Pastoral Care

/ W. Keith Brenton / 5 Comments

I begin with my standard disclaimer: I am not a minister or pastor, nor do I play one on TV.

I work in a church office, but I am not employed specifically to share the gospel of Jesus Christ or tend the flock of the Great Shepherd. But I work with a good number of priceless ministers who are, and priceless colleagues who support them, and I just want to offer a few words of advice on the care and feeding of church leaders, whatever their titles: ministers, preachers, pastors, elders, shepherds, deacons, interns, and staffers.

  1. If your pastor says something you disagree with, keep it to yourself. Seriously. If it’s a difference of opinion over something which scripture doesn’t dare to touch (and scripture dares to touch a lot), then the guidance I’d suggest is ” … So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God.” (Romans 14:22a) And consider the possibility that you heard something you needed to hear; needed to be convicted by … in order for you to turn around and draw closer to God again.
  2. If your pastor says or does something that conflicts with scripture, go to your pastor. Not to someone over them or under them or beside(s) them. Go to them. Follow the steps: “… just the two of you … if they will not listen, take one or two others along … if they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church.” (Matthew 18:15-17) No shortcuts. No keeping it to yourself. No withholding of love or fellowship or willingness to discuss, listen, correct, reprove. You can do this kindly, lovingly, privately — in a way that does not affect your pastor’s influence — just the way Aquila and Priscilla did for Apollos, in their own home (Acts 18:26).
  3. If your pastor has something against you, go to your pastor. Now. Today. Don’t wait until Sunday when you bring a gift to God. Don’t expect Him to accept it when He knows you have something unresolved with your minister. “First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift.” (Matthew 5:24b)
  4. If you have something encouraging to say to your pastor, say it. “Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.” (1 Thessalonians 5) Do it often. Daily if you think they need it. And, again, don’t put it off until tomorrow. “But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called ‘Today,’ so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.” (Hebrews 3)Your church leaders and staffers find out thing about people … things they don’t want to know about. They don’t want to know because they love the flock and want to think the best of them. Sometimes they don’t feel comfortable even sharing this information with a spouse who also loves and cares for the flock. The wise ones share it with God and turn it over to Him and do what they can to comfort, admonish, and encourage the strays and the injured and the sick and the dying among the flock. They are not the hired hands Jesus talks about in John 10:12. They don’t run away; they stay with the flock at risk to their own safety and security.Their hearts break on an irregular but frequent basis — sometimes several times a week. Don’t overlook the ones who oversee you. Don’t fail to serve the ones who serve you. Don’t miss administering care to the ones who minister to others.
  5. If you have a pastor who imitates the Great Shepherd (who laid down His life for the sheep), thank God for your pastor. You have a treasure in your church family worth more than all you could ever afford to pay. So give what is due. “The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching.” (1 Timothy 5:17)

This is by no means an exhaustive list of admonitions from scripture — but it’s a great start. They’ll nourish any believer who does them or receives through them, church leader or not.

What we headstrong and occasionally brainless sheep fail to see, too often, is how famished and weary our pastors can become doing what they love for those they love to the glory of the One they love.

Feed the ones who feed the flock.

They’re trying to help Him look after your soul.

Partial Depravity

/ W. Keith Brenton / 2 Comments

I just want to bullet a few points and then I’m going to leave this subject alone for awhile. It’s taken me most of my 56 years to sort it out this far, and I don’t expect to make any great gains in it anytime soon.

  • I don’t believe the Roman epistle was intended to be — solely or even primarily — a commentary on man’s inclination toward evil. It’s an answer to Jewish and Gentile Christians who are having difficulty living with the reality of their equality in God’s eyes, and that equality is based on the fact that everyone sins; no one is perfect.
  • The first ten or so chapters are written to resonate with the Jewish-trained mind; references to existing scripture and point-of-view. This seems to be because the Jewish Christians were lording it over their Gentile brothers and sisters in Christ that they were of God’s chosen people. (There seems to be a brief break at Romans 11:13 when Paul addresses Gentiles at that point.)
  • Romans 1:18-32 is not necessarily talking about the wickedness of all people (the word “all” does not appear there), but specifically of “people who suppress the truth by their wickedness” (NIV) or “men who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth” (ESV) or “men who hold the truth in unrighteousness” (KJV). There’s no punctuation in the original Greek text, so we endanger the meaning by placing a comma there after “people” or “men.” I think the importance of this passage is that there is no distinguishing between Jew and Gentile; people of both groups have been guilty of these sins — hence the use of the non-specific term “men” or “people” (as the NIV renders it).
  • The text specifically names sins which are in play because of this wickedness: idolatry, sexual immorality (perhaps in the context of idol worship), trading God’s truth for a lie. And this unholy idolatry led to further sin: ” … They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy.” It’s a history of how people have gone wrong through having ignored the plain evidence of God in creation.
  • Romans 1 is not separate in thought from Romans 2, which condemns the kind of judgment and racial line-drawing that evidently had been going on between the Jewish and Gentile Christians. Romans 2:5-11 not only quotes a Psalm and a Proverb, but also agrees with what Jesus teaches in Matthew 25: God will judge according to what people do.
  • Please consider very carefully the verses in Romans 2:12-16 before confidently concluding that belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God through hearing the gospel is an absolute prerequisite to the salvation that His blood enables and that God gives as a free gift.
  • No matter how many good things people do, it can never be enough to earn or merit salvation. That’s the point of Romans 4-9. That’s the weakness of the Jewish law. It was never meant for salvation, but preservation of God’s people as sanctified, set apart to prepare the way for the Chosen One — and by far the greatest share of them paved their own paths to nowhere instead.
  • Abraham was justified by faith in God (Romans 4:1-3); and so are we (Romans 5:1-2). But the good works we do testify to our faith, just as Abraham’s act of faith did (James 2). The purpose of those good works is to bring the judgment of those who have not heard and do not believe to bear on the goodness of God. They give us an opportunity to explain the good and giving nature of God through His most extravagant gift: His Son, Jesus, the Christ. No one comes to the Father except through Him (John 14:6ff); He and the Father are One.
  • Adam brought sin and therefore death into the world; Jesus took away sin and the sting of death (Romans 5-6). Jewish law could not bring life; only judgment, by specifying what constitutes sin (Romans 7). Sinleadstodeath … sinleadstodeath … sinleadstodeath (one of the major subtexts of the entire Bible, but especially Romans). Adam is not responsible for our sin; we are (Deuteronomy 24:16).
  • The Spirit of God/Christ rescues us from slavery to sin and the consequence of death (Romans 8). He is given to those God foreknows and predestines and calls — but there is no language there that says God only calls certain people, or that He alone determines how they respond to that call. (See Isaiah 65:12, 66:4, Jeremiah 7:13; but also see God’s promise to answer even before they call for Him, Isaiah 65:24.) In all cases in scripture, the subject for the word “predestined” is plural. It is never used in a singular, individual sense. The same is true of the word “foreknew” and “foreknowledge.” Is there anyone God does not foreknow? Is there anyone He does not call?
  • The point in Romans 9:18-33 seems to be that God calls to the Gentiles as well as the His chosen people, the Jews, to prove that righteousness in Christ is not achieved by obeying their law/doing good alone, but through faith. The choosing spoken of here, again, is of a group of people (Jews, Gentiles) — not of individuals.
  • To me, the sense of the foreknowledge and choosing is that God knew in advance that he would be calling a group of people to follow His Son from among the Jews and the Gentiles. He predestined this group to be, and to be mixed. Nothing in the text says He predestined individual persons to be a part of that group and made their choice for them. At the same time, nothing in the text says that God does not permit Himself to save — show mercy — to whom He wills if they have not heard of His Son.
  • Romans 10 concludes that Jews and Gentiles (that’s everybody, folks) need Jesus … and need to hear about Jesus so they can believe. Romans 11 maintains that God has not rejected his people, Israel (the Jews), but wants for them to know not just of Him but of His Son and what has been done for all people through Jesus. To the Gentiles, Paul advises that they should not get a sense of superiority over their Jewish brothers and sisters in Christ, because they were grafted in; not inherently better or some kind of “new” chosen people.
  • The rest of the epistle is filled with instructions for both Jews and Gentiles, addressed to all, capstoned (perhaps) by: “Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God. For I tell you that Christ has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God’s truth, so that the promises made to the patriarchs might be confirmed and, moreover, that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy. ” (Romans 15:7-9)
  • None of that says anything about people being incapable of imagining or doing good of themselves. Assuming that people do, in fact, make their own decisions based on the faith God gives them (Ephesians 2:8) without God making the decision for them, then people are capable of making a good decision when they decide to follow Jesus Christ. And people who do what the law requires without knowledge of the law are capable of making a good decision when they decide to do good works.
  • There is no record that Cain and Abel were commanded of God to offer sacrifices. If they were not, then both of them were capable of making a good decision in making an offering of gratitude to God … a creative choice in lieu of a command to follow. And, yes, even one out of two of them managed to mess that up  badly … yet Abel offered his gift in faith (Hebrews 11:4).
  • What value would our choices to follow God have if He made them for us? This is the rhetorical question Paul asks, almost as a joke (“Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” ~ Romans 9:19-24). Paul’s answer is that the sovereign God has the right to make our choices for us — He made us — but His will is to call even the Gentiles as well as the Jews to the relationship made possible through His Son. This agrees with what Paul taught in Athens, that God commands all men everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30-31). Peter agrees (2 Peter 3:9).
  • But: “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” (Romans 10:14)
  • It’s important not to say “can’t” where scripture says “doesn’t.” The fact that we do not choose to do good things does not mean that we cannot.

