This blog serves as an outreach for Pastor Randy Powell of the First Baptist Church of Franklin, PA. Feel free to ask questions or send me an e-mail at pastorpowell@hotmail.com
Transitioning from the story of the line of Seth that came before it, and the story of Noah and the Flood that follows after, Genesis 6:1-4 is a passage with a wide variety of interpretations throughout its history. That being said, it continues the story of Genesis 1-11 of God's work at creating order vs. humanity's ongoing introduction of chaos (through rebellion).
Starting in vs. 5, the chapter shifts its focus to God's observation that humanity has become, "evil all the time." This, we are told, greatly grieves the heart of God, so much so that God regrets having created humanity in the first place. This startling conclusion will set the stage for the judgment to come in Noah's day as it sets the God of Abraham apart from those deities worshiped in the Ancient Near East in that the LORD actually cares about humanity and evil, having created the former and being wholly apart from the latter.
A look at the Garden of Eden from the perspective of what it would have meant to the ancient Israelites (it owes much to Professor John's Walton's, The Lost World of Adam and Eve), it isn't the same as what most of us were taught. Adam and Eve are real people, but are they the only people that were alive at the time? Also, why is the Garden a paradise, what makes it that way, and what does this have to do with human mortality? The answers offered are not dogmatic, simply an attempt to understand this text as it was originally intended.
If you had any doubt that the Torah Clubs (FFOZ) following Daniel Lancaster's teachings are purposefully subverting, more than that, outright jettisoning, the sole authority of God's Word, the proof is there to be seen in the actual Torah Club materials. Now, you could also look at Rethinking the Five Solae - by Jacob Fronczak, First Fruits of Zion's failed attempt to label Protestantism as inherently anti-Semitic, a book that FFOZ is publishing and selling to see just how antagonistic this organization is to scriptural authority.
Here in The Beginning of Wisdom lesson 7, the Jewish mystical teaching of a pre-existent soul, a concept not found anywhere in scripture, is fully embraced to the extent that this idea becomes the very rationale for our time here on earth, "That's why we came to this place." (p. 6) We came here, according to FFOZ, to learn things that our souls in heaven couldn't because they were already in God's presence. In other words, God needed us to disconnect from him so we'd learn to want to come back though life's "innumerable difficulties, trials, and temptations." (p. 6) Thus FFOZ is not only imagining our purpose, but God's intention as well, both dependent upon the notion that we don't remember our time spent with God before birth.
Once you have this extra-biblical idea firmly in place, FFOZ will teach you that Jacob's journey out of the Promised Land and back (necessary because of how thoroughly he had cheated his brother) is an analogy for our journey from heaven, to earth, and back again. Why on earth (no pun intended) would Bible believing Christians sit under this teaching? Are you going to strain this filth out of the food they're serving?
The Group Discussion question in section 3 of lesson 7 is this, "What do you think of the Jewish idea of the preexistent soul?"
*FYI, it isn't a Jewish idea, it is one form of Jewish mysticism. FFOZ wants you to view Judaism and Jewish thinkers as some sort of monolith that they can represent to you and teach you about, it is as pathetic as saying, "What do you think of the Christian idea of Calvinism?" or "What do you think of the Church's idea of priestly celibacy?" Anyone with an ounce of knowledge of Christianity and the Church knows that some Christians adhere to Calvinism but many do not, and a portion of the Church has embraced priestly celibacy, for a portion of that segment's history, but most do not and never have. Note: Torah Club/FFOZ materials rarely, if ever, cite sources for what they define as "Jewish thought" or when they say, "Judaism teaches."*
What do I think about the idea? (1) It is extra biblical, (2) more akin to the ideas of Eastern religions about reincarnation than to anything Jesus taught, and (3) a dangerous wedge to begin teaching people to embrace an authority beyond, and ultimately against, the Word of God.
The Creation narrative in Genesis 1 accomplishes two primary things, both for ancient Israel and for the Church today, it tells us who is responsible for everything, and why what was made was made. The who is simple, the answer is God, nobody else is involved in the Creation account. The why has a two-fold answer: (1) to be God's temple: his kingdom, abode, and resting place, and (2) to foster the relationship between God and man. The second task is accomplished thanks to the wonder and awe associated with what God has made, a variety with purpose and beauty that causes us to ask, "Who was it that made it thus?"
Why did Moses write Genesis 1-3, and why did the Holy Spirit inspire him to do so? The answer to that question isn't to satisfy modern Western reader's desires to know how and when God created, but rather to speak to the Ancient Near Eastern culture's thirst for the answer to the questions of who and why. In the end, that's what Genesis will give us because it is about the relationship between God and humanity, and ultimately between God and his chosen people. For them, the who was the same God who had led them up out of Egypt to Sinai, and the why they already were experiencing as God laid forth his covenant with them, building on the covenant with Abraham.
Is the earth 6,000 years old or 6 billion? That's not a question Genesis is trying to answer. Did God use evolutionary processes or not? That's not on its radar either. What we do find in Genesis 1-3 is the foundation to answer the most important questions of life: Who am I? Why am I here?
John 16:33 “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”
Matthew 16:17-18 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
Philippians 2:9-11
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
We know how the story ends, right? These three verses are but a few of those that proclaim where the true power in this universe lies and that set forth that at the end of history the victory of God will be total and complete. So, why aren't Christians the most perpetually and undisturbedly optimistic people you could ever meet? Honestly, I've met a few that bubble over with that joy, but they're the minority.
We are the ones who believe that Jesus Christ rose in victory over sin and death, right?
We are the ones who believe that he will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead establishing a kingdom that will have no end, right?
And yet, what we often see from Christians is fear and anxiety, something that is as unfortunate as it is unnecessary. Jesus told us to not let our hearts be troubled, that while this world would indeed continue to be full of evil until the Last Judgment, the ultimate victory has already been secured.
