Free will?

I find human behavior fascinating, my own included e.g. "...why did I do THAT?!"

In light of this I found the following video thought provoking.

This demonstrates that even though we have a "free will" -- i.e. everyone in this experment made their own "free" choice to stand - our wills are heavily (if not completely) influenced by our need for acceptance/approval/love -- or at least what we BELIEVE we must do, to acquire or achieve these.

When our identity is strongly anchored in Christ and we know he loves me no matter what I go through or what others think, do or say, we are not as easily swayed. In fact, if our identity/sense of who we are is soundly rooted/grounded in him, I would suggest we will be swayed very little if at all. (This is likely why dictatorships do not like "religious" beliefs and most aggressively try to oppress and outlaw Christianity and other faiths. People who look to a higher source for their identity are not as easily influenced by a dictators threats because we are more influenced by God).

How much of your behavior is dictated by what OTHERS think, do or say? e.g. When the polls go contrary to your views, does that affect you and make you reconsider your position. If not, you either are very principled with clear, strong convictions or you have a strong personality and are more a leader than a follower. If you are anchored in Christ this will instill in you a strength you did not have before to do what you are convinced (believe) is right in the face of opposition. The expression "having a backbone" comes to mind. This is the essence of leadership; courage in the face of great opposition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8BkzvP19v4

Influencing our choices?

In light of the above video, if you have ever wondered whether news is controlled... in some way or another...just a little bit...maybe not a lot...etc, the below video might be a clue.

Also notice the topic of these reports in the below second video. Does it sound like someone might be concerned about the economy? This raises the thorny questions of WHO is concerned and how exactly are they influencing these reports.

This of course also raises the question of what else are we being told (or not told) to get us to act one way verses another. Hmmm, free will indeed. Just some food for thought.

Note also these are not from national news sources  i.e. the "control" goes all the way down to the local level and not just at the national level.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM8L7bdwVaA

But wait! It's all probably just a coincidence, right?!

For a discussion on how our "wanter" is broken and not our "chooser" click here. 

Why, in Gods name, does He love us!?!

Does God love us based on who he is or on who we are?

If by who we are we mean what we do or don't do, no. This is not the grounds on which we are loved. Nothing we can or will ever do will cause God to love us.

Is there anything about us that God loves? Yes there is but it has nothing to do with our doing anything. It has everything to do with how God made us i.e. our being; who we are. 

We are in his image i.e. like God, and he loves this *about us (and therefore loves us; who we are). Why? Because we are able to enter into and participate in the beatific love of the Father, Son and Spirit and reflect that relational infinite love back to him as well as out to other of God's beloved Image bearers, along with all the rest of His highly valued and beloved creation. 

(Let us remember that after each act/day of creation God said it was good. And when he finally created mankind (male and female), the crown of his creation, he said it was all very good).

So going back to the original question on whether God loves us because of who he is or who we are, both are true. But the latter is based on and springs out of the former. So in this sense God loves us because of who God is first and foremost. 

If God were not who he was first (and had not made us the way we are as bearers of his image) there would be no love. No love within God first and therefore no love going out to all of creation in general and his image bearers in particular. Everything is based on and grounded in God being Father, Son and Spirit in blissful and loving relationship from all eternity past. And by virtue of being created as his image bearers, we are able to fully participate in this beatific union.

"And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent... I made known to them your name, and I will continue (by His Spirit) to make it known, that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them." - the very last words of Jesus at the last supper right before his arrest and crucifixion. Joh 17:3, 26

* in fact both we and Christ are in the image of the Father. Christ is the eternal image and only begotten Son. [ Col 1:15; 2Cor 4:4; Heb 1:3 ] We are the created image and adopted sons and daughters in Christ. This is why Christ's is called our brother.

Freed in Christ… Both ways!

In Christ we are freed in two ways. 

* We are freed from the condemnation of our failure to love God and others as we are designed. A failure that keeps us in a subtle but constant state of guilt and shame (for more discussion on why we experience constant guilt and shame click here). 

This is a change of status or standing before God which is based solely on Christs efforts and performance instead of ours.

* We are also freed from addictions and destructive behavior by these being replaced with something exceedingly and infinitely more satisfying and captivating.

At the heart of addiction is a longing to ease pain and to acquire pleasure. However what we usually seek does not work and even harms and sometimes destroys us.

We need something that is constant, lasting, fulfilling, life-giving (not life taking),.. in short we need infinite, eternal love. 