Okay, that’s all for now. I may or may not respond to comments; I’ll just tell you that in advance. I’m not good at arguing with people and I don’t enjoy it. It doesn’t usually set a good example for people who read arguing comments and conclude that Christians are more comfortable at arguing than they are at doing good in the world.

I’m having a more and more difficult time with that perception, myself.

That means I am re-evaluating the kind of blogging that I do here, and it means that a change is in order. I don’t know what that change is, but I have a strong feeling that it will be more writing about Jesus, which I have badly neglected.

I just feel deeply that we believers have too often made a very bad impression on those who don’t know of Him except through us, especially by judging them and using expressions like “total depravity” and generally leaving the impression that God only loves people who have heard about Jesus and have accepted Him as Son of God and Savior and Lord. And that means us and not them.

Nothing could be further from God’s truth.

Call Me Totally Depraved, But …

/ W. Keith Brenton / 43 Comments

… I think I am unfit to be either a Calvinist or an Arminian.

That’s right; they actually agree on one of their respective five points — total depravity — and as far as i understand it, I disagree with it.

Here’s the way that Wikipedia phrases the first of Calvin’s five points:

“Total depravity“: This doctrine, also called “total inability”, asserts that as a consequence of the fall of man into sin, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin. People are not by nature inclined to love God with their whole heart, mind, or strength, but rather all are inclined to serve their own interests over those of their neighbor and to reject the rule of God. Thus, all people by their own faculties are morally unable to choose to follow God and be saved because they are unwilling to do so out of the necessity of their own natures. (The term “total” in this context refers to sin affecting every part of a person, not that every person is as evil as possible.)[10] This doctrine is borrowed from Augustine who was a member of a Manichaean sect in his youth.

And how the third article of the Arminian Remonstrances reads:

That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as he, in the state of apostasy and sin, can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do anything that is truly good (such as having faith eminently is); but that it is needful that he be born again of God in Christ, through his Holy Spirit, and renewed in understanding, inclination, or will, and all his powers, in order that he may rightly understand, think, will, and effect what is truly good, according to the word of Christ, John xv. 5: “Without me ye can do nothing.”

Now, the fact is, I agree that no one is capable of being saved by his or her own effort, or without the blood of Christ. I agree that faith is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8 ), but I do not find anything in scripture that says this gift is given exclusively to those who have heard the gospel of Jesus Christ.

  • Faith may come by hearing (Romans 10:17) — it certainly does for many, many believers — but scripture nowhere says that it comes solely by hearing. You have to add the word “only” to get that meaning.
  • There may indeed be no one who is sinless before God (Ecclesiastes 7:20; Psalm 143:2; Romans 3) … but not one of those passages (or any other) adds, “and therefore they are all automatically damned.”
  • Nor does any of them say that a man is incapable of anything truly good. In fact, a good number of Old Testament heroes are spoken of as righteous or fully devoted to God in spite of their sins (Noah, Genesis 6:9; 7:1 … Abraham, Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:3, 9; Galatians 3:6; James 2:21, James 2:23 … Daniel and Job, Ezekiel 14:14, 20 … King David, 1 Kings 15:3). And as far as we can tell, none of them ever heard the gospel of Jesus Christ in this life. People can imagine, think and do good … even if the rest of Noah’s generation thought only evil all the time (Genesis 6:5). Noah did, unless somehow you can explain to me how Noah was righteous even though he was also a person whose heart’s inclinations were only evil all the time.
  • In addition, when God created man, He pronounced man along with all His creation, not just “good,” but “very good.” (Genesis 1:26-31).
  • This is where I disagree with Calvin’s Reformed thought even further; man (through Adam and Eve) chose not to be good one time; God gave them the choice of two trees in the garden, and one was promoted by the serpent to be more attractive though forbidden on pain of death itself. One of God’s greatest gifts to us is choice, and our choices matter to Him, and they have consequences. We have chosen ever since not to be perfect, but that does not mean that we have chosen not to be good. It only takes one time choosing self to bring sin into our lives and render us imperfect. But that does not mean that God sees us as unrighteous and consigns us to the fires of hell upon the commission of the first sin; through Christ’s blood He justifies the ungodly. He judges fairly — and I believe that would have to mean, individually, rather than as part of a class of people (“sinners”) that He can condemn because it will save Him a great deal of time and effort.
  • This is where I diverge from Arminius’s Remonstrances even further because the fourth article reads:

That this grace of God is the beginning, continuance, and accomplishment of any good, even to this extent, that the regenerate man himself, without that prevenient or assisting; awakening, following, and co-operative grace, can neither think, will, nor do good, nor withstand any temptations to evil; so that all good deeds or movements that can be conceived must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. But, as respects the mode of the operation of this grace, it is not irresistible, inasmuch as it is written concerning many that they have resisted the Holy Ghost,—Acts vii, and elsewhere in many places.

So — if I understand it correctly — this article of doctrine says that only God can sponsor anything good; all good actions come from God as well as all good things and good can only be ascribed to Him. Where does scripture say that? I’ll agree that His grace is not irresistible (one of the points of Calvinism says it is), but where does God’s word tell us that no man is capable of any good at all, of himself? Wouldn’t that be a requirement of free will and choice; the ability to choose within oneself between genuine good and inarguable evil? Don’t we even call it “making a good choice” or “making a bad choice”? Isn’t the purpose of giving people a choice finding out what they will choose?

Let’s face it: all the talk of “total depravity” is just a redefinition of another doctrine of men: Original Sin. It is so tenuously based in scripture that believers in Christ can’t begin to come to a consensus on what it is, what it means, or how it applies to mankind. It seems clear to me in Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:22 that the acts of Adam and Eve introduced sin (and therefore death) into the world. Since Augustine, we’ve read the word “eternal” before “condemnation” into the Romans passage, where Paul is talking about the condemnation of a death sentence — where there was none before Adam and Eve! His point is that the first man brought sin into the world; Jesus took it away. Adam is no more responsible for my sins than I am for his or my great-great-uncle’s or my yet-unborn grandchildren’s (if any — Jeremiah 31:29-31) .

I’ll admit I don’t understand everything about Calvinism and Arminianism. To my view, they lead to extremes: one to excluding man entirely from the salvation process; the other, to virtually excluding God’s sovereignty in favor of free will. I don’t understand all of the arguments that are used to explain away all these doctrines’ inconsistencies with scripture. I don’t get all of the points that new Reformed voices make to ameliorate the extremes of their classic position (does that mean they are reformed Reformed?).

I do understand that these doctrines are two systematized approaches to theology (study of God’s nature), soteriology (study of salvation) and probably lots of other religious stuff, and they are systems created by men.

And I believe I understand what Jesus says about nullifying the word of God by human tradition and invalidating worship by teaching human rules (Matthew 15:1-13; Mark 7:1-13). God doesn’t have to fit in our rulebooks, no matter how cleverly we deduce them or how cogently we argue them or how persuasively we phrase them.

Anything I need to understand about the relationship between God and us — what He wants for us; what He has provided for us — I can see pretty clearly in the life and actions and teachings and sacrifice and resurrection of Jesus Christ, His Son.

He didn’t pronounce anyone totally depraved; completely unreachable by God due to their slightest sin. Instead, He seemed to go out of His way to find good in the people that His countrymen expected the least good from, like a Roman centurion (Matthew 8:5-13) and a Canaanite woman (Matthew 15:21-28). He challenged people with His own perfection (Matthew 5:20, 5:48; John 5:14; John 8:1-11). He was a perfect (mature, complete) example; I believe that He feels we deserve that as much as God’s perfection required it in order for Jesus to be our sacrifice … and that we deserve a challenge of perfection, even if it’s impossible for us to achieve ourselves. But I don’t ever hear Him saying or implying that it’s impossible for us to be good, or to do good, or to have faith in what’s good which can be counted as righteousness.