This truth leads us to several conclusions about life here and now, among them:
(1) Whatever victories Evil has in this world, they will be transitory, whatever defeats Good has in this world, they will be temporary. Our task is to continue to serve in the time and place where God has placed us. We don't know when the End will come, but we know that when it arrives Good will triumph completely and Evil will be no more.
(2) The people, institutions, and causes which truly serve God have nothing to fear from spiritual evil. While the martyrs have demonstrated that they may imprison or kill the body, and persecution has shown they may burn or bomb buildings, both the souls of those who are in Christ and the ongoing life transforming power of the Gospel are forever beyond the power of evil to corrupt in any way.
(3) Because Christ achieved his victory through self-sacrifice we are called to do the same. Our weapons are not made of metal, they don't fire bullets, we don't need political, cultural, or economic power in this world. The true power of God at work in us is service, kindness, mercy, forgiveness, love, and ultimately self-sacrifice.
So let us embrace the certainty of the faith that has been given us, set aside worry and fear, and go forth in love.
"It sounds too good to be true." Maybe that's what your heart says when you hear the wondrous Good News that God loves you and his Son died to set you free from sin. "That might work for some people, but not the likes of me." Maybe that's what trauma and disappointment have taught you to think.
Rest assured, God knows your heart, he knows you need reassurance, encouragement, and hope. So here it is: When you are on God's team, how can you lose? Since God was willing to sacrifice his Son (being Trinitarians as Christians are, that always means he was willing to sacrifice himself because Jesus is God too) to save us, there is zero reason to think that God won't finish what he's started, and that includes his work in each of us who have come to know Jesus by faith.
God as "King of all the earth" is a foundational aspect of the Judeo-Christian worldview. God has no rivals and certainly no equals. The position and dominion of God is secure, always has been, always will be. And yet, 'Christian' Nationalism brings the Kingdom of God down into the trenches, pitting nation against nation, viewing the rise of America (or England, the Holy Roman Empire, Rome, etc. before us) as the flowering of God's purposes, and the potential fall of the favored nation as the withering of God's will. How can this be? Does God not rule the whole earth? Is his purpose not accomplished in every nation?
One of the reasons why 'Christian' Nationalism fails to see the big picture is egocentrism, the belief that God's will must revolve around us and our nation because we're just that important (as compared to other peoples and nations of the world, whom God evidently cares much less about). This was, at times, a flaw of ancient Israel as well, one that Holy Scripture punctures in the story of the prophet Jonah. The entire book of Jonah is a withering rebuke of Israelite nationalists whose concern about humanity stopped at the boundary of their own ethnicity. God's concern did not end there, however. As the prophet Jonah throws a tantrum while watching God's mercy against Nineveh unfold, the book ends with this line:
Jonah 4:11 New International Version
And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?”
The view of Jonah was far too narrow for God, spending three nights in the belly of the great beast of the sea didn't cure him of his folly, so the book ends with us wondering if he hardened his heart following God's rebuke, or repented.
Likewise, the Gospels contain numerous examples in the actions and words of Jesus that refute the notion that God's focus on one nation means that others fall through the cracks. Two prime examples being Jesus' discussion with the Woman at the Well and the Parable of the Good Samaritan.
Lastly, there is one caveat to this discussion, one that will be dealt with numerous times in the texts yet to come in this series: Israel had a covenant with God. Abraham's descendants did have a relationship with God that held promises of great favor AND a stricter level of scrutiny regarding their actions. Israel is the exception to the rule, but as Jonah learned the hard way, the special status of Israel did not remove the other nations of the world from God's concern.
In the end, the Church is NOT Israel, and America is NOT Israel. Whatever promises God made to Israel remain with them, they are not transferable. 'Christian' Nationalism fails, in part, because it seeks to focus God's concern on one nation (the one we happen to live in, imagine that), viewing the world in terms of power politics and national rivalries as they impact that one nation. God's concern is higher, deeper, and much broader.
Step one in his effort to demonstrate the universal need for a Savior by the Apostle Paul is the elimination of the excuse of ignorance. To that end, Paul declares that all of humanity has access to the truth that God exists and requires our gratitude. This knowledge, while readily available when contemplating the created universe, is suppressed by human wickedness. And yet, the need remains. We by nature wonder why we are here, we long for fellowship with God. Thus the Christian evangelist, those sharing the light of the Gospel, have the advantage of human nature to assist. The truth that God exists is all around us.
The universe is not a dualism, there are not equally opposing forces. There is God, and there is nothing. To oppose the will of God is not, as the lie would have it, a path of freedom or autonomy, but one of addiction to sin. It is vanity to reject God, and yet individuals and even nations have done so and continue to do so. In the end, Jesus Christ will assert his lordship over all things, will conquer all resistance, and will reconcile the world to himself. Our choice is simple, submit and know the love, grace, and hope of God, or fight a battle without hope.
Language changes constantly. Every language does this, words are coined, borrowed, transformed, to fit the need of the moment. Old words take on new meanings, sometimes at odds with how they were once used. Some words fall into disuse and disappear from the cultural consciousness, other words rise into the zeitgeist for their own fifteen minutes of fame.
Woke is having a cultural moment. During the 2022 and 2024 election cycles you will hear the term woke used a lot, a whole lot, by pundits and politicians, usually as an insult, a Scarlet 'A' akin to calling someone a Commie back before the Berlin Wall fell. {Not that smearing one's opponent as a Communist or Socialist has fallen out of favor entirely}. How the word 'woke' is being used now, especially as an insult, goes far beyond what the word meant just a few short years ago.
As Professor Andy Smith taught me back in the day when I was trying (and sort of succeeding) to learn Biblical Greek: "Word usage determines word meaning". 'Woke' doesn't technically mean anymore what the dictionary (in this case Oxford) says, at least not only that, because it isn't be used that way primarily anymore. A 2nd definition now exists after the first, "an insult synonymous with calling someone a 'liberal'".
But what of the question in the post title? Is God 'woke' by the dictionary definition? Is God alert to injustice in society, especially racism? Let us let the Word of God speak, and then we will ask the crucial question: Does God's attitude on these issues matter to us?
