There are a lot of verses in the Bible that people quote without really understanding whether or not they apply to the situation at hand. Christians often quote Isaiah's words about the will of God when talking about tragic situations like cancer, a house fire, a hurricane, or simply some loss or failure that doesn't make any sense to us. In that vein, this verse is much like Romans 8:28-29, a verse that when taken out of context doesn't necessary lead us into error, per se, but certainly takes us away from the point that the writer, and thus God, are trying to make.
In Isaiah 55, God is expressing his willingness to not only save and restore Israel after the upcoming judgment falls upon them, but surprisingly he plans to include the nations that haven't even heard his name yet in his redemption. In verses 6-7 God explains that he is near and easily found by anyone who is willing to repent by turning from their wickedness. It is at this moment that God says, "my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways." He certainly isn't talking about understanding or coping with tragedy or misfortune, but instead about how God's love and mercy for sinners is beyond our understanding.
The people of God have a long running tendency to exclude those they don't like or aren't comfortable with from the reach of God's mercy. This began with the people of Israel and continue in the history of the Church. From Moses to Jesus it was the Jews who were reluctant to extend God's grace to the Gentiles, once the Gentiles took over the Church they turned the tables and ensured that the Jews were no longer welcome, and later on added in other undesirable such as the American Indians, African slaves, and other groups. It took generations of dedicated work by missionaries and reformers to fight back against this latent racism, to purge the Church of a willingness to forget about those who had not yet been given a chance to accept the call of God to repent.
This same line of reasoning applies to God's willingness to forgive repentant sinners that have either fallen too far in our view, or who have committed sins that we find more repugnant than the ones we've been guilty of. At times this manifests itself in a reluctance to forgive those whose crimes against God seem somehow more grave than our own, at other times it shows up as a reluctance to allow our social club feeling of Church to be distracted by the likes of such sinners as drunkards, drug users, prostitutes, gamblers, or those with sexual perversions. Are the sins of vanity, greed, or good ol' heterosexual fornication somehow a better class of sin? Are those who have already received God's forgiveness somehow superior to those who are about to?
Why are God's "thoughts" and "ways" not our own? Because we have not yet allowed the transforming power of the Holy Spirit to eradicate the self-righteousness from our own thoughts and attitudes to the extent that we begin to see what God see when he looks upon a Lost sinner, a child of God who needs to come home. That God's "thoughts" and "ways" are not our own is a good thing, a merciful, loving thing, thanks be to God.
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
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Sermon Video: We Can't Save Ourselves - Isaiah 64:4-9
Continuing along the rode through Isaiah that explains the need for the Cross, we come to Isaiah’s explanation as to why the people of God cannot repair the damage caused by their sinfulness on their own. Isaiah begins by reminding his audience that there are no other gods to turn to, that only God has shown care for those who follow him. The lack of other options beyond God makes sense when connected to the end of verse five where the lack of commitment to the Law of God shows that the descendant of Abraham are truly in trouble because of their disobedience. Isaiah asks, “How then can we be saved?”
That the answer to Isaiah’s question is, “we can’t do it ourselves, we need God to save us” is made painfully clean when Isaiah shares three metaphors that explain the inability of even God’s people to rectify the situation themselves. The first, that we are all “unclean” connects to the Law’s designation of some people as being temporarily unclean, a status that could be changed, but on that prevented fellowship until it was solved. That the entirety of God’s people could be designated as “unclean” despite their many sacrifices is a sobering thought that explains the seriousness of the damage done by sin to the relationship with God.
The second metaphor is even more shocking, Isaiah says that, “all our righteous acts are like filthy rags”. That righteous deeds could be nullified because of the impure hears of those doing them is another illustration that this is a relationship with God that we’re talking about; God isn’t just some cosmic good vs. evil meter, our hearts matter too. The “filthy rags” of the NIV (and most English translations) are literally a Hebrew euphemism for a woman’s menstrual cloths. In other words, Isaiah actually said, “all our righteous acts are like bloody tampons”; point taken.
Lastly, Isaiah compares God’s people to leaves that have fallen from the tree, shriveled up, and blown away. There is no hope for that leaf, its days are over; so too are we hopeless unless God rescues us.
The last portion of the passage is an appeal to God as our Father, Creator, and Judge to save us despite our sin, to remember that he is the one who initiated the relationship, and appeal to God’s mercy. Why did Jesus have to walk to Calvary, because mankind had wandered away from God, and we don’t have the ability to walk back on our own.