I think this point of Calvinist/Arminian agreement — total depravity — is pervasive in Restoration Movement thought, too. It supports our view that God cannot and/or will not save anyone who has not heard the gospel, believed, repented, confessed, been baptized, and kept all of our man-made rules, too.

Some of our man-made rules and interpretations give Old Testament heroes the benefit of the doubt, even though none of them ever heard the gospel of Christ in order to believe in it, repent, confess His Sonship or be baptized into a fellowship where we in churches of Christ could explain [sarcasm alert] the salvific importance of a cappella worship. We also excuse babies and small children and usually folks who are mentally challenged from the requirement to obey, though scripture says no such specific thing about their acceptance or rejection by God. So, we Restoration folks kind of believe in total depravity, too … but we also believe in the exceptions we wish to make in it.

Can we even look at these issues from outside our own doctrinal boxes and see what scripture says and doesn’t say?

Those who are saved eternally, are saved by Jesus’ blood and the Lord’s judgment — which is His choice. Those who have heard the gospel and have chosen to accept it and have been immersed into a Christ-like life are recipients of a promise of salvation (Romans 10:9), which they are free to continue accepting or can walk away from it and from Him forever (Hebrews 6:4-6 — now that’s depravity!). Those who have not heard the gospel cannot possibly be expected to obey its implications (Romans 10:14). But you know there are good people who have lived as if they had — including patriarchs who lived before God made clear in His law what kind of good He wanted for His people! Those who haven’t heard, yet live obedient lives, perceive and believe in the necessity of good over evil, repent of and repudiate acts that gratify self at the expense of others … they are a law for themselves (Romans 2:14). We will all be judged by what we have done (Matthew 25:31-46), because what we do testifies to what we believe (James 2).

That’s what I read scripture saying. Not five points decided upon by a Reformation synod or five minimal acts of obedience deduced by the founders of a Restoration movement.

And I can’t find anywhere that scripture says those who have not received the promise are automatically excluded from the gift of salvation through the grace of God in Christ because of their total depravity, or anything else.

So it would appear that I am not fit for Calvinism; I’m not fit for Arminianism.

I do find a fit for myself (and everyone else, excluding no one on the chance circumstance of having heard the gospel) between God’s sovereignty and our own free will to choose and within a human nature that is touched by sin, struggles with sin, yet — along with a lot of other people (some of whom have heard of God’s grace and some of whom have not) — yearning for what is good and right in the world, fully capable of imagining what that looks like and often willing to help make that happen.

Repost: Ten Years Ago Today

/ W. Keith Brenton / 2 Comments

… I got up, ate breakfast with Angi, watched her take the kids on to school, sat down in front of the television and turned it on.

I didn’t usually do that, because I was still working as the Web Content Manager for the site of the Abilene Reporter-News though we had moved to Little Rock just three months before, and I had worked until about 1:30 a.m. putting the news from that day’s edition on the site from my home office. (I usually went back to bed.)

I turned the TV on just in time to see Katie Couric get an odd look on her face and say something to the effect that there was a report of a jetliner crashing into a building in New York. Within a few seconds, there was a camera shot of smoke pouring from the side of one of the World Trade Center building.

After shaking the sleepy, shocked stupor from my head, I went to my computer and started setting up a special news page that would refresh every few minutes with the latest information, and started typing it in and uploading it as quickly as I heard it from the television in the other room.

It was behind me, and turned so that I couldn’t see it. So I was spared seeing much of what America saw happening live.

After a little while, I went back to the living room and plugged in a six-hour videotape to record the disaster.

I still haven’t been able to watch it.

September 11, 2001 has left an indelible scar on everyone in the civilized world who has heard or seen what happened and is old enough to understand.

For those who lost dear ones that day, or have lost loved ones in the conflicts since then, the scar is much deeper.

The date 9-11 has become an emergency call to all of us to wake up to the danger of listening and unquestioningly obeying men who claim to speak for God, but speak words of hatred and urge actions of destruction.

The site of the WTC stands as an empty symbol of something which should be there, but is no more; an anti-landmark in tribute to the futility of prejudice against other faiths – or lack of faiths – and to the outpouring of common love and courage in the aftermath that speaks well of the human heart which remains unmoved by such prejudice.

A crater in Pennsylvania gives testimony to the power of ordinary people who would not surrender to evil, even at peril to their own lives.

And a rebuilt, identical section of obliterated Pentagon silently declares that life must go on and threats must be countered and freedom to choose wisely must always be defended.

Ten years ago today, by late afternoon, I finished posting the horrific news and – emotionally spent; physically exhausted – let the next shift in Abilene take over.

My day closed with a hastily-assembled prayer meeting with my church family.

We prayed for the victims. We prayed for the missing. We prayed for their families. We prayed for the rescuers. We prayed for the nation.

And in one particularly difficult and memorable prayer, we prayed for our enemies.

Then I went home, put my kids to bed and finally wept the tears I had no time for that day.

What Has Shaken My Faith Since 9/11/2001

/ W. Keith Brenton / 5 Comments

I watched a Frontline documentary last night titled “Faith and Doubt at Ground Zero.” It chronicled the spiritual journeys of many people of many different types of faith, virtually all of whom experienced a fundamental shaking of their faith in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks.

Let me tell you what I saw.

I saw hideously, horrendously evil events lead to destruction and death and devastation.

Then I saw ordinary people become heroes in helping each other, whether offering physical assistance going up the stairs or assisting others down or protecting their nation’s Capitol by storming a cockpit or cleaning up the smoking debris in the search for remains and artifacts that might bring others peace.

I saw people like you and I become towers of refuge for others through prayer and donations and prayer and comfort and prayer and resolve.

And in the months and years that followed, we all forgot what we wanted to forget but also who we could be for each other and the glory of God.

Let me tell you what I see now.

I see a nation that has squandered its abundance and splintered over political ideology, as if the nation’s salvation had something to do with the distribution of wealth and economic opportunity … as if 535 people in a domed building or a single sitting President could somehow determine it.

I see the wealthy become more wealthy while the poor become more poor and more numerous in this supposedly Christian nation.

I see hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, floods and fires that God has allowed to be sent our way — just as He allowed the planes to fly into buildings and into the ground on 9/11 — each instance an opportunity to care and give and glorify His name through our love.

And I see us largely turning a deaf ear and a blind eye and a fist clenched around our money and our compassion and ourselves … turning away.

Oh, we’ve made our token charitable donations. Including some to creepy televangelists with multi-million dollar residences and jet airplanes of their own.

Don’t get me wrong. There have been others — Shane Claiborne comes to mind — who never asked a dime and who continue to preach and live a gospel of love and generosity and penitence from greed. But we pretty much treat them like shelf curiosities. Modern-day John-the-Baptists.

We might be willing to go out to the living room TV and see them in the deserts of the Sudan or the dumps of Honduras. Maybe even donate a few bucks.

But if we ever believed what Jesus of Nazareth said in His uniquely human-and-divine way, we don’t show it:

“Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” ~ Luke 6:38

Maybe because we never understood what He said in the first place; because we thought He was just talking about money, and that was all: give money and you’ll get money back. Yeah, that’s the so-called “gospel” that the creepy televangelists preach, and look what it got them.

Spiritually destitute.

Because the wealth is in the giving; the blessing is in the loving; the growing is in the denying self and taking up our crosses and following Him.

I’m talking about me, here. I see what’s in the mirror, too, and I don’t like it any better than what I see through the window or the TV or the computer monitor.

What has shaken my faith since 9/11/2001 is the question: “How could God entrust something so precious as the blood of His Son, the gospel of His grace, the generosity of His salvation … to such a worm as I?”

Oh, sorry, if that offends some of you language purists and self-esteem fanatics and political correctness junkies: “… to such a one as I?” That’s what I meant to say.

How could He believe in us?

Dolphins could do better with the gospel. Pets do.

But I look back to 9/11 and I still see who we were … who we could be again, and more.

And I’m grateful He still fills us jars of clay with His precious Holy Spirit, the power of His Word, the promise of His providence, the potential of His love.

And against most but not all hope, I still believe that we … that I … can do better.

Just like He does.

Sermons and Chimes: Working Out Our Salvation

/ W. Keith Brenton / Leave a comment

Alfred Ellmore, my Great-Great Grandfather
I’m coming to terms with my heritage in Churches of Christ through the person of my great-great grandfather Alfred Ellmore, one of the early preachers in the Restoration Movement that yielded this fellowship. This is an installment from his 1914 book Sermons and Chimes, and my reactions to it in the form of a dialogue with him:

SERMONS

WORKING OUT OUR SALVATION.

“Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good pleasure.” (Phil. 2:[12-]13.)