Leviticus 19:15 (NIV) “Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly."
Deuteronomy 10:18 (NIV) He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the foreigner residing among you, giving them food and clothing.
Deuteronomy 27:19 (NIV) “Cursed is anyone who withholds justice from the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow.” Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”
Psalm 82:3 (NIV) Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.
Psalm 140:12 (NIV) I know that the Lord secures justice for the poor and upholds the cause of the needy.
Proverbs 21:3 (NIV) To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.
Proverbs 24:24-25 (NIV) Whoever says to the guilty, “You are innocent,” will be cursed by peoples and denounced by nations. 25 But it will go well with those who convict the guilty, and rich blessing will come on them.
Proverbs 29:7 (NIV) The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern.
Isaiah 1:17 (NIV) Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.
Jeremiah 22:3 (NIV) This is what the Lord says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place.
Amos 5:10-12 (NIV) There are those who hate the one who upholds justice in court and detest the one who tells the truth. 11 You levy a straw tax on the poor and impose a tax on their grain. Therefore, though you have built stone mansions, you will not live in them; though you have planted lush vineyards, you will not drink their wine. 12 For I know how many are your offenses and how great your sins. There are those who oppress the innocent and take bribes and deprive the poor of justice in the courts.
Micah 6:8 (NIV) He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.
Luke 11:42 (NIV) “Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.
James 1:27 (NIV) Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
James 2:14-17 (NIV) What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
There are more, a lot more, verses and passages of holy scripture that both declare God's concern for the poor, the fatherless, the widow, and the foreigner, AND reprimand God's people, in no uncertain terms, for failing to maintain justice. Of the things that caused God to send Judah into exile (which included idolatry), how the poor and powerless were treated was a primary cause of God's anger. In addition, Jesus himself famously (and controversially at least with the Pharisees and priestly class) sought out those in 1st century Judea who were forgotten, belittled, and oppressed: tax collectors, prostitutes, 'sinners', Samaritans, etc. Few things angered Jesus' critics more than his willingness to point out to them that they were failing to 'do justice' because they had slammed the proverbial door in the face of those in need.
There is no way to read the Word of God, or study the history of Israel or the Church, without concluding that God is very much alert to injustice in society, that God cares a great deal about how society treats the 'least of these', and that God will absolutely judge, indeed he will pour out his wrath, upon those who oppress others and deny justice.
If you think that racism is somehow an exception to this call for Justice, as if its pains and sorrow, injustices and griefs, are somehow lesser in God's sight, I pity you. God is the Creator is all mankind, his Imago Dei is equally stamped upon every person, neither race nor nationality make any single person more or less the image of God than any other person. Racism denies God's role as Creator, it spits in the face of God's common grace, of Jesus' commands to take the Gospel to all nations. Racism is injustice in the eyes of God no less than sexism or classism, all of which immorally place human beings in categories of greater than, less than.
God is not less aware of injustice than we are, God is more aware, perfectly aware. Afterall, God knows the thoughts and attitudes of our hearts, and is not fooled by our pretenses and the lies we tell ourselves. As the Judge of the living and the dead, God will avenge those who have been the victims of injustice.
God knows the flaws (and strengths) of America, American culture, and the system of justice in America, with perfect depth and full clarity.
God is more 'woke' than anyone, he has been from the beginning.
God cares about injustice, therefore lack of care about injustice on our part is a sin, period. On the flip side, putting effort and passion into overcoming injustice is an act of righteousness because it reflects the mind and will of God. God honoring Christians can, and will, disagree about whether or not this particular example is injustice at work. God honoring Christians can, and will, disagree about how to best remedy injustice in a free society. But God honoring Christians cannot disagree about the importance of justice and the sinfulness of injustice, God has taken that option off the table.
Do you still think that 'alert to injustice in society, especially racism' is a fitting insult?
Exodus 20:7 (NIV) “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.
To abuse Scripture to portray God in a light contrary to the Word of God is a violation of this commandment. This is a danger that faces those who purport to speak on God's behalf, a warning of the need to treat the Word of God with respect and honesty.
PragerU is not a university, or an educational institution of any kind, rather it is a popular social media content company founded by talk show host and writer Dennis Prager (co-founded by Allen Estrin), and funded by billionaires Dan and Farris Wilks (from the petroleum industry. The Wilks family founded the Assembly of Yahweh church, a group with numerous non-orthodox/heretical beliefs {they're essentially unitarian, denying the Trinity and making Jesus a created being; not to be confused with the Unitarian Universalist Church, that's a very different group}). PragerU espouses a Conservative, often Libertarian, consistently Republican viewpoint. This being America, PragerU has every right to support these views, to share them in any legal manner, and those whose beliefs coincide with those views have every right to appreciate the content that PragerU creates. However, PragerU decided to bring God into the conversation, to declare that the Bible (and God) 100% supports their position on an issue, that the Bible (and God) 100% condemns the other side on this same issue, and that those in the Church who disagree are, in essence, fake Christians. If you're going to take such a God-centered position, you'd better be able to back it up with theology drawn from the whole Bible (not just cherry-picked verses), from Christian theologians and thinkers throughout Church History, AND you'd better present your argument with honesty and integrity, "for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name."
Below is the transcript (in this font) of the PragerU video (link above, please watch it to see for yourself). My comments upon the video will appear in bold.
The Lord is a God of social justice.
That’s the message in many—maybe most—churches and synagogues in America and the West today.
But here’s the problem: The Bible doesn’t actually say that. It says (in Isaiah), “The Lord is a God of justice.” You’ll find a lot of references to justice in the Bible. But you’ll never find it preceded by the word “social.”
