Better to have division than collective apostasy

The story of Babel is a commentary on man.  There was nothing unique about the original “Babelonians” or that sets them apart from the rest of their race other than that their work is noted in the Bible for its gravity and symbolism.

Right along with the spirit of the world, the story is typically grandiose.  Men excitedly describe the project to one another as if it is the ultimate achievement (not unlike the buzz that occurs today at the latest and greatest electronic gadget, or an architectural wonder).   At the same time their insecurity is betrayed as they crowd together to preserve identity and control their fortunes.  (Derek Kidner notes that pride and fear would be an apt motto for modern nationalists.)

There is a sense of foreboding in God’s words: “this is only the beginning…nothing that they propose…will now be impossible for them.” History has shown us how true this is.  Whether man proposes trips to the moon, cities of skyscrapers, the systematic slaughter of fellow humans, or the killing of millions of babies, it is done.  Man’s abilities may attest to literally be heavenly, in the sense that they are extraordinarily high or great, but our wills are pathetically selfish, and wicked. A sorry combination.  

While God does not take the issue lightly, he approaches it as a concerned Creator and Father, not as a rival.   His statement here is similar to our Lord’s in Luke 12:31 (“If they do these things when the wood is green…”).  Peace and unity, are not ultimate goods (though our politicians and earth worshippers may tell us otherwise).  For God it is better to have division than collective apostasy.

Let us, instead of looking to the work of our own hands and glorifying fellow humans in doing so, look to God.  Millennia later He chose people from all over the face of the earth, gathered them into Jerusalem, and then gave them different languages to proclaim His name in all the earth.  The world and it’s creations will continue to dazzle, but only so long as one ignores the knowledge of God and the grace he extends to all mankind.

The Threefold Promise of Forgivess

When you say, “I forgive you to another” you make a promise, a threefold promise not to remember his sin by bringing it up to him, others, and yourself.  Such a promise is easier to say than to keep.  But the sin is buried. 

Learning about this really brought home to me something the book didn’t emphasize – given that forgiveness is so hard, especially to give to repeat offenders, of which I and the rest of us are, it is no less than amazing that God consistently forgives us when we ask for it. 

It’s hard to imagine forgiving your friend or coworker seven times in the same day, right?  Now imagine how many times you’ve sinned against God today and yesterday ad infinitum and yet He forgives you!  Amazing. 

Something else to keep in mind which Adams recommends as a way to help is that if you’re ever forgiving someone, it’s always the first time.  Think about it, if you’ve truly forgiven them before (maybe twice or even six times) this isn’t the third or the seventh time you’ve granted forgiveness.  If you’ve truly buried their sin and promised not to remember it to yourself or to them, it is always the first time.

Seven Times Seven

In the discussion of forgiveness here (Based on Jay Adams’ book From Forgiven to Forgiving) last time we started looking at Luke 17:3-10, the need to confront an offender, and what it means to rebuke.

Today I want to look at the second part of Jesus’ statement: “if he repents, forgive him.” 

Remember Jesus’ warning, “Be on your guard.”  This part is even harder to follow than the first command (to tentatively rebuke). 

You’re minding your own business when BAM!  Out of nowhere your brother whacks you on the nose then runs off.  Ouch!  While you’re recuperating he shuffles over to you and says, “I’ve got a really bad temper, and well, you were the closest one around…sorry I hit you on the nose. I won’t do it again”  You reply, “That’s ok, I forgive you. Just don’t do it again.” But then later he does it again, and just as before comes back to ask forgiveness and repent.  Again, you respond: “Yes, but don’t do it again.”   You know what happens next?  He does it again.  At this point you really don’t want to forgive him.  After all, he’s broken his word.  And this is why forgiveness is so hard.  We are not just to forgive once, but “seven times”!  Remember, forgiveness isn’t just a feeling or saying something, it is actively “not remembering” one’s sins against you.  Even after they’ve done it time and time again. 

There are three excuses we instantly want to use in these situations:

I’ll forgive…

1) When I get more faith.

2) When I see fruit.

3) When I feel like it.

1) Jesus’ response to the first excuse is in Luke 17:6 in response to the disciples’, “Increase our faith!”  They were thinking, “Wow, that’s a tall order, we need more faith first to do that.”  His response is no, faith isn’t the issue here. Even if you had a tiny bit of faith you would be able to do wonders.  This is a matter of simple obedience.