One of the great blessings to man in this life is that his Creator has given him something to do. Without having his hands and mind employed he can not be happy. And in order to make this work a success, God proposes to take man into partnership with him, hence in the work of salvation there are two parties, the divine and the human, and if one be taken out, either the divine or the human, the work is a failure. Without the divine, man can not save himself. Man can not forgive his own sins, nor raise himself from the dead. Without the divine we would be denied the comforting influence of the Holy Spirit, and would know nothing of his sustaining grace. And without man’s acceptance and his hearty co-operation, God does not propose to save man. Man without God can not save himself, and without man’s acceptance God will not save man. And to make this a little stronger, God asks man through the means to save himself.

Right up to the point where you said “God asks man through the means to save himself,” Great-great Grandfather, I was right there with you. Because, right off the bat, I see a conflict with Acts 15:11, Ephesians 2:8, and 2 Timothy 1:8-10 — just to name a few.

Salvation applies to man in three distinct or separate states, and the first thing is to ascertain which salvation does Paul refer to here. There is offered to man a present salvation from past sins. This means pardon, forgiveness, justification. And man is promised salvation from the grave. This means only the salvation of that which was lost, viz., the body. It was the body which was lost in the grave, and when that which was lost in the grave is taken out of the grave, man will be saved from the grave. Then we are promised eternal life beyond the resurrection, and this will be given unto all who have washed their robes, who have been redeemed, and have lived faithful lives unto death. Now which of these salvations is referred to here? Does he refer to conversion, to their salvation from past sins? Whatever salvation it was, it had to be worked out. Then for two reasons we know he could not refer to their conversion. First, they had already been saved from their sins. Paul was not writing to sinners but to Christians, and though they had been saved from past sins, he is speaking of a fugure salvation. And second, there is not much “work” required in becoming a Christian. We read in the New Testament of the thousands who became Christians under the apostles’ preaching, and it was always the work of one day. There is not the case of one person who was told what to do to be saved, being put off until tomorrow. But if one were to obey the gospel today, and live forty years a faithful Christian life, there would be some work in that. Clearly, then, it was not conversion they were to work out.

I have heard this so-called division of salvation described differently … as justification (Acts 13:39; Romans 4:25; Romans 5:16), sanctification (John 17:19; Acts 26:18; Romans 15:16; Hebrews 10:29), and glorification (Romans 8:30; 1 Peter 1:21): the pardon and forgiveness; the process of being set aside for growing increasingly like God through Jesus’ Holy Spirit; the translation into a glorified, eternal form to dwell with them forever. These are scriptural terms, and I have nothing against calling scriptural things by scriptural names — but it would seem to me that your division separates the last of these into two separate things, and ignores the middle one completely. And here I would differ with you.

Salvation is most often spoken of as a single thing; a continuous process. It may well begin with an acceptance of pardon and forgiveness, progress through the living of an increasingly Christ-like mortal life, and continue forever in an immortal form — but it is spoken of as a single life; a single salvation.

But does Paul refer to their salvation from the grave? For two reasons he could not have meant the resurrection of the body. First, we all get that salvation; as by Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. Second, we do not have to “work” out that salvation. The death in Adam is universal and unconditional, so is the resurrection.

Then we are forced to the conclusion that the salvation spoken of here is the salvation in heaven, it is eternal life. Then, my friend, is there something startling here? Though they were Christians, but they were not in heaven, nor were they absolutely certain they would be; if they prove faithful unto death, a thing I fear very many Christians are not doing, they would be saved. The same thought is found in Heb. 4: “Let us therefore fear, lest a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to have come short of it.”

I would have to argue that in leaving out the “part” or sequence of salvation that has to do with becoming more like Christ — the part which involves our active participation and partnership with God through His Holy Spirit — you have left out the possibility to reach the correct conclusion.

And you have opened the door to the doctrine of a works-based salvation, against which Ephesians 2:8-10, Galatians 2:16 and all of Romans 3 and 4 (in fact, the entire epistle) argue heartily against.

I’m not sure than anything in all of Christendom has done more damage to the faith of believers than a doctrine of works-based salvation; that completely deficient teaching that our salvation is all up to us and that God has done His part and He’s through with us and the Holy Spirit is not going to help us today — only the people who lived in the later years of the New Testament age.

Because it leads to self-reliance and self-doubt, both of which are dead-end tracks to nowhere fast. Self-reliance and self-doubt may be quite useful tools for those who crave power to manipulate others into doing what they desire others to do, but they do not lead one closer to Christ because they are centered on self. To God be the glory!

Those “once in grace always in grace” people do not get much consolation here. Paul says: Let “us” fear! What! Paul fear he might be lost? “Final perseverance” people are not all saved here; they were not all baptized into Christ, and are therefore not in Christ.

“Work out your own salvation.” This suggests two things: First, I need not ask my brother to work out my salvation. He has a work of the same importance, that of working out his own salvation. And we need not ask the Master to work out our salvation. He has not promised to do that. And when he commands man to do a certain work, he will not do that work for man. Then if I do not work out my own salvation, it will not be done. Surely, the Lord will assist us in this great work. “He is a sun and a shield, he will give grace and glory, and no good thing will he withhold from them who walk uprightly.” He will not do our work, but he will assist us in doing it.

“We need not ask the Master to work out our salvation”? Really? Because it’s my understanding that we cannot do it ourselves (Romans 3:23) and that He offers the help we need through His Holy Spirit (John 14:26; Romans 5:5; Romans 15:16; Ephesians 1:13; 2 Timothy 1:14; Titus 3:5; Jude 1:20-21).

There are two things said of the congregation at Philippi, which I believe I never heard of being said of any other congregation: First, they had always obeyed, not in his presence only, but now much more in his absence. Whoever knew a congregation who were more faithful after the preacher had left them? Second, here is the only congregation I ever heard of which had its beginning at midnight. Turn to the sixteenth chapter of Acts, and here we read of the beginning of the work in Philippi. Paul and Silas were the apostles called to Philippi by a vision. And on the Sabbath day they went out of the city to a place where resorted persons for prayer, and Paul preached to some women who assembled there, and a woman named Lydia heard the word, believed, and was baptized. And a certain damsel, possessed of an evil spirit, said: “These are the servants of the most high God who show unto us the way of salvation.” And after some days, Paul being grieved, commanded the evil spirit to come out of her, and when her masters saw their business interfered with they beat the apostles, who were then put into the inner prison, and their feet were made fast in the stocks, and there in a strange city, and no friends, and bleeding and hungry, they sang praises and prayed. The Lord heard them, sent an earthquake which opened the doors and threw off their chains, and the jailor rushed into the prison, and seeing the prisoners all loose, was going to take his own life, but Paul saw him in time, and said: “Do thyself no harm, for we are all here.” Then he called for a light and fell down before the apostles and brought them out, and said: “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said: “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved and thy house.” And they spake unto him the word of the Lord and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes, and he was baptized, he and all his straight way, and when he had brought them into his house he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.

Now here is the report of the beginning of the cause in Philippi. And were are the preachers now, under the most favorable circumstances, who would follow out such a program? Perhaps one-half of the men called preachers in the United States would not baptize people under any circumstances. But many who do baptize would not have gone out and baptized persons at midnight. No; they might say: “Wait until next Sabbath, and I will preach a discourse in our church, and if our church is the church of your choice, you can join.” But these preachers were preachers of the gospel; they were laboring under the commission of Him who had said: “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature; he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” Now, if you should happen to come upon a group of people administering this rite at midnight, what would be your conclusion as to their faith? Would you say they were Catholics? Oh, no; Catholics never baptize. But come among the Protestants; would you say they were Methodists, or Lutherans? Hardly. But are they Presbyterians? No. Presbyterians (except the Cumberlands) do not baptize.

Again, dear ancestor, you seem to miss no opportunity to say rude things about believers of other opinions than your own — and perhaps in their absence — rather than finding an opportunity to teach the beautiful, deep meaning of baptism and its salvific power in our lives. Would it not be more instructive to point out to those hearing or reading why baptism was commended by Paul and Silas to the jailer and his family … even to the heart-touching symbolism of the two evangelists washing the jailer’s sins away in baptism even as the jailer humbles himself to wash their stripes?

But it is God who works the will into the people. And says the sleepy Christian: “I’d like to do more and better work in the church, but I haven’t the will, and when God works the will into me, I will rise up and do my duty.” And says the alien: “I’d like to be a Christian, and when the Lord works the will into me I will obey, and of course you could not expect me to obey if I were not willing.”

Now, it is affirmed here that it is God who works the will into man, and if he do this independent of man’s will, even without consulting man, then men have a lawful excuse for their disobedience. But if the Lord propose reasonable means to induce men to obey, and they reject the means, man is to blame.