1. The "____ is not in the Bible" argument is both foolish and disingenuous. Why? Because it can easily be used against any modern concept. Let me show you. "The Lord is a God of democracy...But here's the problem: The Bible doesn't actually say that." Other words not in the Bible: capitalism, socialism, America, vote, Republican, Democrat, free trade, minimum wage, etc. I've seen this argument used before, and it is always an exceedingly weak one. Not only are modern concepts not in the Bible, which is of course a document written in the Ancient World, but the Bible you and I read isn't in its original languages. The Bible was written in ancient Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic (just a few verses), and thus whether or not a particular English word or phrase is in our Bible is also a translators decision.
But you’re probably thinking, “What’s the difference? Isn’t God the God of justice and social justice?” Well, not if He’s consistent. You see, God cannot be the God of justice and social justice because social justice is not just.
2. Here is the premise of PragerU's argument: Social justice isn't just. That's a serious theological position to take, one that would require numerous examples of social justice movements and advocates actually seeking injustice, as well as significant exegesis of Scripture to establish, but instead of that, PragerU's video will next create a false Straw Man version of Social Justice to attack, declare that version to be unjust, and move on hoping nobody noticed the bait and switch. They are correct that God cannot be the God of injustice, nor of immorality of any kind, including dishonesty.
Justice is getting what you deserve without favor. Social justice is getting what you don’t deserve because you are favored.
3. Here's the Straw Man: "Social Justice is getting what you don't deserve because you are favored." No it isn't. From the Oxford dictionary: "The objective of creating a fair and equal society in which each individual matters, their rights are recognized and protected, and decisions are made in ways that are fair and honest." Or from Dictionary.com if you prefer: "Fair treatment of all people in a society, including respect for the rights of minorities and equitable distribution of resources among members of a community." Here's an important lesson in language: Word usage determines word meaning. How words are used is what they mean. Dictionaries tell us what words mean based on how people are currently using them. PragerU has decided to make up their own definition of the term social justice, which is not a definition at all, but a critique from their own political philosophy. That's not how dialogue works, but it is how punditry works, and this sort of 'argumentation' is one of the reasons why Americans are often at each other's throats. In addition to be unhelpful in actually discussing an issue, this is dishonest. The vast majority of people who advocate for social justice do NOT believe that people should get what they don't deserve. And since PragerU brought Christian Churches into this conversation (in order to condemn them), there are few Christian Churches who believe that their efforts for social justice have anything to do with PragerU's 'definition'.
Justice is blind. Social justice is not.
4. Here lies the heart of the matter and the fundamental flaw in PragerU's viewpoint: Justice isn't blind, not in the real world. It may be blind, ideally, but throughout human history it has rarely been so. Social Justice is the response to this perverted justice, it is an effort to re-balance the scales of justice, to take away the advantages that certain people/groups have (in America that would be, in order of importance for having 'justice' tilt in your direction: rich, males, who are white) with respect to justice, and also taking away the disadvantages that certain people/groups have (in America, again in descending order that would be: poor, minority, female) with respect to justice. The Rich have one version of justice (in America, throughout the world, and throughout history), the poor have another. The powerful (often associated with class, caste, or ace) have one version, the weak have another. And yes, men have one version, women have another.
Let's say a man robs a store. Justice demands but one thing: that he be tried in a court of justice, and, if he is found guilty, punished.
That is not how social justice works. Social justice doesn’t only ask if the person is guilty. It asks about his economic condition: Is he poor or wealthy? About his upbringing: What kind of childhood did he have? About his race or ethnicity: Is he a member of a group that has been historically oppressed?
5. The Straw Man version of social justice once more in action. I've never heard anyone advocating for social justice proclaim that a criminal who is a minority should be given a 'get out of jail free' card. Again, justice isn't blind. The system of criminal justice (as the example is about crime) both in America today and throughout the world and its history, is one that is unfairly tilted toward those with power (typically wealthy, but also things like aristocratic birth). The system affords them ample opportunities to avoid true impartial justice, while at the same time, stacking the deck against the weak and powerless. This is a fact of both history and the world today. It is beyond dispute, yet PragerU mentions this disparity in their video, not at all. This is the heart of social justice movements, but PragerU is declaring that God hates social justice without touching upon this element.
Justice demands that everyone be equal under the law. Social justice demands that everyone be equal. Period. Economically, socially, and in every other possible way.
Justice asks, “Who did it?” Social justice asks, “Why did he do it?”
Lost in all these social justice considerations is the individual’s own responsibility for what he did. That’s why social justice advocates have abandoned the term “justice.” They deem justice alone as unfair. And sometimes it is. A man who was beaten by his father and abandoned by his mother is more likely to commit a violent crime than a man raised in a loving home. But those facts cannot and should not determine his innocence or guilt.
Why? Because justice is, first and foremost, about truth: Is the person guilty or innocent of the crime? None of us is omniscient. We don’t know why people do what they do. After all, the vast majority of people raised in abusive homes do not commit violent crimes. Nor do the vast majority of people who are members of an historically oppressed group.
6. PragerU is arguing from the false standpoint that justice is currently fair and that those seeking social justice want to make it unfair. If that were true, they might have a point, but it isn't, neither part of it. The secular justice system in America should take into consideration if a defendant was an abuse victim, if he/she has a mental illness, and other mitigating factors. A TRUE search for Justice (with a capital J) has room for compassion, has hope for rehabilitation of offenders, and takes into consideration the circumstances behind why a crime is committed. Why? Because that's the way God judges us (more on that later). Again, this is a broken record, but PragerU is arguing against a false version of social justice, as if the idea of social justice is to excuse the guilty from any/all punishment, rather than seeking to actually allow justice to operate without its prejudices.
So, how does God judge human beings? Are we treated equally for fairly?
James 3:1 (NIV) Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.
Luke 12:42-48 42 (NIV) The Lord answered, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance at the proper time? 43 It will be good for that servant whom the master finds doing so when he returns. 44 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 45 But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the other servants, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk. 46 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers.
47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.
Hebrews 6:4-8 (NIV) 4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6 and who have fallen[a] away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 7 Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8 But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.