To watch the video, click on the link below: Sermon Video
That the answer to Isaiah’s question is, “we can’t do it ourselves, we need God to save us” is made painfully clean when Isaiah shares three metaphors that explain the inability of even God’s people to rectify the situation themselves. The first, that we are all “unclean” connects to the Law’s designation of some people as being temporarily unclean, a status that could be changed, but on that prevented fellowship until it was solved. That the entirety of God’s people could be designated as “unclean” despite their many sacrifices is a sobering thought that explains the seriousness of the damage done by sin to the relationship with God.
The second metaphor is even more shocking, Isaiah says that, “all our righteous acts are like filthy rags”. That righteous deeds could be nullified because of the impure hears of those doing them is another illustration that this is a relationship with God that we’re talking about; God isn’t just some cosmic good vs. evil meter, our hearts matter too. The “filthy rags” of the NIV (and most English translations) are literally a Hebrew euphemism for a woman’s menstrual cloths. In other words, Isaiah actually said, “all our righteous acts are like bloody tampons”; point taken.
Lastly, Isaiah compares God’s people to leaves that have fallen from the tree, shriveled up, and blown away. There is no hope for that leaf, its days are over; so too are we hopeless unless God rescues us.
The last portion of the passage is an appeal to God as our Father, Creator, and Judge to save us despite our sin, to remember that he is the one who initiated the relationship, and appeal to God’s mercy. Why did Jesus have to walk to Calvary, because mankind had wandered away from God, and we don’t have the ability to walk back on our own.
To watch the video, click on the link below: Sermon Video
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
Sermon Video - An undeliverable message, Isaiah 6:1-13
Communication in the modern world is easy. We can talk, text, e-mail, video chat, any who knows what else with just about anyone in the world anytime we want. The process of delivering a message has never been easier, but one requirement is still needed: a willing recipient. When God called Isaiah to be a prophet he gave him a message that he knew would not be received by the Covenant people to whom Isaiah was charged with delivering it. Isaiah received his vision in 740 BC; The Assyrian army was not outside the walls besieging Jerusalem until 39 years later. There was time for repentance and revival, but there wasn’t a willing heart.
We often equate Isaiah’s “Here I am, send me” with foreign missions, with those willing to leave home to go and take the Gospel to people who have never heard it before. Isaiah’s task was much different, and in most ways much harder. He was sent to warn his own people, his own family, friends, neighbors, and fellow Jews. These were people who knew who God was, they knew God’s power, and they knew the consequences for disregarding their obligations under the Law of Moses. Their problem was not of the head, it was of the heart. They knew what was required but instead following God with their whole hearts their only did so on the surface. Isaiah was not a missionary, he was a reformer, a far different task.
It doesn’t matter if the people had closed their own eyes, ears, and hearts to God’s call or if God had done so to them in judgment. If it was their own choice, they had no excuse; if God had utilized his prerogative as holy judge and the author of the covenant, he had every right to do so. God was the injured party in this relationship, the cheated on spouse in this marriage. That God was willing to send prophets to try to save at least some of his people, until the very last moment before the long predicted judgment arrived, demonstrates the love that God had for his people. To disregard the Law of God is a very serious thing for his people, it has consequences that cannot be disregarded.
Thus we see another step on the road to the cross through the words of Isaiah. God’s people, a people who knew better, would not listen to his call to repent. The only way this cycle of disobedience, warning, and wrath could be broken would be if God himself came to take the weight of that righteous anger upon himself once and for all.
To watch the video, click on the link below: Sermon Video
We often equate Isaiah’s “Here I am, send me” with foreign missions, with those willing to leave home to go and take the Gospel to people who have never heard it before. Isaiah’s task was much different, and in most ways much harder. He was sent to warn his own people, his own family, friends, neighbors, and fellow Jews. These were people who knew who God was, they knew God’s power, and they knew the consequences for disregarding their obligations under the Law of Moses. Their problem was not of the head, it was of the heart. They knew what was required but instead following God with their whole hearts their only did so on the surface. Isaiah was not a missionary, he was a reformer, a far different task.
It doesn’t matter if the people had closed their own eyes, ears, and hearts to God’s call or if God had done so to them in judgment. If it was their own choice, they had no excuse; if God had utilized his prerogative as holy judge and the author of the covenant, he had every right to do so. God was the injured party in this relationship, the cheated on spouse in this marriage. That God was willing to send prophets to try to save at least some of his people, until the very last moment before the long predicted judgment arrived, demonstrates the love that God had for his people. To disregard the Law of God is a very serious thing for his people, it has consequences that cannot be disregarded.
