WILL GOD JUDGE AMERICA?

My previous post (CHRISTIANITY AND MORALITY?) brought forth comments that spurred my thinking further on some issues raised.

Bob's thoughts on God's judgment of nations were especially thought provoking: "Don't misunderstand; I believe that if a country (or an individual) follows God's principles, it can only benefit them. But God is not in the business of moral reform. He's in the business of creating new creatures in Christ Jesus

Sin surely causes death, and God warns about that. Jonah warned Nineveh that in 40 days their sins would cause Him to destroy them. The Canaanites' sins had reached the point of destruction during the time of Moses. And Sodom and Gomorrah had clearly reached the saturation point (though for reasons other than what we've often been taught).

But what sense would it make for God to prompt a culture to moral reform without the message of eternal life? It seems clear (at least to me) that his warnings were given so that people would remain alive to hear about His grace.

However, we can't warn of impending doom because we're not God. We have no idea, for example, where the United States stands on God's spectrum of sin (though we hear about it all the time)."

Of course Canadian Atheist's comment on Bob's comment was as would be expected: "Sounds extremely superstitious to me."

Bob's parenthetical remark that "... though we hear about it all the time" is so true.  Preachers, especially those on the right and those who fancy themselves as experts on biblical prophecy are often heard ranting on this topic.  Every natural disaster is interpreted as a sign of God's wrath, usually in regard to sexual sins, especially homosexuality.

Of course, those on the secular left often have similar sounding messages, only without God being mentioned.  Global warming, the gun culture, racism are often invoked as signs of the downfall of America.

But does God hold nations accountable?  Does He hold the United States of America accountable?  Will God judge America?  If so, by what criteria will our nation be judged?  I do not believe these are simply "superstitious" questions.  I do not believe they are only on the minds of preachers on the far ends of the spectrum.  Questions like these were on the minds of some of America's great leaders and thinkers.

"Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just" -- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia (1784).

"Fondly do we hope -- fervently do we pray -- that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away.  Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said 'the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether.'" -- Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address (1865).

Both were pondering the horrible sin of human slavery.  It is doubtful, of course, that Jefferson's Deistic thinking led him to imagine an apocalyptic judgment on America.  And Lincoln's enigmatic faith seemed to lead him to believe that the Civil War itself could be God's judgment.

The prophets of the Old Testament pronounced judgments on the nations around them, often seeing those judgments worked out by other nations.  Even God's covenant nation of Israel was not exempt; in fact, judgment seems more pronounced against that nation.

The New Testament does not seem as concerned with the nations as with the human race as a whole and with individual human beings.  However, there are a few passages that do stand out, most having to do with the end of this age.

One that I have written on before is Matthew 25:31-46 (SHEEP OR GOATS).  Jesus is speaking of His return in glory to reign on earth.  The nations are to be gathered before Him and are to go either into His Kingdom or into eternal fire.  The criteria are not given as their sexual conduct or their violence; they are judged solely on their treatment of those whom Jesus terms "the least of these" -- the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the unclothed, the prisoner.

Is the good old USA going to be there?  Which way will they (we?) be sent?

So Bob, I agree with your comments.  I'll not attempt to ascertain "where the U.S. stands on God's spectrum of sin."  But I do believe that God holds this nation accountable.

My task, however, as a follower of Christ is primarily to follow Him, to hold myself accountable and not be preoccupied with America's destiny, but the destiny of the people of America that I am in contact with.

See also:  THE TWO KINGDOMS.

COMFORT MY PEOPLE

I recognize that many of my friends – Christian friends – on both the political left and the political right have concerns about the upcoming election.  I do.  But is this election the great crisis for America as many appear to believe?  I think not!  I’ve lived through many “crisis times” for America, many greater than this.  I confess though that it is easy for me to be blasé.  I haven’t suffered much.