More examples could be given, but when studying God's interaction with human beings in his Word it becomes apparent that God's justice is not 'blind'. It does indeed take into account the attitudes and knowledge of the people being judged, and it holds those who have received more blessings, MORE accountable. God is not a computer, he's a person. God views humanity with both righteousness (his holiness requires it) AND compassion. With both anger toward the wicked and mercy toward the repentant {See Jonah: Jonah didn't want to go to Ninevah to share God's warning with that wicked people precisely because he wanted to see them destroyed not saved, “Isn’t this what I said, Lord, when I was still at home? That is what I tried to forestall by fleeing to Tarshish. I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity."}
As Christians, what kind of Justice ought we to imitate? Blind justice, or God's justice? One could argue that a secular society should seek to administer blind justice and not be influenced by Judeo-Christian ideals, but that's the opposite of what PragerU is saying here as they're actually advocating for blind justice (which we don't currently have, and won't have without social justice, an irony to be sure) in the name of God, and condemning those who want a justice system that more closely resembles the way in which God judges people.
Being a victim, however that is defined, is no excuse for hurting other people. And what about those who are hurt—the victims of those crimes? Shouldn’t they, and other law-abiding citizens, be society’s first consideration?
7. Social Justice doesn't care about victims. That's a big statement, if only it were backed up with any evidence...Oh, and if you're going to bring God into the picture (which PragerU purposefully did), don't spend the whole time talking about Law with no mention of Grace. If the character of God is the barometer of whether or not our system of justice is a righteous one, it had better take into account BOTH God's willingness to punish the wicked, AND God's willingness to have mercy upon the wicked. So far this presentation is 100% Law.
Social justice advocates say no. They say we need social justice to even things out. And that means favoring the have-nots over the haves—the poor over the rich, the female over the male, and the brown or black over the white.
The Bible does not see the world this way. In fact, it speaks against it in very explicit terms.
Here’s a law in the Book of Exodus: “Do not pervert justice by siding with the crowd, and do not show favoritism to a poor person in a lawsuit.”
Here’s one in Leviticus: “Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great but judge your neighbor justly.”
Moses, the greatest lawgiver in history, declares in Deuteronomy: “Follow justice and justice alone.”
And the New Testament declares in the Book of Romans: “God shows no partiality.”
8. Here is the entirety of the thesis that the Bible is against social justice: 4 verses of scripture. Of the 4 verses chosen by PragerU, two warn against favoring the poor, and two speak of impartiality in general. If only the Bible spoke, anywhere, about NOT favoring the rich and powerful, if only the prophets had bothered to speak on this topic too...Here is a list of 100 verses commanding God's people to protect/advocate for the helpless (poor, widow, orphan, foreigner, oppressed): What does the Bible say about protecting the Helpless? Let me highlight a few of them below:
Deuteronomy 27:19 ‘Cursed be anyone who perverts the justice due to the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’
Psalm 12:5 “Because the poor are plundered, because the needy groan, I will now arise,” says the Lord; “I will place him in the safety for which he longs.”
Proverbs 14:31 Whoever oppresses a poor man insults his Maker, but he who is generous to the needy honors him.
Isaiah 1:17 Learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow's cause.
Isaiah 58:6-7 “Is not this the fast that I choose: to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the straps of the yoke, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke? Is it not to share your bread with the hungry and bring the homeless poor into your house; when you see the naked, to cover him, and not to hide yourself from your own flesh?
Jeremiah 21:12 O house of David! Thus says the Lord: ‘Execute justice in the morning, and deliver from the hand of the oppressor him who has been robbed, lest my wrath go forth like fire, and burn with none to quench it, because of your evil deeds.’
Jeremiah 22:16 He judged the cause of the poor and needy; then it was well. Is not this to know me? declares the Lord.
Matthew 23:23-24 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!
Romans 5:6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Or if you prefer, here is what Compassion International (one of the most respected Christian charities) has to say about God's relationship to the poor: What the Bible Says about Poverty
The point is, PragerU has badly cherry-picked scripture to create a false impression, one that it simply tries to dismiss with its next paragraph. Why does the possibility (not the reality, this isn't happening now) of the poor being favored offend PragerU so deeply (its the only type of injustice they mention) but the reality of the rich being favored day after day isn't an issue?
None of this means that there is no place for compassion in a system of justice. Of course, there is. The Bible is preoccupied with the protection of the widow, the orphan, and unfortunate. But compassion follows justice. It doesn’t precede it.
9. Yes! The Bible is preoccupied with the protection of the weak and powerless! How can your very next sentence start with 'But'? "Compassion follows Justice. It doesn't precede it." Thank God this isn't true. Compassion is integral to Justice, Mercy is foundational to Justice, Love is intertwined with Justice. Does God execute complete Justice with regard to human sin? Absolutely, that's why Jesus died upon the Cross, to take the full weight of our sins upon his perfect shoulders. {See the book of Hebrews for a detailed discussion} Do we experience complete Justice? Thanks be to God, we do not. Christ died for the ungodly, Christ died for the undeserving, Christ died for sinners. THIS is the character of God, this is the Justice that we should aspire to.
Well meaning and God honoring Christians can, and will, disagree about HOW MUCH injustice exists, about which particular examples are unjust, and about HOW TO CORRECT that injustice. These can be normal healthy disagreements and discussions about the command we have received from the LORD to administer true justice, protecting the powerless. What does not fit within a Biblical framework is a viewpoint that treats the effort being made to correct injustices as an abomination to God. That viewpoint, expressed as it is here in PragerU's video, is taking the name of the LORD in vain and misrepresenting his Word.
Also, justice, in and of itself, is compassionate. First, to the victims of crime and to their loved ones. And second, to the criminal: How can you become a better human being if you don’t first recognize that you’ve done something wrong?
That’s why any time we put an adjective before the word “justice,” we no longer have justice. Economic justice, racial justice, environmental justice—any form of “social” justice which seeks to “correct” actual justice—undermines justice.