Infinite love only comes from an infinite, eternal source. The infinite eternal source of God himself in and through Christ.

The first freedom comes from a change of status or standing. The second results in a change of our day to day behavior. The second springs forth out of the first and occurs only when the first is clearly understood and believed. 

#Love #Captivating #Eternal #ThoughtsAboutGod #ThotsAboutGod

Does "sin" matter?

Does our sin -- distrust/unbelief --matter?

Regarding God's love for us, our sin/distrust has absolutely no bearing and no longer matters. If we are in Christ we are totally and fully loved. His commitment to us is fixed, unmovable and relentless.

Regarding our fully experiencing this relentless, never ending, and unconditional love, our sin/distrust absolutely matters and has total bearing.

A loving parent never stops loving and desiring the best for his or her child no matter how badly they mess up.

An untrusting and disobedient child however pulls away and alienates themselves from their parents love and does not fully participate in and experience the fullness of it. 

Distrust hinders the child's maturing and growing up to be the best they are capable of being for their own joy, good, and the parent's delight. A loving parent always seeks to bring out the best in their child and for their child.

God is certainly no different. In fact, he is the perfect parent. Unlike our human parents, God is perfect in love, perfect in wisdom, unlimited in ability, possessing all the resources to bring about our best, and is always with us no matter how much we turn away from Him. 

Are you a child of God? If so, you are fully and infinitely loved, no strings attached. This is a fixed and unchanging reality.

Do you trust your heavenly Father completely in every area of your life? Do you believe He is always for you, for your highest good and not your harm? If not, you are missing out on fully experiencing the infinite love God, your perfect heavenly Father, has for you.

By not understanding and distinguishing each (how our sin matters and doesn't matter) from the other, we miss out on fully benefiting from both.

Does sin matter, part II

#love #Unbelief #Trust #thotsAboutGod #ThoughtsAboutGod

Worthless rotten sinners?

In Evangelical circles, we often hear we are worthless, suggesting we are unworthy of God's love. Is this true? It depends on what we mean.

If we were worthless, why would God send his Son - the Son who the Father holds in highest regard and of utmost value; the Son of his infinite love and affection - to set aside his infinite glory and take upon himself our just judgment? And to also assign to us his perfect faithfulness and righteousness?

The very fact that God the Father was willing to sacrifice someone of infinite worth (his only begotten Son) says something of our worth, does it not? God must have felt we were worth it or he wouldn't have gone to such radical measures to restore us to Himself.

Can we be of great worth and actually worth (worthy of) his love while completely undeserving of it at the same time? Are we splitting hairs? Let's see. 

We in no way deserve a restored relationship with God. We regularly tell God by our actions and attitude to go "pound sand." It should be abundantly clear there is nothing lovely or deserving about this. 

The necessity of grace (a gift) in itself says we can never do enough or be good enough to earn God's love and therefore we can and never will earn the right to participate in God's uninhibited and unfettered love. But His Son can! Without God's intervention and provision, we are toast.

It is not until we acknowledge and believe this (a matter of the heart, not our conduct) that we can receive and experience God's love. The depth to which we believe these things to be true is the degree and depth to which we will experience them to be true. 

But this is very different than saying we are unworthy or not worth God acting in love toward us and on our behalf. 

Are we actually worthy of God acting on our behalf? If so why? Is it because of something we have done? No! It has to do with who we are, and who God has made us to be. This has nothing to do with what we do for or by ourselves.

Why are we of such great value to God? Because we are like God. We are God's image-bearers, by God's own doing and therefore highly ¹valued by God. Would not God value His image in us? We, after all, are the only created beings who are like God. We alone can receive God's love and return his love in a way (the same way the Father, Son, and Spirit give and receive it among themselves) that all the rest of his creation cannot. This brings him joy and the honor and glory he rightfully deserves, like nothing else in creation can. But this is God's doing, not ours. He made us this way, in his image, we didn't (click here for more discussion).

Psa 100:3  Know that the LORD, he is God! It is he who made us, and we are his; we are his people and the sheep of his pasture.

Our attempts to be in right standing with God through our independent efforts are worthless or worse yet are as "²filthy rags." But we are not worthless.

To become worthless, we had to have worth, to begin with. So what made us worthless? Our not conducting ourselves as the image-bearers God created us to be i.e. not living to and for God's glory and honor and loving Him with everything we are and have as we were designed to.