I am unable to find scripture which supports your turn of phrase, “it is God who works the will into man.” The closest I can come is 2 Peter 1:21, which is speaking of prophecy and prophecy alone; or Philippians 2:13 (the second verse you quote in your introduction), which says “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” And I believe that this does not say He works His own will into people, but works within believers who want to do what He wills; what pleases Him — almost certainly through the “fellowship of the Holy Spirit” (v. 1).

I wish you were still alive to explain to me how you came by this phrase and what you mean by it, as it is perplexing and outside of scripture and my experience. Was it a phrase used by other evangelists of differing opinions from yours; are you quoting it, daring them to justify it themselves? Because you seem to agree with it in the paragraphs which follow:

In the autumn of 1867 I went into Hamilton County, Ind., to preach. On Lord’s day the house was filled with women, and the men were seated on planks, chairs, and wagon seats in the yard, and I stood on the door step. The audience was enthusiastic, and I was energetic. After we closed, a shrewd man made his way through the crowd, and I was introduce to him as Mr. Smith. In a firm but mild manner he said: “Mr. Ellmore, I want to make a statement to you. I just wish to say that today is the first time I ever heard the gospel preached.” Said he: “I was born in North Carolina, and it was my lot to be thrown among that people who believe that God foreordains everything that comes to pass. Those who were born to be saved will be saved, and those who were born to be lost will be lost. Sometimes these people would hold protracted meetings and get up revivals; some would ‘get through,’ and they would shout. Others would seek and fail. I often became anxious as to my future. On one occasion I was in the woods crying and praying. All at once I sobered, and began a soliloquy: ‘What are you worrying over? My salvation. Is not that all unnecessary? Suppose you are one of the elect, don’t you suppose the Lord will call for you at the right time? But suppose you are one of the non-elect, will your worrying and praying induce him to accept you — when you from all eternity were lost, and couldn’t be saved?’ And I folded my arms and told the Lord that, if he wanted Dan Smith, he could let me know, and I should never make another effort until he informed me, and behold, I have spent the forenoon of my life, and now a part of the afternoon, waiting for the Lord to do for me what he has commanded me to do for myself, and today I have learned what that duty is.” Soon Dan Smith, wife and nearly all of their children were members of the church.

But how does God work the will into man, and leave man free to do his own will? Let us see. Early in the spring here stand two men, a father and a son, and the father says: “My son, it is now time to begin work on the farm.” But the son says: “I have decided to change my line of business. I shall quit the farm!” Says the father: “This is the first time you ever refused to obey my command, how is this?” “Well, father, until this morning I was a minor, and I was subject to you, but this morning I am twenty-one, and here are two citizens now, and two ‘wills’ to be consulted.” Now, since the father is willing — anxious — but the son is not willing, what is the first thing to be done? The father must “work the will” into the son. And what is the proper course for him to take? He might say: “My son, I am the stronger, and if you further refuse, I will force you to go.” This might be in accordance with the will of the father, but I hardly think it would work the will into the son. He might force the son to work, but it would be against the will of the son. Suppose, instead of coercion, he tries persuasion, and offers inducements. “My son, if you will go and work on the farm I will give you a dollar and a half for each good day you put in.” But the son hesitates: “I can make better wages for less hours at some other business.” But the father is loath to let the son go, saying: “Your mother and I are growing old, and we can not consent to having the family circle broken. And now, if you will work with us this season, I will give you two dollars per day, and in addition, I will give you one-third of everything the farm produces this year.” The son springs to his feet and asks: “Where shall I sow the oats, and where shall I plant the corn and cotton?” The father says: “A great change has come over you, and what has brought about this great change?” “You did it, father, by offering me such amazing inducements that I could not find it in my heart to deny.” So, the Father offers lost man remission of sins, the comforting influence of the Holy Spirit, his abundant grace, food and raiment, a glorified body, and an eternal home in heaven, and the considerate, reasonable man says: “I yield, I yield.”

So it is only by coercion and bribery that God “works his will into man”? What of the motivations of love for God and gratitude for what He has done for us in Christ and the honest desire to please Him? Have these no value in becoming more self-giving as Jesus was; living the kind of life He lived?

Now let us note some of the worthy examples who were laborers in the vinyeard, and first, the Master himself. He labored in the carpenter’s shop until he was thirty years old. He then became a preacher, and he labored from morning till night, and after the multitudes whent home to rest, Jesus went apart to pray, and upon one occasion he prayed all night (Luke 6:12). He visited the sick and he healed them. He sought the hungry multitude, and fed them. He went about doing good. How would the ten-thousand-dollar clergyman size up with the lowly Master? The twelve apostles must go into all the world and preach, and take, in part, bonds, and whippings, and imprisonments for their reward. They often labored with fear and trembling.

In his boyhood Paul was taught the trade of tent-making, and after becoming a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin, and after becoming an apostle, he worked at his trade between discourses, to help bear expenses of himself and the young preacher who accompanied him. A preacher of his ability to stop by the wayside and work with his hands! But he worked with “fear and trembling,” not so much for the hardships and dangers of self, as for the poor and forsaken around him. Paul could look across the dark river and see the rewards of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked. And have we all thought of that three-years’ meeting he held in Ephesus? Did anybody ever read of such labors as those were? To the elders he says: “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember that, by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears!” Is not this a remarkable experience? For three years! A long meeting. I ceased not to warn every one of you, the whole congregation. Night and day. Not only during the day, but in the night also. But he warned them night and day with tears! There are not many preachers now who could give such a report. Do we know of one? Just one? And do we see Christians now serve God “with fear and trembling?” Do we see elders feeding the flock “with fear and trembling?” Do parents warn their children of the dancing hall, and of the saloon, and of the Sunday ball game with fear and trembling?

Now, in view of these things, let us all — every one — go to work, not boisterously, but industriously, quietly. Let us assist every one near us, to work faithfully. And let us pray much, pray without ceasing, at least once per day, but three times would be better. Let us do all the good we can, and no harm.

Great-great Grandfather, this is only half-a-gospel. It is the same half-a-gospel that too many preachers preach (and to only moderate effectiveness) today: Don’t do bad stuff. Do good stuff. Work faithfully. Pray. Do all the good we can, and no harm. Obey. Don’t mess up.

It isn’t specific. It doesn’t tell us what good stuff to do, or what good stuff to do might be, or what we should work faithfully at, or what all the good we can might involve.

And it is also only moderately effective because it is only moderately descriptive. It misses out on that whole middle sequence of the salvation process: growing up in, maturing like, growing closer to, becoming like Jesus Christ in this world, through the power and comfort and assistance of His very own Holy Spirit in our lives. It is part of an ongoing transformation which begins with our surrender and forgiveness (justification) and continues through our grateful obedience (sanctification) :

“Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.” ~ Romans 12:2

“And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.” ~ 2 Corinthians 3:18

… then culminates in our being changed from mortal to immortal at the return of Christ and the judgment we escape by His grace:

” … who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body.” ~ Philippians 3:21

“After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.” ~ 1 Thessalonians 4:17

Great-great Grandfather, there is not one iota that you or I or anyone else (save the Lord) can do to effect this part of the change. It is beyond our capability. What Paul means by our working out our salvation in fear and trembling cannot possibly mean our transformation into eternal beings, but our transformation into Christ-like mortals through partnership with God, His Son the Christ, and Their Holy Spirit.

“For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.” ~ 1 Corinthians 3:9

“As God’s fellow workers we urge you not to receive God’s grace in vain.” ~ 2 Corinthians 6:1

“We sent Timothy, who is our brother and God’s fellow worker in spreading the gospel of Christ, to strengthen and encourage you in your faith …” ~ 1 Thessalonians 3:2

Paul doesn’t say this of himself or Timothy out of arrogance; but out of God’s grace and desire to work through those of us who believe.

“There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men.” ~ 1 Corinthians 12:6

That’s what scripture means when it says, “for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose” (Philippians 2:13)

Partners with God. Working out our salvation. Not by ourselves. Not earning it ourselves.

Together, with Him. Yes, in holy fear and trembling at the notion of God Himself dwelling within us and working through us — but also trembling with excitement at the incredible opportunities afforded by a partnership with God Himself.

I believe you were on the right track when you began this sermon, dear ancestor.

I wish you hadn’t taken the dead-end siding.

The Maxims of Methuselah Moot

/ W. Keith Brenton / 2 Comments

Methuselah Moot

Robert Heinlein chronicled a far-flung future’s The Notebooks of Lazarus Long; a few years later, David Gerrold responded with the often-hilarious and equally-irreverent Sayings of Solomon Short. That was all years ago, so I have decided at last to reveal The Maxims of Methuselah Moot (although some of them go back as far as the Greek philosopher-humorist Mediocrites).

It is merely coincidental that most if not all are 140 characters or less.