Thus we see another step on the road to the cross through the words of Isaiah. God’s people, a people who knew better, would not listen to his call to repent. The only way this cycle of disobedience, warning, and wrath could be broken would be if God himself came to take the weight of that righteous anger upon himself once and for all.
To watch the video, click on the link below: Sermon Video
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
Sermon Video: The System is Broken - Isaiah 1:10-20
Where does the road to the cross begin? As we once again begin this week our Lenten journey, it is important that we remember that the road to the cross began long before the Son of God was born in Bethlehem. The need for a redemptive Messiah was clear at the Garden of Eden, and humanity’s inability to self-remedy the situation only grew more evident as the story of God’s interaction with man unfolds. In Abraham there was hope, a Covenant people was formed, but when clarity of God’s standard was shown through the Law of Moses the inability of mankind to live up to it was clear. God then sent prophets like Isaiah to warn his people of the consequences of disobedience, and it is through the eyes of Isaiah that this message, and the next five to follow, will look at the road to the cross.
How does God feel about half-hearted obedience? The people of Israel are raked over the coals in chapter one of Isaiah for thinking that they could continue lives both lacking in righteous deeds and full of sin and yet still appear before God with sacrifices, worship, and prayer. God rejects all such attempts by his own Covenant people, the people with whom he is supposed to have a relationship, as a father to his children, or a husband to his wife. The lack of real obedience by God’s people leads him to label their efforts as “meaningless”, “detestable”, and “burden” that he will no longer bear.
The same warning that applied to the descendants of Abraham applies to the Church today. Not to America, or any other nation, we have no Covenant with God, but to his universal Church, the bride of Christ, to whom the New Covenant has been given. If we do not root out sin in our midst, as individuals, families, and local churches, our acts of worship and prayer will be just as useless as Israel’s. God desires a relationship with his people, we cannot hope to please God if we don’t take our commitment to him seriously.
To watch the video, click on the link below: Sermon Video
How does God feel about half-hearted obedience? The people of Israel are raked over the coals in chapter one of Isaiah for thinking that they could continue lives both lacking in righteous deeds and full of sin and yet still appear before God with sacrifices, worship, and prayer. God rejects all such attempts by his own Covenant people, the people with whom he is supposed to have a relationship, as a father to his children, or a husband to his wife. The lack of real obedience by God’s people leads him to label their efforts as “meaningless”, “detestable”, and “burden” that he will no longer bear.
The same warning that applied to the descendants of Abraham applies to the Church today. Not to America, or any other nation, we have no Covenant with God, but to his universal Church, the bride of Christ, to whom the New Covenant has been given. If we do not root out sin in our midst, as individuals, families, and local churches, our acts of worship and prayer will be just as useless as Israel’s. God desires a relationship with his people, we cannot hope to please God if we don’t take our commitment to him seriously.
To watch the video, click on the link below: Sermon Video
Thursday, February 27, 2014
Is a little knowledge of the history of the Bible a good thing?
I just finished a two week presentation on the History of the English Bible at our regular Wednesday evening Bible study. More than half the people who attended were from other churches, a fact that is encouraging as evidence of the desire of ordinary people in the pews of our churches to know the history of the book they turn to for answers to the most important questions in life.
The question in the title reflects a quote I found for my presentation from a King James Only partisan who would rather put his faith in a perfect 17th Century translation of the Bible than study the actual history of the transmission of the text down through the centuries. He contended that we need to take the perfection of the Bible (in his view only the 1611 KJV, the modern versions being of the devil) on faith. I started my presentation by telling the people who had come to learn about the Bible that in fact they don't have to take it on faith that we have the same words that were written by Moses, David, Luke, and Paul. The story of the copying and translating of the Bible is a fascinating piece of history in its own right, but it is also an amazing tale of bravery, dedication, and scrupulous scholarship.
To learn about the history of the Bible is to learn about a human process. The doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture is the portion of that process that we need to take on faith. In other words, I believe that when Isaiah, or John, or James was writing Scripture God had a hand in the process. The words came from men, but were inspired by God, the words reflected the vocabulary and history of those men, but the truths flowing through them were God's. From that point, when the original autographs, penned by the authors, began to be copied and circulated, the process was not divine, but human. Errors and mistakes crept in; imagine copying the whole Bible by hand, wouldn't you makes a few mistakes along the way? But, instead of wrecking our faith in the Bible, this process actually uplifts it. The copyists mistakes have been preserved. That's a good thing, it means that the original text is in there too. When we compare the thousands of copies of the Bible, spread out all around the Roman world and beyond, spanning more than a thousand years, primarily in Greek, but also translated into a half dozen other languages, an amazing thing happens. The copies agree with each other. The copying mistakes fall away and become evident, so much so that an agreement of 98% can be made.