10. The word social preceding justice automatically negates it? As a former English teacher this claim leaves me scratching my head. This is another argument that doesn't make any sense because it could equally be used against other uses of adverbs and adjectives in front of nouns with silly results. For example: Agape Love, Brotherly Love, Loving Kindness, Saving Faith, Holy Spirit, etc. Why is this one example with the word justice, somehow evil when we use words like this all the time, and so does the Bible? The answer is PragerU's political philosophy, not Biblical theology.
"Any form of 'social' justice which seeks to 'correct' actual justice- undermines justice." This would only be true IF actual justice were actually happening. To correct injustice IS justice. To stop further injustice IS justice. This is the Straw Man still going, social justice doesn't seek to undue true impartial justice, but rather the perverted form of justice that many people in society have to reckon with. What actually undermines Justice in a society? When the rich and powerful guilty are allowed to go free (or get greatly reduced punishments) and the poor and powerless have the full weight of the system upon their backs, whether or not they are guilty. Is the LORD supposed to be pleased with this? Is God supposed to be smiling upon America (or any other nation) as a paragon of true Justice? If the prophets of old excoriated Israel for failing to follow God's Law with justice, what makes you think any other nation is beyond God's ire?
So, then, if social justice is not a biblical concept, why do so many churches and synagogues promote it?
Because many Christians and Jews no longer regard biblical principles as binding. Because it’s a lot easier to dispense compassion than hold people to a biblical standard. And because leftism has superseded the Bible in many houses of worship—and leftism, as a guiding principle, holds that the weak are good and the powerful are bad.
That’s why the great battle of our time is between Judeo-Christian values and leftist values. The former is rooted in justice; the latter is not.
11. And the icing on the cake? PragerU has declared that Christians and Christian Churches who follow the Bible's commands to advocate for the poor and the powerless are in fact fake Christians who care more about Leftist politics than they do about God. This is a sweeping and broad condemnation, one that would include MLK Jr., Mother Theresa, St. Francis of Assisi, the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, John the Baptist, and of course Jesus himself who had a pesky habit of siding with the poor and the oppressed against the Pharisees and the Sanhedrin.
What does the Bible say about Right vs. Left? Nothing. What does it say about Capitalism vs. Socialism? Nothing. Take these fights outside and stop dragging God into them.
Here's an uncomfortable truth for PragerU: The only economic system that God ever created was that of ancient Israel through the Law of Moses. This system was NOT a free-market land of rugged individualism, but rather a system designed with a safety net for the poor {See Ruth and the law of gleanings} as well as a powerful mechanism to rebalance economic inequality in the Year of Jubilee. Every 50 years the entire nation of Israel was required to return all property to its original owners (leaving no families destitute with generational poverty) and free all slaves. God required his people to RESET the wealth/poverty ratio on a regular basis. This was not 'blind justice' in action, but God's justice, for it contained both mercy and grace.
I’m Allie Beth Stuckey, host of Relatable on BlazeTV, for Prager University.
12. I have nothing against Allie Beth Stuckey, but if you're going to claim that God is on your side, maybe chose a theologian and not a pundit to make the case.
Acts 20:27 (NIV) For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole will of God.
There is plenty of room within orthodox Christianity to discuss the issue of social justice with fairness and honesty. There is plenty of room to disagree about the extent of injustice and the potential solutions to it. I have family and friends, and members of my church whom love, who disagree with me on issues of social justice (racial, economic, etc.) We disagree about how to obey God, and that's ok, we're living and learning together. Historic, orthodox, Christianity, grounded in the Word of God has maintained an advocacy for the poor and the powerless, and it has maintained a prophetic voice against the abuses perpetuated by the rich and powerful. This stance honors our God, for it imitates him. PragerU is free to make its arguments in the political sphere, but if its going to try to dictate the will of God to the Church, it had better go back and read the WHOLE Bible.
"While justice can be used to talk about retributive justice in which a person is punished for their wrongdoings, most of the time the Bible uses the word justice to refer to restorative justice, in which those who are unrightfully hurt or wronged are restored and given back what was taken from them. Taken this way, the combination of righteousness and justice that God dictates means a selfless way of life in which people do everything they can to ensure that others are treated well and injustices are fixed."
"Justice flows from God's heart and character. As true and good, God seeks to make the object of his holy love whole. This is what motivates God throughout the Old and New Testaments in his judgments on sin and injustice. These judgments are both individual and corporate in scope."
I often speak and write about the danger of a too cozy relationship between the Church and political power, but this warning also begs a further question: What is the proper relationship between God and Politics? The various answers will fall on a continuum from one end of the spectrum that places the Church above earthly power feuds all the way to the other extreme which subjugates the Church to the dominion of temporal power structures. Some will respond to the 80's sitcom question, "Who's the Boss?" by emphasizing God's sovereignty (an idealist and/or Rationalist position) and others by accepting the limitations of life as we know it (a pragmatic and/or Empiricist position). Truth be told, when studying philosophy, I always preferred the logic based approach of Descartes or Kant to the observational style of Hume or Locke. I will focus upon three primary points on this continuum, feel free to carve out a place for others in between or at the ends of the spectrum, the goal is to spur discussion and contemplation, not to squelch it.
1. God < Politics = Principles are expendable
One option would be to merge Christian belief and practice INTO the current political goals of a party or system. This option would be much worse if the system were itself overtly evil, like the German Lutheran Church's acquiescence to Nazi rule, but it still contains pitfalls even if the political philosophy one merges into is not outwardly immoral. Why is that? If one's commitment to political goals/methods is greater than one's commitment to God, it will only be a matter of time until that political system goes astray from the principles of faith and requires one to abandon them. An example that might illuminate this type of arrangement is the 'deal' that Lando makes with Darth Vader in The Empire Strikes Back. Lando believes he has no choice, that a harsh reality requires him to compromise 'for the greater good', but soon realizes that his 'deal' can be altered at any point because he is subservient. If you prefer a more classical example, the deal that Dr. Faustus makes with the Devil is a parallel, it too trades temporary benefits for long-term destruction. While we might typically think of this choice as relevant to Christians living under oppressive regimes that try to force obedience upon them, for examples the Early Church when facing Rome, or Christians in China today, the real danger comes not from an aggressive and antagonistic power structure, but a welcoming one. The promise of wealth and power are far more dangerous to the Church than the threat of oppression. If power is more important than principle, where is the basis for criticism of the power structure? What is the role of the prophet when the Church has handed over authority to political masters?