  • Lads, here’s a good rule of thumb: Never date a girl whose voice is deeper than yours.
  • So I asked Voldemort “What’s it like being dead this time?” He didn’t say anything, so either he’s very ticked off or it’s a lot more final.
  • Sometimes the kindest thing you can say is nothing. Especially when you’re angry. But also when someone else is hurting. And you’re angry. (This one may have been inspired by Jack Handey.)
  • Has anyone let Sarah Palin know that if she’s ever elected President, she would be expected to actually do the job?
  • Actually, Donald Trump was the first to offer a jobs plan: “You’re fired!”
  • I’m not a drinkin’ man, but if a Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster would alleviate the way I feel this morning, I’d risk it.
  • There is no opinion so stupid that you can’t reply “Well, of all the points of view there are in the world, yours is certainly one of them.”
  • There is nothing so rare as a day in June (except in June) unless it’s a steaklet in a French restaurant.
  • The art of mosaic isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
  • Indecisiveness isn’t as bad as all that — and yet it is, and much worse, sometimes.
  • With each passing year, my skills in advanced narcolepsy become even more acute.
  • If I had it all to do over again … aaah, I probably wouldn’t live to be 112, so what’s the point?
  • Hey, folks. Install a window in your paradigm, okay?
  • If you cross a chocolate lab with a maltese, do you get a chocolate malt?
  • Today’s earthquake near the District of Columbia has confirmed the existence of the legendary Congressional Fault.
  • There is a beverage that seemeth sweet to a man, but the aftertaste thereof is bitterness to the soul.
  • I’d buy myself some ginko biloba if I thought I could remember to take it.
  • You go ahead and have a fun night. I’m tired enough for both of us and can turn in early. You’re welcome.
  • The way to a man’s heart is through his accelerator pedal foot. Cardiologists have known this for years. All women should.
  • Surely there can be no computers in heaven, for Gabriel himself would lose his soul at their mischief. All the more reason to yearn for it.
  • Some like Cutter’s Point; some like High Point. But my favorite brand of decaf coffee is Whats-the Point.
  • Like Howard the Duck, we are all trapped in a world we never made. Well, okay, we made some of it … worse. But it’s not all Cleveland.
  • Thinking about calling my dentist to see if he could schedule me in today for a couple of hours of soft music and gas.
  • I gave up worrying — or thought I had, until I caught myself worrying that I wasn’t worrying enough.
  • The most tragic oxymoron of all: “holy war.”
  • There are two types of people in the world: Those who finish what they start
  • Well, here I am sitting on my bottom with a headache. But at least I’m not sitting on someone else’s bottom with their headache.
  • In addition to a “Dislike” button … has anyone approached Facebook about adding a “Don’t Care” button?
  • How many Mad Hatters does a Tea Party need?
  • I appreciate air conditioning. I’m not a big fan of big fans.
  • Yay. The debt ceiling hike passed. Now we can spend more money than we have for a little while longer before China forecloses on US. Yay.
  • I just bit my tongue. I’d have bitten someone else’s, but I was by myself.

Well, that’s just a sampling of The Maxims of Methuselah Moot that you’ve missed last month by not following keith_brenton on Twitter, ’cause I share them there almost as fast as I receive through the ol’ neurotransmitters (unless I happen to remember my aluminum-foil skullcap and can avoid them).

9/11: ‘Nor Did It Enter My Mind’

/ W. Keith Brenton / 3 Comments

We look back on the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001 and we still want someone to have to pay for them — and I believe that reflects a sense of God’s just nature in our own — but there is no one around to blame. The direct perpetrators at that time had themselves perished in the flames, and the cowards who instigated their treachery seemed to have taken their cues at stealth from termites or cockroaches. Too often, in the ten-year aftermath, we have turned on those we felt should have prevented or protected our nation from these attacks, and have savaged them with our frustrated fury.

Yes, to some degree, there were people whose jobs were to anticipate evil and take steps to prevent and protect.

At the same time, there are acts so heinous, so … may I use the word unthinkable? … that I am not sure we can hold those people responsible for not considering them a serious risk.

After all, there were acts so heinous in the history of Israel that God said regarding them, “something I did not command them, nor did it enter my mind.” Three times He repeats the phrase in Jeremiah:

They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire—something I did not command, nor did it enter my mind.

~ Jeremiah 7:31

They have built the high places of Baal to burn their children in the fire as offerings to Baal—something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind.

~ Jeremiah 19:5

They built high places for Baal in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to sacrifice their sons and daughters to Molek, though I never commanded—nor did it enter my mind—that they should do such a detestable thing and so make Judah sin.

~ Jeremiah 32:35

Does that mean it never occurred to God that Israel could do such a thing? Obviously not, since He (again) three times specifically forbade it in Leviticus:

“‘Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molek, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the LORD.

~Leviticus 18:21

If the members of the community close their eyes when that man sacrifices one of his children to Molek and if they fail to put him to death,

~ Leviticus 20:4

“Say to the Israelites: ‘Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him.

~ Leviticus 20:2

So did God contradict Himself? No; and I think there are two possibilities that explain it:

  1. The phrase “nor did it enter My mind” could refer specifically to the act of commanding it; it would never have entered HIS mind to command such a thing (the incident with Isaac notwithstanding; there’s no evidence He ever intended for Abraham to follow through — see the phrasing of “tested” in Hebrews 11:17).
  2. He perceived the possibility that Israel could sink this low … He just couldn’t imagine that they would do so, after instilling them not only with instinct of parental love but also after giving them a direct and specific command not to do such a reprehensible thing, especially in the name of faith and religion.

Either way, it was never God’s will for His children to put their own children to death in the same way that the surrounding peoples did in their worship of idol gods. In fact, preventing this kind of abomination seems to be the specific reason why God commanded the obliteration of those peoples as the Israelites moved into the land promised to them (Deuteronomy 20:16-18). It is possible that nothing else would have also obliterated those practices from the land.

The crimes against humanity that took place on 9/11/2001 are of this detestable nature: people willingly — perhaps eagerly — sacrificing their own lives in order to commit mass murder of thousands, including children, as an act of piety because some shaman in their religious structure instructed them to do so. There were Muslims who died in those attacks. There were children who died in those attacks. None of that served as a deterrent to the warped motivations of the warped individuals who masterminded and conducted the attacks.

Ten years later, we still have difficulty dealing with the reality of it.

Let’s not blame the good people we put in charge of our protection for being no more willing to believe in the likelihood of that kind of inhumanity on that kind of scale than the Lord Himself was.

Outwords

/ W. Keith Brenton / 19 Comments

Let me take a quick break from my dialogue with my great-great grandfather to say something as briefly and clearly as I know how:

Phrases like “our identity” and “our distinctiveness” have no place in the vocabulary of any Christian who believes that Jesus prayed John 17. They should be cast out as demons were cast out by Jesus and those who followed Him.

You will not find an individual church’s “identity” or “distinctiveness” as a concept in scripture. Heck, you won’t even find those words in scripture.

So who authorized anybody to use them with regard to the church at all, let alone as issues that are paramount?

Those are words used by people who are divisive and contentious, and I think we all know what scripture has to say about such people.

They are words which create division and cause dissension, because wherever there is an “our” or “us,” there must be a “their” and “them.” There is no denying this.

They are scare words, because the people who use them are scared to lose the power that they think they have by using them.

The power in the church belongs to God in Christ Jesus, not anyone else. The only identity that the church has is through Christ Jesus, our Lord. The only distinctiveness we should have is in lives that reflect His, which shone forth the Father’s glory from the moment of His birth to the moment of His death, and then beyond and on and on.

“Our identity” and “Our distinctiveness” are judgmental words, because they cast judgment and condemnation on others who are different, see things differently, have different customs.

They are contra-authorized words, prohibited because scripture advises that we count others better than ourselves and accept each other as we have been accepted in Christ.

They are unholy words, because they do not maintain the Spirit of unity in the bond of peace, but seek to supplant Him with self.

They are arrogant words, because they presume that “us” and “our” is correct and therefore righteous and therefore superior. Scripture says that no one is righteous; no, not one … except through the blood of Jesus Christ. And that through faith, which is not even of ourselves, but is the gift of God.

Only by Jesus’ sacrifice and His judgment will sheep be separated from goats; only by His grace will any be saved; only by His justice will any be excluded … not by any lines that we draw or  judgments we make or by any subscriptural human teachings that we espouse as dearly as if they were God’s own words when God had no intention of saying them. And it should be to no one’s surprise that they do not appear in scripture.

They are words by which their users will be judged, and I am not at all superior to or more righteous than those who use them constantly because I have used them myself, over and over, without even thinking of the connotations of them or the perceptions of others or — most importantly — the way they sound to God’s ears.