As I pondered these matters, Isaiah’s “comfort” sermon kept coming to mind.  Here was a message to a people who had a genuine crisis looming.  So I went to my file and lo!, there I discovered sermon notes and a sketchy manuscript from over 20 years ago.  After reading it over I decided to simply publish it as I had written it.  I realize that as much as 1/3 of my preaching is “improv,” so it won’t be as lengthy as when I preacher it.

First a little background.  The date was February 24, 1991.  Our nation was at war, our first real war in 15 years.  500,000 American troops were involved in Operation Desert Storm, an invasion of Iraq to drive them out of the nation of Kuwait, which they had invaded the previous year.

I was pastoring a church in Georgetown, TX and also serving as a volunteer chaplain at the local hospital.  It was in the latter role that I was called upon to work alongside a psychiatrist in leading a group session of families – spouses and parents – of troops deployed to the war.  There were many such families in our city, as it was located close to Fort Hood, from which a large contingent of troops had been deployed.

As the sessions were held in the basement of a Methodist church, I became acquainted with the associate pastor.  One evening while we were conversing before the session, he suggested that we needed to have an encouragement service for the community.  Others besides these families were concerned and anxious.

After we had discussed the format, I consented to be the speaker.  We both agreed that this was not to be a patriotic, flag-waving pro war service; nor was it to be an anti-war service.  Rather it was to be a service where we could give comfort to the many families who were anxious, some suffering from what was known at the time as “chronic stress syndrome.”

The sermon:

Sometimes we feel helpless as we look at the world scene.  The conflicts of nations overwhelm us.  We don’t understand.  Our loved ones are taken from us, it seems, to fight a war that shouldn’t have had to be fought.  The misguided evil ambition of one man has caused the conquest of a nation and the exile of a people.  It has brought suffering on a great number of people, including those of his own nation.  And our loved ones and friends are taken from us.  And we are anxious.

Does God care?  Perhaps when we look at the immense size of the conflict – the millions of people involved – ½ million American troops among them – we may feel that our situation is of little concern to God.  Perhaps the “big guys” are important to Him, but am I?  Is my spouse, my child, myself of any concern, any importance?

Perhaps the words of Isaiah will speak to our questions:

“Comfort, oh comfort My people, says your God.

Get up on a high mountain
oh Zion, bearer of good news;
lift up your voice with strength,
oh Jerusalem, bearer of good news;
lift it up and do not fear.
Say to the cities of Judah,
‘Behold your God!’” (Isaiah 40:1,9)

Isaiah, of course, was speaking to another situation.  The ancient nation of Israel was contemplating its conquest by the ancient nation of Babylonia.  (I didn’t choose this passage because of geography.)  Apparently, there were those then and there who felt as you perhaps may feel.  The message for them may be of some help to you.  In a sense, it is simply some facts about God.  Facts that you may already know, but which I believe need to be emphasized or reemphasized.

First, God is sovereign over the movements of the nations.

”Behold, the nations are like a drop in a bucket,

Regarded as a speck of dust upon the scales;
He lifts up the islands like fine dust.
Lebanon is not enough for fuel,
nor its beasts enough for an offering.
All the nations in His sight,
He regards them as less than nothing.
Do you not know?
Have you not heard?
Has it not been told to you from the beginning?
It is He who is enthroned above the vault of the earth,
and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers!
He stretches out the heavens like gauze,
and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
He reduces rulers to nothing;
makes the judges of the earth meaningless.”  (Isaiah 40:15-17, 21-23)

God is all-powerful.  The nations are weak.  They are of relatively little importance; He is in control.  It may not look like it from our perspective.  It apparently didn’t look like it from the perspective of Isaiah’s first readers.  That’s why He has to say it and emphasize it, over and over.

And God is just.  He is ultimately going to make things right.

“Behold the Lord GOD is coming with might,

His right arm ruling for Him.
His reward is with Him,
and His recompense before Him.”  (Isaiah 40:10)

And God is concerned about individuals!

