Sam 7 David is promised a throne
Jesus receives the throne of David (Luke 2)

Regarding Israel, Israel is Jesus of Nazareth.  The One that, as was promised to OT Israel, is raised from the dead and marked out with the Spirit (Ezek 37:13-14; Rom 1:2-4). That same Spirit guarantees that all who share the Spirit of Christ are “joint heirs with Christ” and promised the same inheritance (Rom 8:17).  Therefore in Christ, we receive the inheritance of Abraham because I am in the fulfillment of Abraham’s true seed, Jesus Christ.  

Therefore, when you interpret the Old Testament, you must interpret it in light of Christ. The promises in the Old Testament are stages of God's revelation, which come to final fulfillment in Christ.  May you find your fulfillment in Him as well!

Pastor Wes

When one thinks about the anti-Christ, the image that come to mind is often far from a biblical understanding of anti-Christ. So often we think of a smooth-talking man named Dameon whose eyes turn red with a tattooed 666 on his forehead traveling door-to-door selling the latest version of micro-chip implants, which are conveniently placed inside the right hand. It is this imagery that has caused people to be afraid of every new technology from the credit card to computers. 

I remember as a kid when the Kroger card came out hearing pastors preach, “See, that is just one more way the anti-Christ can keep track of you.”  I never could figure out why the anti-Christ cared about my grocery list?  I suppose he wanted to make sure we bought “deviled” eggs (I’m sorry, I couldn’t resist).  These things, some claim, are just many ways the anti-Christ can take over the world and enslave humanity.

While your imagination may not have run as wild as others concerning the anti-Christ, if you are like me you have imagined the anti-Christ as something from a bad horror flick, rather than an actual human being who everyone likes and wants to follow. In this article, I hope to give you a better understanding of what the Scripture teaches concerning the anti-Christ.

On Sunday nights I have been teaching on “Seeing Christ in All of Scripture.” I have spent a great deal of time outlining the Old Testament “types” of Christ (Adam, Jonah, David, Israel, etc). If you do not understand how there were many christs (anointed ones of God) that ultimately point us to a final Christ (the true Son of God), you will not understand the anti-Christ either. You see, so often when we think of anti-Christ we think of one final person waiting to be revealed in the end. Yet, the Scripture is full of anti-Christs who have stood against the plan and purpose of God in order to deceive the people of God. So what constitutes an anti-Christ?

1) A Beast-like figure. The Bible portrays anti-Christ as a beast-like figure (Rev 11).  One must remember that the book of Revelation is apocalyptic literature and is symbolic. In other words, this figure is acting like a beast, not that he is actually an animal. Beasts throughout the Scriptures are uncontrolled and untamed. We get the imagery of one who does not want to be ruled by another, rather acts according to his desires and passions.

2) Rebellion against authority. This is very similar to the previous point. However, Paul points out in 2 Thes 2 that the anti-Christ opposes authority and seeks to place himself above all other idols and gods. He places himself as the central authority figure.

3) Claims of divinity. Paul goes on to add that he proclaims himself as a god and takes his seat in the temple. Dispensationalists misunderstand this to mean the rebuilding of the temple in the future. However, the New Testament clearly teaches that the temple is Jesus Christ along with those who are united with the true Temple, the church. Therefore, the anti-Christ is one who is seeking to be worshipped, even by those who are religious.

4) Deception through signs and wonders. The anti-Christ is one who is persuasive, does many great deeds, says things people want to hear, and performs things that draw attention to himself. Many are deceived because they do not hold fast to the truth.

5) The mark of 666. This is one that is very misunderstood. Once again, dispensationalists have gone too far in their literal interpretation and consequently many look for actual tattoos on the forehead. This number simple stands for a mark of imperfection. 777 is the number of perfection, and the Scripture speaks of 666 as symbolic imperfection. The fact that it is on the forehead is a sign of identification. In other words, you are either identified with the anti-Christ or identified with the True Christ.

These are a few “marks” of a biblical understanding of anti-Christ. These marks have been true for hundreds of years. The Bible is much more concerned with the spirit of anti-Christ than a final man. Take for example King Nebuchadnezzar in the book of Daniel. He is portrayed as a beast-like figure (Dan 4:32), he exalts himself as a god (Daniel 3), he demands the people of God to bow (identification) before the sound of his name (Daniel 3), and he exalts himself as a god. This is anti-Christ!!! Therefore, just as there are many types of Christ and then one final Christ, there are also many types of anti-Christ and then one final anti-Christ.