May God forgive me.

May God forgive us all.

Sermons and Chimes: The Ark and The Church

/ W. Keith Brenton / 9 Comments

Alfred Ellmore, my Great-Great GrandfatherI’m coming to terms with my heritage in Churches of Christ through the person of my great-great grandfather Alfred Ellmore, one of the early preachers in the Restoration Movement that yielded this fellowship. This is an installment from his 1914 book Sermons and Chimes, and my reactions to it in the form of a dialogue with him:

SERMONS

THE ARK AND THE CHURCH

“And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me, for the earth is filled with violence through them, and behold I will destroy them, with the earth. Make thee an Ark of gopher wood, rooms shalt thou make in the Ark, and pitch it within and without with pitch.” (Gen. 6.)

If a man who had never heard of the Bible were given the Old Testament to itself, he would be surprised at the many wonderful things he had read, but he would also be surprised at not finding the object of his search. He had been told that there was a golden thread running entirely through the book, promising the world a great king, a deliverer, and a conqueror — ah! a Savior — but having read the book through, he found the history of many great men, but the great one promised he found not.

But if he were given a copy of the New Testament, having never seen nor heard of the Old Testament, he would find at its beginning, and running all the way through the book: “It is written, it is written in the law, it is written in the prophets, it is written in the psalms,” etc., and he would wonder who wrote those books, and where he could find them.

One of the many strong evidences that the Bible is divine, is its types and its anti-types. The Old Testament abounds with shadows, the full meaning of which would never have been known, if the New Testament had not been written. For example, what would the world know of the deeper meaning of the opening of the side of Adam, and the means taken therefrom to form for him a wife, if the side of Christ had not been pierced and the elements been taken therefrom — the water and the blood — to form and cleanse for him a bride, the church? God has given the world but two lawgivers, Moses and Christ, and we should never have had the deeper meaning of the finding of the former in the little basket in the rushes, if we had not heard of the finding of the infant Christ in the manger! And the world would never have seen the deeper signification of Adam and his one wife being required to populate the whole world with his offspring, if we had never heard of the wonderful transaction of Christ, through his one wife, the church, populating the whole world with Christians.

Great-great Grandfather, the metaphor of the bride being made from the side of the first Adam and the last Adam (as Paul phrases it in 1 Corinthians 15:45) is deep and visceral and invaluable. Thank you for that.

A few of the many types of Christ, are Adam, Moses and Isaac. Adam, the progenitor of the human race, foreshadowing that Christ would bless the world, the whole world, through a spiritual family which he would bring forth. Moses leading fleshly Israel from Egypt to Canaan, through the wilderness, foreshadowing that Christ would lead the spiritual hosts through this world of sin, to the land of rest. Isaac being made a sacrifice, in a figure, was the type of Christ, who was made the atoning sacrifice of the world. A few of the chief types of the church are the Ark, the Tabernacle and the Temple. And when these types are deeply studied and their corresponding anti-types in the New Testament are found and fitted, and a few prophecies added from the Old Testament, they form a bulwark of testimony that men and demons can not shake.

But I beg leave to deviate for just a few minutes, to adduce a golden thread as evidence from the work of Moses. Moses rose up 2,200 years this side of creation, and without a word of written history, in a few brief chapters covered that period perfectly and accurately. Then he went upon the mountain and received the law of ten commands, which he delivered to the people of God. Then he became prophet, and covered 1,800 years with a few prophecies, reaching to the coming of Christ, hence this man Moses, whose flaming words Ingersoll and a few lesser lights delight to mar and stain, became historian, lawgiver and prophet, and covered a period of 4,000 years, and he has never made one mistake that any one knows of. And how could he, with no date written, give an accurate history of 2,200 years? And how could he look down th[r]ough the ages and give accurate prophecies which are indorsed [sp.] by the later prophets, by the Savior and the apostles, if he had been only man? No wonder that Ingersoll, at death, cowered when considering his tare-sowing, and looking into the future, realized that he must reap as he had sown. What a future he will meet. Josh Billings, the humorist, gives my sentiments when contrasting Moses and Ingersoll. He says: “I wouldn’t give five cents to hear Ingersoll on the mistakes of Moses, but I would give five hundred dollars to hear Moses on the mistakes of Ingersoll.”

As an illustration from type and anti-type, take the following: Some morning in autumn a farmer goes into his field and sees his shocks torn, and there are tracks in the soft soil, such as he has never before seen. On looking to the east he sees the fence is broken down, and also upon the west. His conclusion is that some wild beast has done the damage. He tells his neighbors of his loss, and they say: “Perhaps it was a cow that has broken into your field.” “Oh, no, I know it was not a cow.” “But did you see the animal or see any one who did see it?” “No.” “Then how can you be so positive that the animal was not a cow?” “I know it by the track left in the soil.” Calling in some of the neighbors, and all deciding that the animal was a foreigner, they decided to call a man who was a great hunter, who had seen all kinds of animals on the American continent, who, when he saw the track says: “That is the track of a black bear! Sure, ask a number.” “May it not have been a grizzly or a mountain lion?” “No, sirs.” “Not having seen the animal, how can you be so positive as to the kind of a bear?” “I identify it by the extra toe in the track.” Now if this hunter is not mistaken as to the track, you are sure there is a black bear roaming somewhere in the community. There is no other animal known which makes such a track.

Dear ancestor, in your era the debate over inspiration may have been so well known that your listener / reader could discern your intent and easily deduce your support of the Holy Spirit’s role in bringing about the scriptures. But those of us in later days — and even disinterested unbelievers of your time — might have benefited from a clear statement of it.

In Noah’s time, the world having become desperately wicked, and every imagination of the thoughts of his [man’s] heart was only evil continually, and refusing to hear the counsel of God, he concluded to destroy them, and said to Noah: “I will destroy the world with a flood; make thee an ark to the saving of yourself and your house.”

1. Now what was the object of the Ark? Salvation from death. From what death? Physical death. Physical death by what means? By drowning. And if there had been no flood, there would have been no need of an Ark. Where no loss is involved, there can be no salvation. This is true of every salvation spoken in the Bible. There could be no salvation from the grave if there had been no grave, and no salvation from sin if there had been no sin, and there can be no salvation from hell if there is no hell. The loss of the antediluvians may reach further than physical death, but this is the salvation promised by means of the Ark.

Now, let us take a view of the church. Christ said: “I will build my church.” Christ is the head of this body, and no man can come to the Father but by him. To him be glory in the church, by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. But some say the church can’t save us. But did the Ark save? Yes, those who went into it, and remained until the flood was over. And I think there is one class whom the church can save, those who go into it, remain in it, and do their duty.

There is a problem with this metaphor — that of the ark as type and church as antitype — and that is, of course, it is not strictly scriptural. It’s one that you, Great-great Grandfather, have devised. While it may be illustrative, it is not what one would call authoritative. That’s the purpose of a metaphor or parable: to clarify, rather than justify. They make truth clear; they do not make truth true.

When Peter speaks of Noah and salvation (1 Peter 3:19-22), he’s talking about how the resurrection of Christ pioneers the way for our own; how the waters of baptism wash away the world’s sin as the waters of the flood did so in Noah’s day. It is a chapter about imitating Christ, even through suffering as He did. The church — strictly speaking — can’t save us; we are saved into it. We could vote each other in and out all we want, but it would not save anyone.

2. How many Arks did Noah build? Only one. But since there were a great many people, why not make several Arks? And you know “all people can’t see alike,” and one Ark might not have suited all, with so many tastes and notions. And some might no like old Noah, he was a pessimist, clear and simple, no way would do but his way. And some of the women might not like some of Noah’s family. No, we can never join such a crowd as that! And I have no doubt but if we had a history of the suggestions made by men to Noah’s sons, and made by women to the sons’ wives, we would have something like the following: “Your father is old and he is becoming childish; we hardly think there will be a flood — it has never rained, and there is not sufficient water in all the seas and oceans to cover all these mountains; and why require Noah to labor more than one hundred years to build an Ark? And if he must bring a flood, he can point out to Noah the highest mountain and have him collect all the required creatures to that mountain, and take there of all food and preserve life as well there as in an Ark, wich would become musty and very unpleasant, and saved your father all this work? And if none are saved except those in the Ark, there will be very few saved.” And the women would approach the three wives of these three sons and suggest: “Now your father is a good man, but he is narrow in his views, and thinks nobody right but those who believe as he believes, and by his rigid preaching he has become very unpopular. Now, have the old man to exercise charity for the views of others, there are others who are as good as yourselves.”

Great-great Grandfather, I think you may have been as much a fan of Mark Twain as I am.