Rom 3:12  All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; (why?---->) no one does good, not even one."

Is being in God's image enough? 

Being in God's image alone, however, is inadequate to restore us back to God because we rebelled and rejected his design for us and our original status. Being in His image means we have the capacity to love and honor God as He rightly deserves, but this is not actual loving. Thus requiring God to restore us back to fellowship with him by doing for us what we could never do for ourselves, i.e. by removing the consequences of our not loving God as we ought and were designed to. In the place of our unrighteous distrust of God - along with all its consequences - He offers us his righteousness as a gift i.e. by and through grace.

So there is nothing we can do to earn God's love, ever. His love was and is totally undeserved yet we are absolutely worth it in God's eyes or He wouldn't have done it.

Some other links that look at different aspects of this are as follows. 

Our worth based on what?

The most valuable values us 

Lovable vs lovely

Hard wired for greatness

Created for glory

God's love is based on who or what?

Our worth, God's glory

Giving and receiving glory

Why in God's name does he love us?

__________________________________________________________________

¹Remember after God created everything he said it was good. After he created man he said it was very good. God values his creation and we are the pinnacle of that creation.

²How filthy? This refers to the rags used during a woman's menstrual cycle. Though some - i.e. the translators of the original language - try to candy-coat how repulsive our efforts to make ourselves righteous in God's eyes are, He does not. 

The different "flavors" of Christianity

I came to Christ my senior year in high school at a Nicky Cruz Crusade in 1971. Cruz came to Christ through David Wilkerson who was of a more charismatic persuasion. 

My first church was a fundamentalist Independent Baptist Church (the John Rice, Jack Hyles, Jack Van Impe legalistic variety...if you are old enough to remember those dudes). Before that I was unchurched. Neither of my folks were practicing faith of any kind, though my mom was raised Catholic and my dad grew up in the Church of Christ, but had walked away from the church as a young man and never returned. 

A year after I came to Christ, I went to Lynchburg Baptist College (now Liberty U) and then transferred to Columbia Bible College (now Columbia International U) after two years. I graduated from Columbia in 77. Columbia's theological roots were in the Keswick or "deeper life" movement. 

While at Columbia, I was exposed to a whole spectrum of views through the various students and faculty, from Reformed, to Arminian, to deeper life, to charismatic. I also started reading folks like Francis Schaeffer and CS Lewis and some works out of a more Reformed tradition. I eventually landed in an Orthodox Presbyterian Church after College for a couple of years -- which is on the far right theologically and the most conservative spectrum of Reformed churches. Solid doctrinally for the most part, but very little life. I found the label "the frozen chosen" to be appropriate. They were all "up in their heads" and somewhat oblivious in their approach to the mysteries of the Spirit and how to live in God's presence (or possibly it was more my lack of spiritual maturity, and I was not ready to hear whatever they offered in this area). I learned a ton theologically while there, however, and became more convinced and grounded in a Reformed theological outlook.

With my then-growing family (2 already born and one on the way) we moved to Massachusetts in 1982 to open a sales office for my business. While there we attended a Christian Reformed Church (Dutch Reformed) for about 4 years, then a Congregational Church for about 6 years eventually landing in a Baptist church for around 6 years (my wife had left our marriage and the Baptist church had a strong youth group which I attended for the benefit of my 4 kids, ages 12, 11, 9 and 7 at that time). 

After living in Massachusetts for approximately 16 years, I moved to the West Coast and attended an Evangelical Wesleyan Church for 4 years, eventually landing in a non-denominational Charismatic Church (co-pastored by 2 brothers) for 13 years, where I taught an adult bible class for 12 of those years.

I moved to Texas - since my daughter and her husband were considering starting their family (they have a son now) - and attending a Baptist church (in name only...which they keep under wraps) that operates more like a Presbyterian church in its form of government (e.g. a plurality of elders/pastors) and also in their eschatology, but also like a charismatic church in their style of worship.  

The main thing Baptist about them is that they practice adult Baptism. Otherwise, they even enjoy a good glass of wine or a beer - definitely not the kind of Baptist Church I used to attend. (They also do not emphasize the "cultural mandate" and exercising dominion over all aspects of culture, which is more common in Presbyterian and Dutch Reformed circles).