When the apostle John speaks of a beast and a spirit of anti-Christ (1 John 4, Rev 11) he is not speaking about some future figure waiting to be revealed hundreds of years from when he was writing, rather he was speaking to his listeners concerning the anti-Christ in their day, namely a Roman emperor (Caesar) who would persecute them if they did not deny Christ. John is not writing to comfort people in persecution regarding a beast-like figure who would not exist for hundreds of years. Rather, he warns them of this beast-like figure precisely because what was true in their day regarding anti-Christ, has been true in every figure (Hitler for example) of anti-Christ since the first spirit of anti-Christ in the garden of Eden (the serpent). 

While there will certainly be a final anti-Christ (2 Thes 2), the Bible teaches that we should be less concerned about who he will be and more concerned about the spirit of anti-Christ that we are facing in our day. While we search for tattooed foreheads, we are being deceived by politicians promising safety and legislating death. We are afraid of micro-chips, while churches are filled with individuals who love everything but the true gospel of Jesus Christ. We long to know who this final man of lawlessness will be, while we vote for politicians based on our wallets. We are drawn to prophecy messages and books about the end times, while more and more are being drawn by a spirit that offers a variety of ways to “god.”  We love to fill out our prophecy charts in order to figure out when the anti-Christ will come, when the spirit of anti-Christ can be found in a smug Southern Baptist who thinks he has earned his way to heaven. 

This is the spirit of anti-Christ and it is in our midst. Is there any wonder the apostle John says, “this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.”  This is why we must walk in discernment and hold fast to the gospel because the anti-Christ won’t be selling micro-chips and Kroger cards, he might be selling Bibles.

Pastor Wes

 

You know those little particles that fall from the sky after a beautiful firework show? Well they may not be left over remains of the fireworks; they may be the left over remains of grandpa.

An article I read a few years back stated…

“Ashes scattered at sea? Been there.  A tasteful burial with flowers placed over the grave? Done that.  With a new law that allows more options for the handling of cremated remains, Bay Area residents are proving that they want just as much variety in their deaths as they do in their lives. The first Bay Area scattering of cremated remains by fireworks was completed this summer.”

Such expressions of death are deeply theological, and, at least for me, deeply troubling. It is not just that we are spreading grandpa’s ashes across the sky, but the celebration of death and the disrespecting of the body.

In the year 2000 over 25% of all deaths were cremated. It is estimated that by the year 2010 this number will increase to around 40%. I was reading in our local magazine “Living Christian” that “Cremations are occurring at a higher rate than ever.”  This is certainly true in my experience as a pastor.  The article also points out (from the perspective of a local funeral home representative) that the growing amount of cremations is due to a “family not wanting the pain of seeing the body of the deceased, as well as prearrangments by the deceased not wanting to have people pass by their casket and look at them.” 

For many, cremation is appealing for a variety of reasons.

1) Logistically: Cremation takes less space than burial.

2) Economically: Cremation is cheaper than burial. (Caskets, burial fees, etc)

3) Personally: Cremation removes the fear that many have of being “viewed” by others after they die (as stated above). 

While these are just a few, of many, reasons people may give for being cremated, one should ask, “How should a Christian view the burial of the body?”

Burial in the Old Testament

Throughout the Old Testament burial constituted the proper means of dealing with dead bodies.
When Abraham’s wife Sarah died burial tombs were used (Gen. 23:4-6). Abraham’s family was all buried in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre (25:9). When the first high priest, Aaron, died, we are told that he was buried (Dt. 10:9). When Moses died the Scriptures says, “And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said. He buried him in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no one knows where his grave is. (Dt. 34:5-6) Even criminals who had been put to death were deserving of burial. “His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but you shall bury him on that day.” (Deut 21:33). Of course, this passage specifically corresponds with the burial of Jesus, who died upon a cross. “Then they took the body of Jesus, wrapped him in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.” (John 19:40)

Not only was burial the clear practice in the Old Testament, but also the body (even though it would decompose) was buried in honor. Notice in the passage above when Jesus was buried, that he was buried with spices. It was a common practice to bury people with myrrh, aloes, and spices. (See 2 Chronicles 16:14, John 19:39) The point here is simply that the body, though dead, still warranted love, care, and respect.