“Why do you say, oh Jacob,

and why do you declare, oh Israel,
‘My way is hidden from the LORD,
and my cause is hidden from my God?’
Don’t you know?
Haven’t you heard?
The LORD God is from eternity,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He never grows tired or weary.
His wisdom is unlimited.
He gives strength to the weary
and power to the powerless.
Youths may grow weary and faint
and young men stumble and fall;
but those who wait for the LORD
will gain new strength;
they will run and not get tired;
they will walk and not faint.”  (Isaiah 40:27-31)

He is concerned about us; about you and me.  This is in contrast to what we just read regarding the nations.  He is gentle to those who know and trust Him.  Look at verse 11:  He carries us like lambs.  Because He is all-powerful, He can give strength to those who lean on Him.

One of the features of stress syndrome is fatigue.  That feeling of being extremely tired, for no apparent reason.  Apparently it is not new.  Isaiah spoke of this problem.

But something else we should note about God is not found here in this chapter, because to some extent it was not yet true.  And that is that God understands your sufferings, your anxieties, our longings for your loved ones who are away.  Because He gave a Son.  God sent His Son to enter a world hostile to Him.  And that Son willingly came.

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.”  (John 3:16)

Jesus Christ – God the Son – went on a mission to conquer death through His death on the cross, and to bring liberation and eternal life to those who put their faith in Him.

Trust Him:

As the One who cares for you.

As the One who cares for your loved one.

As the One who entered into your pain to bring you salvation.

THE INTRUSIVE GOD

Some thoughts on a few thoughts gathered from various sources:

“In the beginning God…” – Moses (Genesis 1:1), ca 1450 BC

 

“…the infinite abyss (within man) can only be filled by an infinite and immutable object, that is to say, only by God Himself.

Man is obviously made to think.  It is his whole merit; and his whole duty is to think as he ought.  Now the order of thought is to begin with self, and with its Author and end.” – Blaise Pascal, Pensees, ca 1660 AD

I have always been, I suppose, somewhat of a philosopher.  I suspect that all of us are to some extent, even though most of us have had little, if any, formal schooling or even reading on the subject.  As Pascal tells us, we were made this way – “made to think.”

I recall as a child sitting off to one side in our living room in the evenings, listening to the conversation of the adults.  My father and my uncles and their friends would sit for hours discussing the great issues of life.  The conversations would, actually get quite deep and cover a wide range of heavy topics – especially after they’d had a few beers.  And the deeper they got, the more likely God would intrude into the conversation.  I’m not speaking of what we would call “religious” discussions.  They were, as I’ve implied, quite philosophical.  Nor am I simply talking about the occasional use of His name in oaths.

I started reading quite young and before I entered high school I had devoured, besides westerns and science fiction, a number of the classics as well as works of historical fiction which were popular in that day.  And again in my reading, there would be God, intruding uninvited as it were.

He’s always there!

Scholars and scientists have studied and attempted to ascertain what makes man (or humankind) different from the other creatures, especially the higher animals, such as chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans which we are informed, are our “cousins” and with which we share 98% of our DNA.  Without getting too deep into anthropology or theology, I’d like to oversimplify by saying that God has put into us – humans – the consciousness of Himself.  He has not done so with His other creatures.

It makes little difference whether we are educated or uneducated, whether we refer to ourselves as Christians, pagans, Atheists or whatever; God is always intruding Himself into our thoughts.  He is inescapable.

“… (a man) sets for himself trees of the forest; he plants a fir and the rain makes it grow.  And it is something for a man to burn.  He takes from them and warms himself; he builds a fire and bakes bread; he also makes a god and worships it; he makes a carved image and falls down before it.