2. God = Politics = Principles are negotiable
Option #1 only happens most clearly when dealing with a corrupt political leadership as when Henry VIII removed the Church of England from its relationship with Rome in order to allow himself to obtain a divorce. An arrangement more likely to occur in 'ordinary' times would be one in which the Church considers Politics to be a partnership, simply a means to an end that can be managed (after all, how often are we really dealing with a Vader?). In this case, Christian belief and practices are not merged INTO the system, but rather emphasized or minimized in accordance with the current political goals of the party (or a particular leader) that one chooses to partner with. Criticism isn't excluded, as in #1, but simply muted for the sake of Realpolitik. Principles and morality are not expendable, but they are negotiable, becoming a part of the game that must be played. The time will come when the Word of God is weighed against a bargain that must be made (to get legislation passed, or to win an election), and tossed aside. This arrangement it typified by the actions of Saruman in The Lord of the Rings, whose study of the power of Sauron convinces him that the best course of action is not to oppose him (for he sees no hope in victory), but to work with him. Gandalf, realizing that Saruman has traded morality for power, continues to fight on, even against hopeless odds. If the Church allows its principles to be dictated to it by popularity (for what is politics but a popularity contest? Even dictatorships require popularity among the ruling clique), it will forever shift with the needs of the moment. Most of Church History reflects this middle of the road, pragmatic, view. There will be times when this partnership seems to be beneficial to the Church, when it yields results, and may even advance worthy causes, but these victories will inevitably give way to setbacks and compromises.
3. God > Politics = Principles are foundational
But what if the Church chose to proclaim Christian belief and practice APART FROM the current political goals of any party? Such a Church would be beholden to none, would compromise its beliefs for no promise of power. The Church could then criticize whatever policies and proposals it saw as unjust or immoral, it could support those that align with biblical principles, supporting ideas that it judged to be moral, not politicians or parties. It could cooperate when politicians chose to align with the Church's goals, engage on its own terms, and do so for God's purpose. Is such a stance naive? Impossible in the 'real world'? Or have too many of the Church's leaders lacked the courage to stand their ground? The example that comes to mind here is the decision of Steve Rogers, Captain America, to refuse to sign the Sakovia Accords in Captain America: Civil War because he believed that giving up the ability to decide for himself the difference between right and wrong was a dangerous path. (Yeah, I'm Team Cap when watching that movie.) There are actually numerous biblical precedents for this stance: When the Prophet Nathan saw that King David had chosen an immoral path, he opposed that path and called the king to question. When the Prophet Elijah saw that King Ahab and Queen Jezebel had embraced the idolatry of Baal worship, he took it upon himself to oppose the prophets of Baal, earning himself a death sentence from the king and queen in the process. Likewise, John the Baptist did not consider Herod's role as king to make him exempt from the Law of God and rebuked him for his unlawful marriage (this opposition cost him his life). Fast forward to the situation described in option #1, that of the German Lutheran Church succumbing to Nazi control, and you see in opposition to this betrayal the faithful work of the Confessing Church, led by Dietrich Bonhoeffer (who also lost his life because of this stand). The Church fulfills its relationship with earthly power most faithfully when it maintains its prophetic ministry of speaking Truth to the powerful, of opposing immorality wherever it originates.
Are there other options? The Amish have decided that they'd rather not be involved at all, withdrawing from society, as have the Jehovah's Witnesses (somewhat less dramatically). While this removal from the questions of power and politics removes the temptation to compromise, it also abdicates the responsibility given to the Church to stand for justice and protect the oppressed.
Isaiah 1:17 New International Version
Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.
Leviticus 19:15 New International Version
“‘Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.
Psalm 82:3 New International Version
Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.
While it is true that the Church is not Israel, and we do not live (nor should we seek to) in a theocracy, the Church still has a role to play in upholding and advocating for morality in the societies and power structures that it finds itself a part of. What the Church has at times forgotten, especially when offered earthly power, is that God does not accept that the pathway to good can be paved with evil. (Romans 12:21 (NIV) Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.)
When I was eighteen I strongly considered majoring in political science and seeking to serve my country in the realm of politics. In the end, I rejected that path for two primary reasons: (1) I hated the idea of constantly asking for money, (2) I knew that I would be forced to choose between proclaiming what was True and Right and thus ending my career at some point when those things were opposed by the needs of the party, or muzzling my beliefs (or worse yet changing them) in order to move ahead. I don't doubt that thousands of Christian politicians from the local to the federal level struggle with what their faith demands of them, with the demand to compromise principles for the sake of politics. What if the Church supported them by not playing the political game? What if the Church offered these politicians an example of moral fortitude that might inspire them to stand for justice even when it wasn't convenient?
We've never truly seen what the Church could become if it took all of Jesus' teachings to heart. What would our world look like if Christ's followers really 'turned the other cheek' and 'repaid evil with good'? We fall short, we repent, we lean upon the Spirit and seek to imitate Christ-likeness better the next time. Imagine also if the Church truly believed the words of Paul, Philippians 3:20 (NIV) But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ.
God is already sovereign, what if the Church started acting like it knew that to be true?
Philippians 4:8 New International Version
Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.
This story connects with me on multiple levels: (1) I was an avid baseball card collector in my youth {thus spending nearly all my paper route money} with tens of thousands of cards now stored in boxes in my parents' basement back in MI, (2) Don Mattingly was one of the four players that I tried to get every card of {along with the Tigers' Matt Nokes, the Mets' Dwight Gooden, and my all-time favorite, the A's Ricky Henderson}, and (3) the reason why I'm sharing this, I too care about accuracy and truth.