The Old Testament does, however, speak of cremation in a sense. In Joshua chapter 7, anyone who stole items from Jericho would “be destroyed by fire.” When Achan was found guilty of such a crime, he was stoned and his entire family was burned. Also, in Lev 20:14, another judgment is given for any man who marries a woman and her mother. The same was true for a priest’s daughter who became a harlot. We should recognize that a biblical theology of God’s judgment is often centered around fire and burning.

Others might turn to 1 Samuel 31:11,12 were it seems to indicate that the body of King Saul and his sons were cremated. However, the Hebrew is very questionable here. The Hebrew word “saraf”, which means “to burn”, is very similar to the Hebrew word “sarap”, which means to “anoint with spices.” Hebrew scholars debate as to which one is most accurate, however in verse 14 we find that their bones were buried. It is hard to believe that if they were completely cremated that their bones could still be buried. Either way, given the amount of Scriptural evidence, it seems clear that one verse would not overthrow what was clearly the commonly held practice.

Death in the New Testament

Once again there are examples in the New Testament of bodies being burned as a result of God’s judgment (Rev 18:8, 19:20), yet the practice of the New Testament is once again burial. Although Paul does make reference to “though I give my body to be burned” (1 Corinthians 13:3), he is not speaking of the practice of cremation. Rather, Paul is speaking of sacrificing himself for the sake of the gospel as meaningless if he does not have love. That being said, the rest of the New Testament speaks in terms of burial.

Jesus Christ, the foundation of our faith was buried. This is important not just for the sake of practice, but also for theological implications. Paul clearly proclaims that just as “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and was buried, and that he rose again on the third day.” (1 Corinthians 15:3-4) In others words, the burial of Jesus is directly connected to His resurrection. Just as His body was put in a tomb, that same body came walking out of it. This is the hope that Paul continues to offer through the New Testament, namely just as we have be buried with Christ, we also will be resurrected with Christ. (Romans 6)

The New Testament views the dead as those who are merely asleep. The Greek word that is often used is “koimnomai”, which means “to lie down or to sleep.” This is precisely because death is not the end! In the Old Testament, the dead were viewed as those who were “asleep with there fathers” (1 Kings 2:10), Lazarus, according to Christ, was simply asleep (John 11), and those who are dead in Christ have merely fallen asleep (1 Thess 4).

Final Comments

Not only is how we view death a matter of theology, but how we go about honoring the dead is theological as well. I am not saying, nor could I say with biblical authority, that being cremated is a sin or a violation of Scripture. Nor am I saying that God cannot resurrect those who have been cremated, of course He can and will (just as God will resurrect someone who burned in an automobile accident or died in a burning fire). However, I do feel strongly that the practice of cremation says something about the body, death, and future resurrection, which is inconsistent with the biblical pattern and gospel message.

We must regain…

A Theology of the Body

So often at funerals we hear that the “body” doesn’t matter, what matters is that the spirit is with God. Such a statement could not be further from what the Scriptures teach. When the body is separated from the spirit, it is a tragic thing. This is precisely why we are “longing” for restoration, namely when our bodies will be glorified and reunited with our spirit.

Many pagan cultures resorted to cremation because they want to dispose of the body for fear of it returning. The Greeks and Romans favored cremation because of their philosophical views that downgraded the body in comparison to the spirit. Throughout history, and even in our modern culture, very little honor is given to the body of the dead. In general, cremation reflects a low view of the body after death. Christians need to reclaim the significance of our physical bodies, specifically at the graveside.

A Theology of Death

The hope that we have as Christians is that death is not the end, because in Christ, we have overcome death. Yet, death is deeply tragic. Often funerals are described by Christian ministers as “times to celebrate” instead of “mourning.” While I understand their point of view, death even for a Christian, is worthy of, and I would argue demanding of, mourning and weeping. Remember, the wages of sin is death, and therefore every funeral we go to ought to remind us of the consequences of sin and the fallen world order we are all currently apart of. That my friend, should to cause us to weep!