Part of it he burns in a fire; on this part he roasts meat, eats and is full; he also warms himself and says, ‘Ah, I’m warm, I can see the fire.’  And the rest he makes into a god – his own carving.  He falls down before it and worships it; and he prays to it and says, ‘Save me, for you are my god.’” -- Isaiah (44:14b-17), ca 650 BC

“…men who suppress the truth in their unrighteousness, because what can be known of God is revealed among them, for God has revealed it to them.  For since the creation of the world, His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being comprehended through the things He made, leaving them inexcusable; because though they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or thank Him, but became futile in their reasoning and their senseless heart was darkened; claiming to be wise they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image of corruptible man, and birds and four-footed animals – even snakes.” – Paul (Romans 1:18-23), ca 56 AD

According to Paul, the one who worships idols – false gods – does so not because of lack of knowledge of the true God, but because of deliberate choice.  Though elsewhere he speaks of the ignorance of these worshippers, it is apparently a chosen ignorance.  God has revealed enough of His attributes in nature to be able to demand worship of Himself and to hold inexcusable those who do not do so.

Paul doesn’t discuss the “why” of man’s rejection of the God revealed in nature, other than what appears to be pride – a supposed wisdom which is anything but that when it comes to one’s perceptions of God.  Paul calls it elsewhere “the wisdom of the world.”  (See:  JESUS FOR DUMMIES.)

Could idolatry also be motivated by fear – fear of facing the truth about who God is?  Certainly what I have seen of various religions has seemed to demonstrate that fear.  The rituals of paganism can bring comfort and relief from fear.  By fulfilling religious obligations one can feel protected from having to think about the God who has revealed Himself and of any obligations one might have toward Him.

I might also add that present day idolatry does not necessarily involve the worship of objects, animate or inanimate.  It may also involve the worship of ideas – the creation of a god in one’s own mind.  How often when speaking of God have I heard a remark something like, “That’s how you think about God, but here’s how I like to think about Him”?

What about Atheism?

 

“I am talking about something much deeper – namely, the fear of religion itself.  I speak from experience, being strongly subject to this fear myself:  I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy be the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers.  It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief.  It’s that I hope there is not God!  I don’t what there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that.

I am curious, however, whether there is anyone who is genuinely indifferent as to whether there is a God – anyone who, whatever his actual belief about the matter, doesn’t particularly want either one of the answers to be correct (though of course he might want to know which answer was correct).” – Thomas Nagel, The Last Word, 1997

Could the Atheists’ rejection of God also be influenced by fear?  The words of Thomas Nagel would seem to strongly imply that possibility.  Mr. Nagel is quite honest and his confession shows his vulnerability.  I suspect that one day he may open his mind to the existence of God.  As Jesus once said of a perceptive scribe, he is “not far from the Kingdom of God.”  But those “angry Atheists” – Dawkins and company.  Could their angry arguments be the rantings of a disguised fear – disguised even to themselves?

And then there are those of us who claim to know God.  I fear that we too sometimes seem to be doing our best to avoid Him.  We try to protect ourselves from thinking too deeply about Him by getting wrapped up in religious or legalistic – even “theological” thoughts and activities.  We try to wall Him off into a corner of our lives and minds, but it seems that He always seems to punch His way through our barriers and intrude Himself back into our thinking.

So if God is going to intrude into our thoughts, with or without our permission, perhaps we would do well to pay attention to Him, to cease fleeing, to start listening and to allow His thoughts to influence ours.

 

“You awake us to delight in Your praises; for You made us for Yourself and our heart is restless until it reposes in You.” – Augustine of Hippo Confessions, ca 400 AD

IS GOD VIOLENT?

The question on the cover of the January issue of Sojourners’ magazine grabbed my attention.  It was the title of an article by Brian McLaren.

As one who has struggled for years with the problem of war and violence in the Old Testament as well as in the world, I read the article with eagerness.  I thought that this article might answer some questions I’ve had or help me clarify my positions on these issues.  What a disappointment!  It seemed to me to be condescending and based on false dilemmas and red herrings, as well as a selective reading of Scripture, I felt it wouldn’t have been worthy of a C as a college paper.  So I dashed off a letter to the magazine giving some of my views.