Why my church history? I have seen a lot of shapes and varieties of churches and the full theological spectrum within the church as a whole. I have observed what I feel are the good and not-so-strong sides of these various groups and drawn some conclusions along the way. The following are the differences I have seen. I am not suggesting I am right necessarily, only giving you my observations and understanding. In the following thoughts, I will discuss these and mainly compare and contrast the broader groups of Charismatic to non-Charismatic.

Charismatics

Charismatics tend to draw their sense of God's love through his present work and activity, such as experiences and manifestations of his love in and through his Spirit and various spiritual gifts. They are more experience and feeling-oriented in how they approach God, tending to look to experiences/manifestations as much as God's word, sometimes giving personal encounters with God more weight than scripture. Given the inclination of our fallen hearts, I have concluded this ¹can be and often is very shaky ground to stand on. They tend to be so focused on present experience that they can lose sight of the significance, importance, and completeness of God's past work in and through Christ and the vast depth and richness of that work for us in our day-to-day lives i.e. they tend to chase present experiences/manifestations of God instead of appreciating the rock-solid realities of God's presence due to Christ's work on our behalf, despite present circumstances, experiences, and manifestations or lack of them.

Other Evangelicals

On the other hand, non-charismatic types i.e. Calvinists, Reformed, Baptists, and non-charismatic evangelicals, tend to focus more on God's past work and Christ's future return, with minimum emphasis on his present work i.e. the necessity of ²operating "in the Spirit" and what that means exactly. They have a tendency to draw their sense of God's love through the depth and breadth of Christ's past work - if they do at all. 

My observation is many evangelicals within the non-charismatic part of the church know more about God - in their head - instead of having an ongoing, vital, daily personal relationship and experience of God. This was also true of me for a long time and is something I am constantly discovering more about. 

I find this is where Charismatics are stronger than most other evangelical churches. They at least have some life in them and seek to operate in the Spirit, if not always as strongly grounded in God's word. The downside of this, however, is that Charismatics can confuse some subjective experiences as proof they know God, when their experience may have nothing to do with God. Non-Charismatics, on the other hand, are propositional or doctrine-oriented (even among those who do not consider themselves cessationists or recognize the validity of all the gifts and the various activities of the Spirit). In fact, non-charismatics are so focused on propositional truth in scripture that they confuse knowledge about God with knowing God. (I discuss this further here.) There is little emphasis on seeking God's presence or experiencing manifestations of his presence ²through His Spirit and what that looks like in our day-to-day walk with God. They are so focused on Christ's past work, they can lose sight of God's present ongoing work by His Spirit and what it means and looks like. This is especially true of those in reformed circles, from my experience. 

Both Christ's past work and the Spirit's present work are necessary means by which God shows his love and grace to us and through us. They are equally vital. I would also suggest that for us to experience the latter (the work of the Spirit) as God intends, we must be firmly grounded in the former (the work of Christ). I address this tension throughout the various posts on this blog. To focus primarily on one to the exclusion of the other is missing out on all the vital means by which God reveals himself to us, no matter which side you fall on. 

We cannot emphasize one to the point of minimizing the other or we will miss out on the full benefit of both and the vital connection between them. A key work of the Spirit is to reveal to us the things of Christ. And not just propositionally, but in the day-to-day experience and manifestation of his presence through the various gifts and other means of grace i.e. worship, prayer, meditation, etc. 

Now, in saying all of this, these differences are not absolute distinctions but tendencies. All groups for the most part would say they believe what the other groups emphasize, but from my experience and observation, there is a very definite distinction in practice, even if there is a verbal acknowledgment by each of the other's views and approaches.

I would also add that the last church I attended (Baptist in affiliation) was more "charismatic" than most, and the former charismatic church I was in was far more scripturally oriented than most, with a slight reformed leaning in eschatology, while Arminian in their soteriology. But even with these two more "centrist" churches, there is still a considerable difference between them when you look "under the hood" and see how they operate and what they emphasize. 

For the non-charismatic groups, seeking and knowing the work of the Spirit is vital and a key missing piece. We are under grace because of the past work of Christ. But to be under grace is also to operate in the presence of God by His Spirit. I touch on this more here.  

My last church emphasized the past work of Christ and minimized the present work of the Spirit, as is typical of most non-charismatic churches.

Where I have landed... at present

I have personally been heavily influenced by Jonathan Edwards (1703 - 1758 who was instrumental in the first Great Awakening during the 1730's and 40's) and those who have studied him, such as John Piper (a Baptist), Tim Keller (a Presbyterian), and Kyle Strobel, (a professor at Talbot Seminary - also the son of Lee Strobel, author of "A Case for Christ").