A Theology of Resurrection

Though we weep at death, we can weep with joy! The doctrine of the resurrection of the body is central to the Christian faith. Notice what Paul says…

Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him… For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. (vv. 13-16).

Praise the Lord! The “Dead” “In Christ” “Will Rise”! The doctrine of the resurrection is what has motivated Christians throughout history to reject the practice of cremation and proclaim the practice of burying the dead. It is precisely because Christians have a high view of the body, a humble view of death, and a hope in the resurrection that we bury our dead.

And we look forward to a day that is better than any firework show; a day when the sky won’t be filled with the sound of bottle rockets, but the sound of trumpets. It won’t be filled with sparkling colors, but of colored people from every tribe and nation. And that same body that rolled back the tomb will roll back the clouds.  And that is why we bury the dead! 

Awaiting that day with you...
Pastor Wes

 

I have been asked by a lot of people recently and heard others asking the question "Are we still planning to send a team to Mexico?"  The answer is YES!  The reason why many have been asking the question (and it is a legitimate question) is because of the violence that has been reported in the city of Juarez.  In order to help give perspective on our decision to still move ahead with our trip, let me give you a few things to keep in mind. 

1)  The violence that has been reported has been going on for a few years now.  The media coverage, however, has picked up in recent months and covered more of the stories involved.  I personally led a team last year during talks of violence and there was never a moment of concern.  I am not in any way belittling the situation, but I have led a team to Mexico for the past decade and trust the leadership at Casas Por Cristo (the organization we work with). 

2)  What is happening in one area of the city is not necessarily true of what is happening in other parts of the region.  Most of the teams that work with Casas por Cristo build houses that are several miles (often 30-40 miles) away from the actual downtown area of Juarez (where most of the violence is happening).  It would be the equivalent of violence in downtown Decatur and sending a team to build in Springfield.  Could something happen?  Sure, it could happen anywhere at anytime.  But the point is that where our team will be building will be in a different region than where much of the violence has been reported.

3)  The larger issue for me is that when doing missions, safety is never the first question (I know this is uncomfortable for some).  If safety is the most important concern the church will not take the gospel to the places the gospel needs to be heard.  Let me be clear, I would not lead a team right into the middle of danger just for the sake of it. 

In the case of Mexico, if we had previous information that the location of our building site was in the middle of a violent area, we would certainly use caution before sending the team.  However, at the end of the day if God has called us to go we must answer the call.  If missions is about going with a guarantee of safety, comfort, and ease the Great Commission will not be faithfully followed.  We want to be a congregation that uses caution, that thinks wisely, that is fully informed, but a congregation that is willing to send teams even to hard places, to do hard things, for the sake of the kingdom of our Christ! 

I am more than happy to discuss this issue in person if anyone wants to talk about it.  I would strongly encourage the congregation to remain open and positive concerning the sending of a team.  We will keep a watch on the situation and make appropriate adjustments if needed.  Until then, there is a family to serve, a home to build, and a Christ to proclaim.  And we go knowing that He promises us, "I am with you, even until the end of the age."

That all peoples may know HIm,
Pastor Wes

Do Christians have a sinful nature?  Are there two dogs fighting back in forth in you, one the old man and one the new man?  For most of my Christian life I was always told that Christians still have a sinful nature.  Last night, in our study through Galatians, I tried to demonstrate why I do not believe that Christians have a sinful nature.

Here are a few (no exhaustive) of the reasons...

When most people talk about the "sinful nature" what they mean is the natural (hence the word nature) predisposition to sin, which was inherited through Adam's sin [sometimes called the "Adamic nature...see Romans 5].  This "nature" is the part of you that stood condemned before God before the work of regeneration.  In other words, we were condemned before Christ not just because we committed acts of sin, but because we, by our very nature, were slaves to sin.  Our identity in the eyes of God was sin because we were by nature children of wrath (Eph 2). 

To think that this reality still exists within the life of a believer is very problematic for me.  I believe the Scripture teaches that when a believer in Christ is converted, they take on a completely new nature with different desires, which leads them to a completely different lifestyle that is led by the Spirit (Gal 5). 