Then we might hear something like the following from the faithful old Patriarch: “Dear daughters, I would be glad to please all, and would be far from preaching a doctrine purposely to displease any one, but I have a message, not from man, but from God, and if I refuse — nay, fail — to deliver that messages, strictly and perfectly, to the minutest detail, we will all go down into the dark waters of inconsolable grief, with the rest of the disobedient.”

And how many churches did Christ build? But one. The church is the Bride, the Lamb’s wife, and we can not think Christ was a polygamist. The word “church” is in the singular, except when various congregations are meant; the seven churches of Asia mean simply, the seven congregations. The followers of Christ are commanded to be of one heart and of one soul, to speak the same things, and there must be no division among them.

3. The Ark was 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet in height, and had three stories, and yet it had but one door, which was in the side, and everything that went into the Ark went in through that one door. There was not one door for the admission of the large animals and one for the small animals, and another for the birds. Jesus says of the door into his church: “I am the door.” Then we must go in through Him. And when the side of Jesus was opened thence forth came the water and blood, the cleansing elements from sin, and no man can get into His church except through the water and the blood. We are immersed in water, into Christ’s death, and there we come in contact with His blood, and we are washed, cleansed and saved.

I have written before about the phrase “come in contact with His blood,” and since writing then (I Can’t Find It), I still have found no preponderance of evidence for saying it.

4. There was but one window in the Ark, and that was above, or upon the top, and here we see the sideom in so arranging the light. If the window had been near the base the heavy freightage would have kept it inundated, or if half way up, the spray and the waves would have darkened the window much of the time. But being upon the top, all the light possible could flow into it. And when we come to consider the light brought into the church, it all comes in through the one window. And what is that light? Some say it is conscience. No, if this be the light, then we would have as many windows as people, and no individual would give light to another.

But another says it is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. No, the gospel was often preached by the apostles, and people were saved, in the absence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit never converted any one, was not given as a condition to pardon. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit fell upon men to enable them to work miracles, and this occurred but twice, once upon the Jew and once upon the Gentile, and following this miraculous power men were baptized in water for the remission of their sins. (Acts 2 and 10.)

“But twice”? Then, dear ancestor, you would write off Acts 19:11, 1 Corinthians 12 and 1 Corinthians 14, 2 Corinthians 12:12, Galatians 3:5, and Hebrews 2:4? You know, there is such a thing as pushing a metaphor too far.

Clearly, then, it is the Bible which brings the light from heaven. Where this revelation has never been given, people are in darkness, but where delivered and accepted, the inhabitants become enlightened and rejoice in this heavenly light.

5. All the food was in the Ark. The command to Noah was: “And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and gather it to thee, and it shall be for food for thee and for them. Thus did Noah, according to all that God commanded him, so did he.” After the waters covered the earth there was no food for man, beast nor fowl.

But now men have become wise. One church, one assembly, one altar, is not sufficient. It has become necessary to have in addition to this perfect Holy Place, a separate gathering for the young men, another for the young women, another for the young people, and still another for the children! But look here, my zealous but misguided brother. Christ has but one body, and in this divine body — the church — dwells the Holy Spirit, in this one body is the blood, which remains in this body. And the grace of God, all of it, comes to the Christian through this divine medium. And every parable spoken by Christ where a blessing is conferred, it is within, and not without. And he formed the parables from things with which they were familiar, that the most unlearned could grasp his meaning. It was in the net that the fishes were caught, in the vineyard that the laborers must work, in the meal the leaven was placed, in the field that the seed was sown, in the field was found the pearl of great price, in the garden the mustard was sown, in the field the treasure was found. Let us be careful, very careful, that we do not direct some soul astray.

And here, I would say, is where the metaphor is taken too far — in the direction of painting the church as a place, rather than as a people. The wooden ark surely makes a fine metaphor to a wooden church building as typical of your day, but it is not an accurate metaphor in that way. Thinking of the church as a single edifice has led many to conclude that people meeting in a different building from their own cannot be a part of their church, and that is simply erroneous. When we so judge, we are judging, and that is not our place. Our place is to love, accept, and share the gospel — and to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

6. There was one family in the Ark, and they must eat and drink to perpetuate life. If one had decided to fast during their stay in the Ark, he would have fasted longer than Dr. Tanner fasted. They were in the Ark a year and ten days. They went into the Ark on the seventeenth day of the second month in the six hundredth year of Noah (Gen. 7:11-13.). and they went forth out of the Ark upon the twenty-seventh day of the second month in the six hundred and first year of Noah (Gen. 8:13). During that period, in the one Ark, the one family prayed at the one altar, and ate at the one table. And we can not satisfy the longings of the soul at heathen altars nor gluttonous feasts.

7. The conditions of salvation by means of the Ark and of the church are the same. The first thing necessary in Noah’s case was a revelation. If God had not made known to him the coming destruction, Noah would have known nothing of it, and would have made no preparation for his salvation. After being informed of the approaching flood and of the terms of salvation, Noah must believe the revelation. The next thing was works, faithful works, complying with the terms offering salvation. He must build the Ark, go into it and remain, and be faithful to all the duties incumbent upon him as governor of that divine family. So in the salvation proposed in the church. As to the means of transition, bearing Noah’s family from the old world over into the new world, Peter says: “Wherein few, that is eight, souls were saved by water, the like figure wherein baptism doth now save us.” (1. Peter 3.) The water picked them up, and by means of the Ark, they were carried over and put down into the new world, so baptism takes the subject from the kingdom of sin and puts him into Christ, his church. He is then born again, born of God, born of water, born of the spirit, born (begotten) of the word, born anew, taken from the world and put into the church — saved. And the man of a very common intellect would say the birth was not of water alone. But some of the “called and sent” clergy now tell the people that baptism has nothing to do in saving men.

Baptism has much to do with saving men — but it is not the only thing God wants for us, and gives us, and wants to bless us with that is salvific; of His saving grace and power. Seeing baptism as a work of man — like building an ark — is an error that has seduced millions. Jesus built the church; not us (Matthew 16:18). And baptism is a gift from God (Matthew 21:25); ours to accept or reject. But in rejecting baptism, we reject its power of testimony to one’s immersion into the life of Christ and resurrection from one’s old dead person of sin.

8. I will now touch upon the destruction which followed the dispensation of God’s mercy, which lasted over one hundred years, but my pen is too feeble to portray that awful catastrophe. No heart can conceive, nor tongue describe, the horrors which fell upon that disobedient people. The Ark being finished, and the creatures all shut in, the windows of heaven were opened and for forty days and forty nights the waters fell in torrents, the low lands were covered, people’s hearts were faiting, they were being forced out of their homes. God is infinite in mercy. Many as devout prayers as were ever heard were offered, but the rains continued. People go up the hillsides. They were drenched and hungry. Children cried for bread. God is infinite in love! He loved all these people, but a God possessed of all the attributes can’t save people in disobedience. Poor old grandma’s strength had failed, and she had to be carried. O the cries and lamentations! Where are the children? Some had starved, some had fallen into the dark sea. God was able.

But see that group upon the highest hill; their provisions are exhausted, and they are ankle deep in water. God had said if they did not repent he would drown them; it looked that way then; they make their last appeal for help. God is infinite in all his attributes, and one of them is justice, and he will render to every man according to his works. Another is vengeance, and he will punish all who trample his righteous laws. If God had commanded Noah just then, saying, “They have suffered enough, push the Ark to those people and take them in,” would it have required a strong discourse, and a touching exhortation to induce them to enter the Ark? But it was too late — ah! too late.

But, my slothful brother and my heedless neighbor, let me once more remind you of that awful destruction, more fierce that this one, which I believe will fall upon the world in the near future. Peter says: “The world which then was being overflowed with water perished. But the heavens that are now, and the earth, by the same word are stored up for fire, being reserved against the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.” [2 Peter 3:6-7] He says: “The elements will melt with fervent heat, the earth and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” [2 Peter 3:10] Now, sinner, do you not believe this? Then eternal fire awaits you. But we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness. O that great day. We shall all be there.

There may have been a time when addressing one’s listeners and readers as “slothful” and “heedless” had an air of authority to them, but these days, insults simply come off as insulting. (I have to wonder if they did back in your day, too, Great-great Grandfather.) At any rate, I cannot recommend the use of them.

In fact, I have to question the whole psychology of pointing an accusing finger down from the pulpit of authority … trying to terrify someone out of hell and into doing a bunch of things that leads to trying to always do the right thing … lest one slide right back down a hell-bound slope. Does that really lead a person to become a devoted, life-long disciple and example of Christ? Fear?

Or does perfect love cast out fear? Doesn’t it make more sense to come alongside someone whose life-path wanders aimlessly … lovingly share the message of the dying-yet-living love of Christ with them … and teach them what it means to be like Him so that others can see His promise in our lives?