When I first read the article, I didn’t know who Brian McLaren was, though I had heard of him through conversations and other articles I’d read.  The magazine informed the readers that he is an author and speaker whose new book is entitled, A New Kind of Christianity: Ten Questions that are Transforming the Faith.  Pretty heavy sounding.  Anyway, I looked up his book on Amazon.com and read some reviews and a short bio.

Mr. McLaren is apparently one of the chief intellectual spokespersons for the “Emerging (or Emergent?) Church.”  The reviews that I read were mostly positive some actually gushy, though a few questioned the author’s arguments and logic.

So, though I have no plans to read the book, here are some of my thoughts on the article.

It begins with a note from someone that the author says, “we’ll call Pete.”  It concerned the previously mentioned book. Pete, while agreeing with much in the book, said, “I do think you are doing disservice to this argument … when you shun the ‘violence’ of God and the subsequent need for the cross’ justification, which was also quite violent.”  Pete spoke of the “plethora of biblical examples (of violence)” and continued, “The fact is the Old Testament is a God-ordained bloody mess, and the cross is the ultimate expression of it.”

McLaren’s comment is “I don’t know which shocks you (i.e., the reader) more – that I would question God’s violence, or that Pete would defend it.”  Here is the first of his false dilemmas.  As I read Pete’s comments I did not see him “defending” God’s violence, simply stating its factuality which, it seems, McLaren denies.

McLaren goes on to discuss religious violence in the post 9/11 era and violent language by Muslims, Israelis and U.S. Televangelists.  “A lot is at stake,” he tells us. I (and I suppose Pete) would agree.  However, it seems to me that the implication is that our interpretation of Scripture should somehow be a reaction to others’ misinterpretation.

McLaren gives a pretty clear definition of violence, which Mr. Webster would basically agree with:  “force with the intent of inflicting injury, damage, or death.”  He then gives what he says are “four primary responses to the question of God’s violence.”

1.  God is violent and as humans made in God’s image we’re free to use it.
2.  God is violent, but in a holy way.  So it’s generally prohibited to us except to those whom God has designated.
3.  God is not violent, so human violence is never justified.
4.  God is not violent, so violence in any form is absolutely forbidden.

McLaren chooses option 4, but can accept option 3.  He thinks Pete would choose option 2, but be tolerant of option 1.  This whole “choose your option” thing is a frustrating oversimplification.  It’s a false dilemma times two!

He then tells us that non-Christians are “interested bystanders” in this conversation.  Their perception of us as violent or non-violent is important to their perception of the Good News we present.  Agreed!  But need we reinterpret Scripture because of others’ perceptions?  Another false dilemma!  He returns to this warning at the close of the article.

He gives us a bit of autobiographical material concerning his own growth in understanding of this topic.  Much of what he speaks of is similar to my own pilgrimage, though we somehow didn’t arrive at the same conclusions.

McLaren then goes on to discuss “the plethora of biblical examples” of violence.  Again I would agree with him that they are indeed troubling and admit that though I have sought ways to deal with them, I am still uncomfortable – as I am with the violence that I see outside of the Scriptures.

But McLaren’s solution is to recognize that “there was another plethora of verses that present God as kind, reconciling and compassionate …” and that he was “going to have to choose one plethora over another …”

Wow!  I never thought of that!  Just pick and choose whatever Scriptures I like and reject the rest.  He tells us that he no longer reads the Bible as “an inspired authoritative constitution” and now reads it as “an inspired and authoritative library.”  Now I have no idea what this means or what the difference is, and I suppose I need to read his book to find out (this view is mentioned in many of the book reviews).  But whatever it means in theory, in practice it appears to mean one can select whatever volumes agree with one’s position and leave the others on the shelf.