Those who hold to the "dual-natured" view (Old man vs. New man) do so because they believe that it is the reason why Christians still sin.  They also believe that if the Christian is only the "new man" then they would have to be sinless.  However, such conclusions are not needed in order to demonstrate that believers still have a struggle with sin (more on that in a minute).

A Bad Translation of Flesh

The NIV, in Romans 6-8, translates the Greek word for flesh (sarx) as "sinful nature."  This is a very unfortunate translation because that is NOT what the word flesh means.  When Paul speaks of the "flesh" (sarx) he is not speaking of a nature or a predisposition, but rather our bodies, which can be used as instruments of sin or instruments of righteousness.  The point here is that our "flesh" is not our "nature". 

A Few Biblical Passages

If the "sinful nature" [the condemnation inherited in Adam] is still alive within the believer the following verses seem problematic. 

"Therefore, If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation.  The old has passed away; behold, the new has come." (2 Cor. 5:17)

"We know that the old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no loner be enslaved to sin." (Rom 6:6)

"There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." (Rom 8:1)

"Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old self, with its practices and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator." (Col 3:9-10)

What about the battle with sin?

There is no doubt that a battle with sin still takes place within the life of the Christian.  However, I believe that Scripture teaches that this battle is not between who you were before Christ and your new nature in Christ.  The Christian struggles with sin because they still live in the flesh and the flesh is still apart of the creation which is longing for future restoration (Rom 8).  In other words, there is still a power of sin living in the flesh because the flesh is not fully glorified.  As a result, the believer will continue to struggle with sin because their body is not yet restored. 

I think this view makes the most sense out of Romans 7 when Paul writes, "For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is in my flesh...For I do not do the good I want [his nature is different] but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing.  Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me...For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being [the new man], but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members." (Rom 7:18-24, emphasis mine)

A few observations

• Paul wants to do what is right (something he could not say if both natures existed at the same time because one nature would be contradicting the other nature.
• Paul delights in the law of God in his inner being.
• The struggle with sin is from the flesh not his old man.

Why does it matter?

Does this really matter?  Is this not just a question of semantics?  Yes it does matter and no it is not semantics.  I have heard too many Christians makes excuses for sin by saying "after all, I have a sinful nature."  I have seen too many Christians lack victory in their walk with God.  Paul exhorts believers all through the New Testament to walk according to the Spirit because they have been set free in Christ (Gal 5).  There is victory in Christ, there is freedom in Christ, there is righteousness in Christ and none of these realities can be experienced if you are still under condemnation.  You have the freedom to say no to sin because it is no longer who you are! 

Walk on...
Pastor Wes

I received an email this week about whether or not a Christian should engage in social drinking.  The question stems from last Sunday’s message on self-control.  It is a great question and one that I get asked often as a pastor.  Let me give you a few of my thoughts on this matter.

 

Is Drinking a Sin?

 

There are several sides to this issue.  Many would argue the point that to take any drink, of any alcoholic beverage, is a sin.  The problem with this view is that one cannot argue it from Scripture.  The Bible, aside from drunkenness which is clearly prohibited, simply does not make such a statement.  Therefore, in seeking to let Scripture form my beliefs, I cannot, in good conscience say that taking a drink, in and of itself, is a sin.

 

Are Christians free?

 

On the other side of the spectrum are those who argue for “Christian liberty.”  Many in this camp believe that because the Bible does not call drinking a sin, Christians are free to drink as long as they don’t get drunk.  Such a view of Christian liberty is also unbiblical.  One should never make an “argument from silence,” namely that since the Bible does not specifically prohibit something, we are therefore free to partake.  To do so is very dangerous. 

 

"All things are lawful for me," but not all things are helpful. "All things are lawful for me," but I will not be enslaved by anything."Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food"---and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. (1 Cor. 6:12-13)

 

Paul, in the passage above, is quoting those who argued an unspiritual view of Christian liberty [“All things are lawful for me”…”Food is for the stomach and the stomach for food.”]  Paul balances that argument with “but all things are not helpful” and “I will not be enslaved by anything” because the body is for the Lord.

 

"All things are lawful," but not all things are helpful. "All things are lawful," but not all things build up.  Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor. (1 Cor. 10:23-24)

 

Later in chapter 10, Paul adds (quoting the same people) that just because something is “free” or “lawful” does not mean that it is helpful.  In fact, Paul addresses here that the attitude of “I can do what I want because I am free” is spiritually arrogant.  Paul encourages believers to not seek their “own good” but the good of their neighbor.