Why is it that so many people today can't even be bothered to spend 30 seconds to determine (painlessly and for free) whether or not what they're about to share on social media is a hoax, fake, or an outright lie? What happened to the idea that, "My word is my bond"? Why doesn't it bother more people that they're being used as tools to advance causes they may/may not agree with on the basis of falsehoods?
Baseball historian Bill Haber spent countless hours tracking down the truth about even totally obscure baseball players, writing letters and spending money for public records because he cared about the truth. The author of the story, Sam Miller, dug around until he found the answer to a mystery (It's an interesting mystery, read the story) because he too wanted to know the truth.
As Christians, the Truth is supposed to matter more to us, there's a reason why I use a capital "T" when talking about it as a principle. Dozens of times in the Gospel Jesus begins an important statement with, "I tell you the truth..." {"Verily"is the old school translation in the KJV}.
Numbers 23:19 New International Version God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill? John 4:24 New International Version God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.” John 14:6 New International Version Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Those are but three of dozens of examples of the insistence upon the Truth from God and by the people of God. When we lie, or share lies, we not only harm our own reputation as people who value Truth, but we are indeed committing acts of sinful rebellion against a God who rejects utterly the notion of using evil like a tool, no matter what the goal may be. You may think you're serving a higher purpose by lowering the truth from a necessity to a nuisance, that your cause is worth the cost, but you're not, and it isn't.
Why don't we care more about Truth? Why aren't we deeply concerned that we might inadvertently be spreading lies? There is an answer, but you're not going to like what it says about us. I use the plural pronouns because even though I do spend the time and put in the effort to honor the truth to the best of my ability, when some fellow Christians do not always do so, it is all of our reputation that suffers. If we can't be bothered to care about the Truth in politics (to use a common example) why would anyone believe we know the Truth about life after death? When enough Christians (or at least those professing to be Christians) have earned a reputation for dishonesty, that character flaw is ascribed to all of us, it becomes a weight that we must carry as we attempt to share the Gospel and impact our communities for the Kingdom of God.
Facts matter, honor matters, integrity matters, and yes, the Truth absolutely matters. If you can't be bothered to seek the truth, please stop pretending to represent Christianity.
When caught between a rock and a hard place, the former smuggler/gambler/scoundrel Lando Calrissian (played by Billy Dee Williams) in Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back makes what he thinks is an acceptable, albeit costly, deal with the Evil Empire's enforcer, Darth Vader. Unfortunately for Lando, the colony he administers (Cloud City), and the 'guests' he bargained to save, Princess Leia and Chewbacca, Darth Vader quickly decides to alter the deal. In addition to the original cost of giving Lando's friend, Han Solo, over to a bounty hunter, Vader now demands that Leia and Chewbacca be given to his custody as well. When Lando objects, Vader responds with the infamous line, "I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further." Aside from a chilling moment in a movie masterpiece (Yes, Empire is the best SW movie, although A New Hope is right behind it), this interaction demonstrates an unalterable truth about deals and bargains made with evil: they only get worse.
This is not a new dramatic theme, the playwright Christopher Marlowe said much the same thing in his classic 1592 play, The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus, wherein the title character makes a literal deal with the devil, only to have it predictably unravel to his final damnation. To the Christian (or Jewish) theologian, the notion that any pact/deal made with an evil entity, or any path laid out that will utilize evil as a means to an end, will inevitably end in one's own corruption and destruction is no surprise at all. What else could the outcome be? The reason for this is simple, rebellion against God only has one outcome: self-destruction.
Proverbs 10:16 New International Version (NIV) 16 The wages of the righteous is life, but the earnings of the wicked are sin and death. James 1:15 New International Version (NIV) Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. Romans 6:16 New International Version (NIV)
16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?
Why is there no other outcome? Once again the answer is straightforward: God is the sole source of holiness, goodness, and life. All those who turn from that source, who choose instead to strike out on their own, and who offer God no gratitude or allegiance, will in turn reap the true nature of what that cry for independence has earned. This is not a question of God's mercy, for God has offered salvation to humanity, a way to be redeemed and not perish, but rather a question of reality. Apart from God, there is no life. How could God make it otherwise? And more importantly, God could not do such an act of evil as to make a path 'work out' that leads those he has created away from him.
What is true in the grand scheme, that is the direction and outcome of our lives, is true along the way as well. If we cannot end a journey away from God with anything but self-destruction, nor can we hope to have success when choosing to live against the Law of God between here and there. The standard by which our whole lives are judged (the holiness and righteousness of God), is the same standard by which each episode within those lives are judged. What is true for the whole is true for the parts as well. To make a 'deal with the devil', even if one considers it to be only a short-term deal, is to embrace folly. Deals with evil are always worse than they present themselves to be, and they only go downhill from there, inevitably.
Our literature and pop-culture extensively utilize "Christ figures"; heroes from humble beginnings who are more than they seem to be on the surface, and who through self-sacrifice manage to save the day. {Aragorn, Luke Skywalker, Harry Potter, Superman, to name a few}. But what of the original? What exactly is the nature of the God-Man, whom Luke called Emmanuel, 'God with us'? While the Gospel writers and other NT authors made it abundantly clear that they saw Jesus as both God and Man, it took the Early Church a while to sort out exactly how to explain that unique combination. After Arius' false venture into Subordinationism (the Son as the highest created being, i.e. modern-day Jehovah's Witness doctrine), which the Church soundly rejected at the Council of Nicaea (325), where they also rejected attempts to deny the full humanity of Jesus, the Church still needed to refine their explanation, eventually arriving at the language of the Council of Chalcedon (451), "consubstantial with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood." The Apostle Paul illuminated this mystery when he wrote in Philippians about the nature of Jesus, declaring Jesus to be "very nature God", while at the same time taking on the role of a humble and obedient servant "being made in human likeness." It is an enduring, and incredible, mystery. God the Son, willing to take upon his divinity, humanity, in order to fulfill the role of the Messiah and save humanity; no wonder we celebrate Christmas two millennia later.