2) Jesus eliminates the second excuse by anticipating it in the way he structures his command: “if he sins against you seven times a day.”  Fruit takes awhile to grow, much longer than a day anyway.  And if our brother sins multiple numbers of times we are to forgive him without waiting to see if his verbal repentance is sincere.  We’ve gotta take his naked word for it.

3) And before the third excuse can even be thought about, Jesus preempts it by making an illustration (Luke 17:7-10).  Appealing to the listener’s experiences or knowledge of their society he asks them what they would do if they had a slave who had been working in the field all day and it was now time for dinner.  The master certainly wouldn’t look at the slave, size up his situation then encourage him to grab some grub.  He’d say “take a shower then make my dinner.”  And though the slave may be desperately hungry he cannot take one bit of the dinner for himself until his master is finished eating.  The slave likely doesn’t feel like waiting, his stomach is practically yelling at him to swallow a few morsels when he is back in the kitchen.  Doesn’t matter. He must obey.  And Jesus says even when he’s done that he hasn’t done anything exceptional, only what he’s supposed to do. 

So, even if we don’t delight in it, even if we don’t feel like it, or it seems illogical, we must forgive.  Remember, forgiveness is a promise, not a feeling.  And you can make a promise whether you feel like it or not. 

Adams closes the chapter by saying:

Refusal to forgive is a decision for vengeance.  It is taking vengeance into your own hands.  Joseph carried the logical of personal vengeance to its logical conclusion when, in response to his father’s supposed plea for forgiveness, he said, “Don’t be afraid; am I in God’s place? (Gen. 50:19)

Be on your guard!

I’ve been working through Jay Adams’ “From Forgiven to Forgiving”.  Today we start learning about forgiveness and our response to offenses by looking at one of Jesus’ teachings on the matter.

That is how Jesus begins his teaching on forgiveness in one of the principle passages on the matter, Luke 17:3-10.  That seems like an unusual way to introduce teaching on forgiveness but he does so because it is difficult to put into practice…“This is hard to swallow, Christian, be on your guard.”

“If your brother sins, rebuke him.”  (vs. 4 makes clear that he’s talking about sins against you).  Why is this hard?  Because when we’re sinned against our natural impulse is not to go to the offender and rebuke.  Our impulse is usually to throw a pity-party, to gossip to others in the name of ‘warning them about this other person’, just plain get furious and be angry, or find some other action that isn’t going to the brother to rebuke him.

That’s hard.  Why do I have to be the one that goes?  Isn’t the offender obligated to come to the person he wronged?  Yes, but that’s in a different passage (Matt 5:23-24), and right now we’re dealing with the command in Luke.  Ideally, both will go, and meet each other halfway.  Right here we’re told the one offended must go.  Perhaps we can better understand via a story:

A friend you haven't seen in a while is in church and you spot him across the aisle.  After the service you quickly go over to say hi and catch up after all these years but when you're just about there your friend sticks his up in the air nose and walks away out the door.  You can't even find him.  

You've likely been offended.  If you weren't you probably tend to give people the benefit of the doubt, but not everyone does that, and even if this scenario doesn't work I'm sure we can at least imagine a similar one where you would be offended or feel disrespect etc.  What do we do?  Well, to finish the story - your long lost friend actually had a cold and had a case of the runny nose during service and needed to get out to the car asap.  The only way you would likely know that is if you then contacted this person and said, "Hey, what's up? Why did you walk away."  Problem solved.  That person probably didn't even know they sinned (maybe they didn't even see you coming to meet him), but you were offended nonetheless.  Maybe this is a ridiculous example, but fact is relationships can be ruined or damaged over silly things and simple misunderstandings. 

You are obligated to go because your brother or sister may not know that they’ve offended, stepped on your toes.  “So, the rule is: The on with the sore toes goes because he’s the one who always knows.” 

Ok, so what does it mean, “to rebuke”?  One use of the word in the NT is “to prosecute a case against another that he is convicted of the crime for which he is accused.”  It’s not that one J The word used here means, “to rebuke tentatively.”  The brother should be approached with the facts as you see them.  Then give them a chance to clear away any misunderstanding.  If there was no misunderstanding or confusion then the offender needs to repent after which the offended party needs to forgive. 

And that’s where it gets even harder.  I’ll pick up the next post there.

Enough Violence

Politicians induce far less violence than they use to accomplish their sneaky schemes and idealistic visions.  