Wait a minute, only 98%? Forget for a moment that the number dwarfs any other ancient document in accuracy of copies, as well as number and age of the copies, is that good enough? Are we better off pretending that any one particular version of the Bible is perfect? No, we're not. The vast majority of the 2% not in agreement are Orthodox statements in and of themselves. For example, the extra part of I John 5:7-8 that was added by a copyist 1,000 years after John penned the letter. Is the statement Orthodox? Clearly, it is a trinitarian statement that we all would agree with. John would have agree with it, he just didn't write it. Do we lose the doctrine of the trinity without it? Of course not. Any doctrine in the Bible worth fighting for is in the Bible in a lot of places. Is idolatry bad, um, yeah, the Bible condemns it hundreds of times. Are we supposed the help the poor, we're told to do so everywhere. Is Jesus Christ the risen Lord, the Son of God? The NT is full of confirmation of that teaching, we don't rely on any one verse or phrase to declare it.
The Bible is the most historically accurate and at the same time the most scrutinized document of the ancient world. It stands up to the assault of any critic who would doubt its accuracy and trounces them with facts. You don't have to take it on faith that your Bible today is conveying to you the same ideas, thoughts, and truths of the original authors, it is a historical fact far more attested to than anything else we know about human history. Is it the Word of God? That's where faith comes in. A little knowledge of the history of the Bible is a good thing, it will increase your faith in the Word of God.
The question in the title reflects a quote I found for my presentation from a King James Only partisan who would rather put his faith in a perfect 17th Century translation of the Bible than study the actual history of the transmission of the text down through the centuries. He contended that we need to take the perfection of the Bible (in his view only the 1611 KJV, the modern versions being of the devil) on faith. I started my presentation by telling the people who had come to learn about the Bible that in fact they don't have to take it on faith that we have the same words that were written by Moses, David, Luke, and Paul. The story of the copying and translating of the Bible is a fascinating piece of history in its own right, but it is also an amazing tale of bravery, dedication, and scrupulous scholarship.
To learn about the history of the Bible is to learn about a human process. The doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture is the portion of that process that we need to take on faith. In other words, I believe that when Isaiah, or John, or James was writing Scripture God had a hand in the process. The words came from men, but were inspired by God, the words reflected the vocabulary and history of those men, but the truths flowing through them were God's. From that point, when the original autographs, penned by the authors, began to be copied and circulated, the process was not divine, but human. Errors and mistakes crept in; imagine copying the whole Bible by hand, wouldn't you makes a few mistakes along the way? But, instead of wrecking our faith in the Bible, this process actually uplifts it. The copyists mistakes have been preserved. That's a good thing, it means that the original text is in there too. When we compare the thousands of copies of the Bible, spread out all around the Roman world and beyond, spanning more than a thousand years, primarily in Greek, but also translated into a half dozen other languages, an amazing thing happens. The copies agree with each other. The copying mistakes fall away and become evident, so much so that an agreement of 98% can be made.
Wait a minute, only 98%? Forget for a moment that the number dwarfs any other ancient document in accuracy of copies, as well as number and age of the copies, is that good enough? Are we better off pretending that any one particular version of the Bible is perfect? No, we're not. The vast majority of the 2% not in agreement are Orthodox statements in and of themselves. For example, the extra part of I John 5:7-8 that was added by a copyist 1,000 years after John penned the letter. Is the statement Orthodox? Clearly, it is a trinitarian statement that we all would agree with. John would have agree with it, he just didn't write it. Do we lose the doctrine of the trinity without it? Of course not. Any doctrine in the Bible worth fighting for is in the Bible in a lot of places. Is idolatry bad, um, yeah, the Bible condemns it hundreds of times. Are we supposed the help the poor, we're told to do so everywhere. Is Jesus Christ the risen Lord, the Son of God? The NT is full of confirmation of that teaching, we don't rely on any one verse or phrase to declare it.
The Bible is the most historically accurate and at the same time the most scrutinized document of the ancient world. It stands up to the assault of any critic who would doubt its accuracy and trounces them with facts. You don't have to take it on faith that your Bible today is conveying to you the same ideas, thoughts, and truths of the original authors, it is a historical fact far more attested to than anything else we know about human history. Is it the Word of God? That's where faith comes in. A little knowledge of the history of the Bible is a good thing, it will increase your faith in the Word of God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)