McLaren acknowledges “tension in the Scripture” but seems to look down on those who look to other authorities to help resolve their conflicts; he says, “I first turn to Jesus.”  “When in doubt consult Jesus” is his mantra.  He tells us that “the staggering reality is that Jesus didn’t kill anybody … He didn’t hit anybody.  He didn’t hate anybody.”  Wait a minute!  This is the same WWJD argument I’ve seen on many poorly written college papers.  Jesus didn’t speak exhaustively to these issues and we should be wary of putting our thoughts into His mouth.  (Although Jesus did speak of hellfire and outer darkness and that sounds pretty violent to me!)

McLaren frowns on “the theory of penal substitutionary atonement.”  He asks, “Where do you primarily find God on Good Friday?” and concludes that “God is located first and foremost with the crucified one.”  I agree.  But what does it mean that He was “delivered up by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God”? (Acts 2:23; see also 4:27, 28.)  Whose wrath was propitiated by Christ’s death?  The work of Christ on the cross can only be explained in the light of the doctrine of the threefold person of God and the incarnation of the Son.

The Bible presents a multi-faceted and inscrutable God.  We aren’t given the right to pick and choose those facets of His character that we prefer.

McLaren ends his article with a paragraph that begins, “I probably agreed with Pete when I was his age.  Now my journey has taken me to a place to which Pete may never come, or even want to come.”  This sounds a bit condescending, like Job’s friend Zophar:  “What do you know that we do now know? … Both the gray-haired and aged are among us, older than your father” (Job 15:9, 10).  Perhaps McLaren should read Elihu’s rebuke:  “The abundant in years may not be wise, nor may elders understand justice!” (Job 32:9).

I am in my seventies and have been wrestling with these questions for more than a half century.  My journey has taken me to a different place than McLaren’s has.  I have come to understand that I may never understand God’s ways.  I have come to realize that God ways are inscrutable and while I may continue to seek and gain wisdom, I will have to be content with a limited knowledge of God and His ways.

For some of my other posts on this topic see:
THE CHRISTIAN AND WAR
VENGEANCE, WHOSE PREROGATIVE?
VIOLENCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

THE BIG IDEA

In Homiletics (preaching) classes that I took at seminary, I was taught to always look for the “big idea.” Our instructor, Haddon Robinson, insisted that each passage in the Bible could be reduced to one big idea, a simple sentence with a subject and a predicate that sums up the whole text, whether it’s a verse, a paragraph, a chapter or even a book. This became a major tool for me, not only in preaching or teaching, but also in my study of Scriptures.

I began to wonder if it would be possible to find the big idea of the whole Bible. Is there some overarching theme under which all the Scripture can be subsumed?

Then one day while studying the book of Habakkuk, I found it! There in the middle of the LORD’s reply to Habakkuk’s gripes, stood this verse: “For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea” (Habakkuk 2:14).

This is it: the big idea of the Bible – God’s ultimate purpose in history! Of course, it didn’t take me long to realize that I was not the first to make this discovery!

And this thought is not only found in Habakkuk, it’s scattered throughout the Old Testament, often popping up in places we’d least expect it. “But indeed, as I live, all the earth will be filled with the glory of God” (Numbers 14:21). The context is the LORD’s pronouncement of judgment on the whole generation of Israel that refused to enter the promise land.

“And blessed be His glorious name forever; and may the whole earth be filled with His glory. Amen, and amen” (Psalm 72:19) – a prayer of Solomon.

“They will not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain, for the earth will be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea” (Isaiah 11:9).

“They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD’, for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, declares the LORD, for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more” (Jeremiah 31:34). This is included in God’s promises of His future New Covenant.

So let me try to state it in brief summary: God’s purpose in history (creation, redemption) is to bring about in His creatures the knowledge of His glory.

And, of course, this theme is carried over into the New Testament.

Look at Jesus’ prayer in John, “ . . . Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You” (17:1). “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (17:5). He claimed that He had glorified the Father. “I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You had given Me to do” (17:4).

How God is fulfilling His purpose is spelled out in clearer detail.

“For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the Name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:9-11).