 

In light of the last statement, one should also consider Romans 14.

 

Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats.  It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. (Rom 14:20-21)

 

Paul here is trying to keep peace between those who think that meat offered to idols was to be considered unclean while others did not consider it unclean.  Paul makes clear in the context of this passage that people were free to eat the meat.  However, whether one could eat or not eat was not the bigger issue.  The bigger issue was the work of God and the relationship between other believers.  Once again we see the spiritual arrogance of eating and drinking while disregarding what such a testimony and witness can do on others.  There are parents who may chose to drink and disregard the message they are sending to their children, there are Christians who willingly drink without any regard of what kind of a witness that gives to others.  As a result, one must be very careful how far they take the argument of Christian liberty. 

 

The Way of Wisdom

 

In addition to a Christian view of liberty, one should also consider the wisdom of indulging in, even moderately, that which can be addictive in nature.  We are not as strong as we think we are and can fail to realize the grip things have in our lives.  John Piper talks about the “wisdom of abstinence” because alcohol is an addictive and potentially mind-altering drug.  He writes, “Is it really so prudish, or narrow to renounce a highway killer, a home destroyer, and a business wrecker?”  Realizing that alcohol is responsible for 40 million addicts in America, is the number one drug among teenagers, and is a leading cause in the destruction of families, is it really such a stretch to ask Christians to abstain in wisdom? 

 

Now one could easy respond, “But can’t you make a similar argument for food addiction or sexual addictions?”  Yes, but one major difference is that you do have to eat to live and God has specifically designed sex for procreation (Genesis 1).  Alcohol, on the other hand, is not necessary for life and therefore the argument is not quite the same. 

 

WWJD?

 

There are also those who argue that Jesus drank wine.   The Bible is clear that Jesus did drink wine, and I believe that the wine in Jesus’ day had fermentation.  However, I believe it is historically foolish to think that wine in Jesus’ day was “strong drink” as it relates to our day. The term “wine” [Greek word oinos] was a wine mixed with water.  Danny Akin, president of Southeastern Baptist theological seminary, points out that “to consume the amount of alcohol that is in two martinis by drinking wine containing three parts water to one part wine [a common ancient ratio], one would have to drink over 22 glasses.” 

 

Final Thoughts

 

Though I cannot in biblical conscience or with biblical grounds say that taking a drink of alcohol is categorically a sin, I think there is clear, firm, and significant biblical evidence for why Christians should absolutely abstain from drinking.  I agree with John MacArthur when he says, “Can I say that it is always a sin to take a drink? No.  Can I say it is almost always ill-advised?  Yes, because it violates the biblical principles of wisdom and witness.”

 

I would also encourage those who do not drink to avoid being spiritually arrogant towards those who do, as though you are somehow spiritually superior.  Such arrogance is no different that the arrogance of Christian liberty mentioned above. 

 

Therefore, without a heart of legalism, without making Scripture say something it does not say, I believe that the wisest path for Christians to walk is the one of abstinence. 

 

It is, in my opinion, the sober thing to do. 

 

Walking and Working Together,

Pastor Wes

This past Sunday I preached from the book of Proverbs concerning the issue of work and wisdom.  One of the things I tried to point out is that work is about of God's created order.  Work is not a part of the curse, it was a part of God's original design.  Adam worshiped God through working (ruling the creation, filling the earth, naming animals, and working the ground).  We often dichotomize spiritual things and practical things.  We view spiritual things as what we do on Sunday and practical things as what we do the rest of the week.  However, Proverbs is clear that what we do during the week has everything to do with our spiritual vitality.  Therefore, how one approaches their work says everything about their relationship with Jesus.  If someone is lazy at work, they are usually lazy in other areas as well.

The book pictured above, "Plowing in Hope" by David Hegeman, is one of the best books I have read concerning the issue of work and its root in God's creation design.  It is a short book, but filled with great truth.  It will make you think outside the box concerning what God has called you do.  It is a theological book, so keep that in mind if you decide to read it.

Working together until Jesus comes...

Pastor Wes