Strobel is considered an Edwards scholar and did his Ph.D. about his understanding of spiritual formation - often referred to as sanctification. Edwards is wordy and also uses the 1700s variety of English - not unlike King James type English minus the "thee's and thou's" etc - which makes him hard to read.  Strobel, however, wades through this and does an excellent job of distilling his work and bringing out key aspects of Edwards's understanding of God in a way we can understand. I highly recommend all his work. The book at this link is a good summary overview by Strobel of what Edwards addresses regarding "spiritual formation" or what most evangelicals call sanctification. 

I have also posted some main truths Edwards discusses, summarized by Strobel here. 

While Edwards (along with the others mentioned) is within the reformed wing of the church, Edwards understands the importance of operating in the presence of God and the role of both our affections and our reason. As some may be aware, he's written an entire treatise on "Religious Affections" in an attempt to address and assess the increase in emotional displays during the "Great Awakening" in the 1730s - e.g. folks loudly crying out to God for mercy, going into trances or convulsions, fainting, weeping sometimes for days, etc. Though he felt there were excesses and counterfeit displays of "the Spirit" he also believed much of this was the work of God. 

(by "religious" Edwards means spiritual, as we would use it today. Not the legalistic performance-based variety common within the Evangelical community today) 

Interestingly, Edwards stresses (correctly I believe) that Christ is the eternal Word of God i.e. the truth and light (knowledge) of God revealed in the flesh and the Spirit is the passion and love of God poured out on us, through which Christ is revealed and the grace of Christ's work is applied (for a further discussion on this click here). Or as Edwards also likes to say, Christ is the light of God and the Spirit is the heat of God. Both knowledge and affection are vital in experiencing all of who God is and offers according to Edwards. So Edwards would not fit well in either a Charismatic or a stereotypical Evangelical church today, or maybe, to say it more positively, he could possibly work well with either. 

The balance and conclusion

Our current walk with God and the presence of the Spirit are anchored in the past work of Christ i.e. the gospel of grace. Without that work and a clear grasp of grace, there wouldn't be our present walk with in and by the Spirit. Our present experience of God is based on a clear and full understanding of this past work.  The truer our understanding, the greater our faith and the stronger we will experience the presence of God through His Spirit and day-to-day walk with God right now, this moment. We are not to focus just on Christ's past work or our future hope of glory but on our present ongoing dependence on/faith in/walk with God. Our experience of God does not start and end with the past work of Christ but only begins there. This past work is the vital foundation for our ongoing participation in the ever-present love of the Father, Son, and Spirit. As scripture says, "the just shall live (present continuous action in the original Greek) by faith" and "If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit" (Gal 5:25) - it is worth noting the context of Galatians is a discussion of being under grace and not the law i.e. there is a direct tie into operating in the Spirit and being under grace. For a further discussion on how the Spirit and grace are connected, click here. 

God did what he did in the past so we might know Him and walk with him in joy and power in every present moment today for the glory of His name. 

___________________________________________________________________

¹Early on in his ministry, George Whitefield approached God in this way but later abandoned it after making a decision on "an impression from the Lord" that later proved to clearly not be His leading. 

²For a discussion on what I believe it means to operate in the Spirit, click here and here. 

For a discussion on being empowered by the Spirit, click here and here. 

Control… Our world disrupted

We do not like to have our world disrupted. We become very comfortable in how we go about things and relate to others because we settle into a pattern. Patterns are predictable. 

We like patterns because they give us an illusion of control over our world and do not require us to trust things or others we can't control. We *hate having to trust unless it's trusting ourselves.

However if a pattern is not healthy, but broken, it needs to be disrupted so it can be revealed to us and abandoned. If we do not address but allow this we will miss out on the riches of God's grace he wishes to extend to us in those particular areas of brokenness.

If we do, that area will become a place of healing and allow us to be more effective in ministering to others in those same areas.

A challenging and painful circumstance is often the primary means by which God accomplishes the above, especially those areas of deepest wound and brokenness we need freeing from the most.

_______________________________________________________

*We hate it because we hate pain. Anything we can do to minimize (control) pain and promote comfort or pleasure, we seek. 

#Disruption #Control #comfortable #thoughtsaboutGod #thotsaboutGod