God the Father is glorified by the exaltation of His Son!

So how do we fit in God’s master plan?

Our place, our task is, of course to contribute to that glorification. By our worship, by our witness, but most of all by our becoming more and more conformed to Christ.

“For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren” (Romans 8:29).

I believe the Westminster Confession had it right: “The chief end of man is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.”

It’s not about me; it’s about Him! The paradox is that the more we seek His glory, the more we find our own purposes, our own selves and our greatest pleasure.

Bill Ball
9/1/2008

THE TRINITY

A friend of mine who is attending seminary e-mailed me that he was assigned to ask the following question of three men in the ministry: “How does the Trinity impact your ministry and message?”

My first question back to him was: “Do you mean the doctrine or the Persons of the Trinity?”

Answer: “He didn’t say.”

This is a tough one. I’d never considered it.

Well here goes.

The more I think about it, the more I realize that my ministry and my message is the wrong place to start. I must start with my own personal relationship with God. Jesus, in His prayer in John 17:3 said, “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and the One whom you sent – Jesus Christ.” Tie that with the passages earlier in John’s gospel where Jesus spoke concerning the ministry of the Holy Spirit, and we see the ministries of the three cannot be separated (as we often do in theology class):

”But the Helper (parakletos), the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in My Name, He will teach you all things and will remind you of all things that I told you” (John 14:26).

“Whenever the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father … He will testify about Me” (John 15:26).

“He will glorify Me, because He will take of Mine and He will report it to you” (John 16:14).

Also see John 14:16, 17; 16:7, 8, 12, 13.

In John 17:1, the Son asks the Father to glorify Him, as He has glorified the Father, yet earlier He said the Spirit would be the One who would glorify Him.

Look at the passages about their mutual love:

“But that the world may know that I love the Father and as the Father commanded Me, so I do …” (John 14:3`).

“Even as the Father has loved Me, I also love you” (John 15:9).

“You loved Me before the foundation of the world” (John 17:24).

I hope I’m not sounding sacrilegious when I say that we have in the Trinity a sort of “mutual admiration society.” If God’s main desire and purpose is to bring about His own glory, I believe we can conclude that the desire and purpose of each Person of the Trinity is to bring about the glory of the other Persons.

So where am I going with this? The God I know is a Trinity, and it is only as the Trinity that I can really know Him.

So how does this affect my ministry and message? It means that their purpose must be to bring people into this knowledge of the one God who is three persons.

I believe that having a (reasonably) clear understanding of the three Persons is essential for a clear message: knowing not only what it is that distinguishes the Persons, but also their different works.

I believe that the average Christian is very vague in his/her understanding of the Trinity. We hear it in their prayers. We hear the Father being thanked for dying for us. We hear prayers closed “in Thy name,” without, I believe a real understanding of whose name it is. (We can, however, be thankful that though “we don’t know how to pray as we should … the Spirit intercedes for us … and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is …” Romans 8:26, 27.) Many think of Jesus, in His incarnation, almost as if He were some sort of theophany and have little understanding of His real humanity. The Holy Spirit seems to be thought of as some sort of “force” rather than a real Person. We may confess a belief in the Trinity, but to many, the doctrine is avoided or ignored as though it were beyond comprehension by any but professional theologians. Yet the Christian who does have some understanding and is able to relate this to life can really grow.

So the Trinity is central to my message and my ministry. No matter how the gospel is presented, no matter how I tailor the message, it must always involve the three Persons. If not, it is defective.

When we tell people that Christ died for their sins, we have to know and explain Who Christ is – not merely a good man, not merely a theophany – but God in the flesh. And we have to communicate what sin is – an offense against a Holy God – the Father of the One who died. And we must understand that the message itself would make no sense to its hearers without the illuminating work of the Spirit.

And I can only perform my ministry in relation to the Trinity. Following the example of the incarnate Christ, I must live in submission to the Father empowered by His Spirit.

Bill Ball
1/31/2007