Now that I'm pretty sure the Washington Post didn't print this letter I'm publishing it here:

Editor, Washington Post

1150 15th St., NW

Washington, DC  20071

To the Editor:

In response to vandalism at a local Democratic Party headquarters building, you quote the Executive Director, Lindsey Stauble as saying: "It was surprising and alarming to know that people, when they have so many opportunities for expression in this country, that somebody would resort to a brick.” (3/25/10)

There is certainly no excuse for the destruction or theft of property.  That said, I find it even more surprising and alarming to know that people, when they have so many opportunities for expression and service in this country, would resort to ramming a bill through Congress to get their way.  Why men of such seemingly sincere, and passionate good will would resort to passing a law is absolutely shameful.  In fact, that these rulers (who think they ought to be masters of industries and our lives) think they know how best to take care of the citizenry is nothing but unalloyed arrogance.

Throwing bricks in response to this is equally wrong, but “when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce [us] under absolute Despotism” the people have right to shout loud and clear, “Enough.”

What is Forgiveness?

I was recently given and read “From Forgiven to Forgiving”, subtitled ‘learning to forgive God’s way, written Jay E. Adams.  Though I grew up in a Christian home, I don’t remember ever formally being taught what forgiveness is and isn’t, and by extension, how hard it is.  So up until now I don’t think I’ve had a clear understanding of what forgiveness is.  If you would have asked me a few months ago what forgiveness is I likely would have said something such as, “It’s telling someone, ‘It’s o.k.’ after they apologize, and thus not holding a grudge against them for what they did.”  But beyond that I really would not have been able to boil down to its essence what forgiveness truly is.   I’m glad I read the book and intend to further clarify my thinking by reading through it again and writing here on some of the book’s major points. 

“Forgiveness is man’s greatest need,” says Adams in the introduction.  There are other great needs as well, and perhaps they’re all intertwined together so that it’s impossible to separate them or say that one is greater than the other.  But without forgiveness, one cannot avoid punishment for his sin.  Without forgiveness it can be said of one “it would be better had he not been born.”  What a frightening thing!  Imagine all the non-Christians you know now and are rejecting Christ or those you did know and have since died.  It would have been better for them had they never been born.  It is only because of forgiveness that one is saved from eternal pain and separation from God, and welcomed into Heaven. 

So what is forgiveness?  Forgiveness is going on record with a repentant offender with a promise that one will not remember the offender's sin against him.  It’s key that we understand the “going on record” part.  Without having to go on record, forgiveness would just be an emotional process by which we just think or emote, have certain feelings.  But forgiveness is much more than just feeling a certain way or thinking to ourselves that we will not remember one’s offense.  We are to forgive whether we feel like or not and the Bible has nothing to say of having forgiving feelings.  Why must we go on record? Because we are to imitate God.  In Eph 4:32 Paul says to “forgive one another just as God, for Christs’ sake, has forgiven” us. 

God doesn’t forgive sinners by just feeling or thinking a certain way.  He goes on record with us, declaring that we are forgiven (cf. Ps. 103:12, Is. 43:25).  For God, forgiveness is much more than a feeling or withholding a grudge.  He “declares that the matter of sin has been dealt with once and for all.”  Forgiveness is a promise, a promise to not remember our sins against us.  Why does God have to “not remember” as opposed something like “forget”?  Well, God, being omniscient cannot forget.  Forgetting is something that we humans, not being omniscient, do passively.  But not remembering is active.  Adams says, “It is a promise whereby one person (in this case, God) determines not to remember the sins of another against him.  To ‘not remember’ is simply a graphic way of saying, ‘I will not bring up these matters to you or others in the future…I will never use these sins against you’.”

There are important implications of this that I will try to write about later. 

A Great Grandson of Noah

Gen. 10:8-11

Nimrod was the first on the earth to be a mighty man, or warrior.  In today's vernacular that would be a politician, or nation builder, etc.  He is remembered in the Biblical record for two things that the world admires: personal prowess (he was a mighty hunter) and political power.  That he is before the Lord marks for us God's estimation of his skill - it is no mere formula.

At the same time there is a bit of tragic irony...not yet but only hinted at.  The beginning of his kingdom was Babel... The next chapter of Genesis, the eventual progress of Babylon, and Revelation 18 is comment enough on earthly success and power.

The nations he founded, Assyria and Babylon, can perhaps look to Nimrod as their antecedent in terms of military might.  The inhabitants of these nations at a later time would later descend in destructive power on the kingdoms of Israel and Judah.