Every Wednesday we’ll post something having to do with doctrine and purity. Hope it helps.

—

Eternally Secure, Perpetually Striving

One of Christianity’s longest running arguments has to do with the believer’s security. If one has been born again, can he ever lose his salvation? If so, how? And, once lost, can it ever be retrieved?

I’m not entirely settled on the issue myself. Some of my favorite scriptures (and indeed, ones I draw no small comfort from) bolster the “once saved, always saved” position. “No man is able to pluck them out of My Father’s hands” (John 10:29) for example, and “There is now therefore no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus.”(Romans 8:1) Ditto for “He is able to save to the uttermost” (Hebrews 7:25) and “ye who are kept by the power of God.” (1 Peter 1:5) Indeed, if we’re saved, as Paul told Titus, “not by works of righteousness which we have done but according to His mercy” (Titus 3:5) then my works, righteous or not, don’t figure into the salvation equation. But I’m also sobered to consider Christ’s warning that if a man does not abide in him he is “cast forth as a withered branch and thrown into the fire” (John 15:6) and Paul’s description of some as “having damnation because they’ve cast off their faith.” (1 Timothy 5:12) Save it; I’ve heard all the pro and con interpretations of these verses, so I know exactly how both Calvinist and Arminianist would explain them. All of which leaves me preferring the idea of eternal security (who wouldn’t?) while not being entirely convinced of it.

You’re in good company, wherever you stand. My all-time hero Charles Spurgeon was true-blue Calvinist firmly holding to the once-saved-always-saved position. Yet my spiritual father and favorite Bible teacher Chuck Smith does not fully endorse the position and my denomination, the Assemblies of God, officially rejects it.  So honestly, I can’t see this as an essential doctrinal issue, and while debating it can be enlightening, I hope none of us would break fellowship over it.

I prefer, instead, to focus on what we do know about future judgment, including this: The great white throne judgment described in Revelation, at which those whose names aren’t written in the Book of Life are consigned to eternal damnation (Revelation 20:11-15) isn’t the only judgment people face after death. There’s also, for the believer, the Judgment Seat of Christ (2 Corinthians 5:10) before which we who’ve been born again will stand, and at which we’ll face bestowal of, or loss of, eternal rewards. (1 Corinthians 3: 12-15) And while heaven or hell won’t be the issues we face there, the believer’s gain or loss at that hearing will be momentous.

So Jesus encouraged us to lay up treasures in heaven (Matthew 6:20) referring to heavenly rewards in quantities (Matthew 5:12), and Paul compared our earthly life to an athletic contest in which competitors strive for a crown:

“And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they [do it] to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.”(1 Corinthians 9:25)

No wonder, then, he (Paul) referred to himself as a man who “presses on toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.” (Philippians 3:14) Surely he of all people knew his good works could never save him, but he likewise knew he was in a race, striving to give it his best to please His Lord and receive the rewards he’d been encouraged by that same Lord to go for. He was saved, and eternally secure in that knowledge, while still zealous to be a faithful, diligent steward of the temporal gifts and responsibilities he’d been given.

Us, too, I hope. It’s discouraging to hear a believer say “If I’m saved and that’s unchangeable, why should I bother resisting sin? Why not kick back, enjoy whatever I want, then go home to Glory with my fire insurance policy all paid up?” That shows a remarkably immature view of our relationship to God, and a general ignorance of the fact that eternity isn’t just about heaven or hell, but also – and largely – about the eternal rewards, or loss thereof, given for faithful stewardship in this temporal life.

I’m secure. I’m striving. No contradiction there, only a deep, and ever deepening, desire to run this race, finish this course and say, as Paul did shortly before his own was finished:

“Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.” (2 Timothy 4:8)

Every Tuesday we’ll post something to do with strengthening marriages. Hope it helps.

—

He’s Just Not That Into Him

A book and subsequent film titled “He’s Just Not That Into You” looked at the phenomena of single women who find it hard to accept the fact that when a man doesn’t return phone calls, breaks promises to get in touch, or keeps making excuses for not getting together, it doesn’t mean he had a car accident. Nor was he kidnapped, drugged, or overcome with the flu. It simply means he’s not that into you. Brutal fact, but there it is, and it’s better faced than avoided.

Male behavior can seem inexplicable, especially when it’s selfish, or wildly inconsiderate. So to the woman navigating the maze of dating, the concept of a seemingly nice guy showing brief interest (Great meeting you! Sure, I’ll call) then disappearing, two-timing, lying, or making promises he never keeps makes no sense. “I really liked him”, she muses, “and I was so sure he liked me! There must be something deeper, some hidden reason for his actions.” The simplest answers can be the hardest to face: he’s self-centered; his relational attention span is seven minutes long; he pretended to be more into you than he is. That’s not only hurtful, but downright bewildering to a lady who wouldn’t dream of behaving that way towards someone who liked her.

But if that’s true of single women, it can be doubly true of Christian wives. They make sacred vows at the altar convinced, with good reason, that God put their union together. They’ve taken time beforehand to know their mate, and based on all they’ve seen and experienced with him they’re convinced he’s their divinely provided partner with whom they’ll share life, create and raise a family, and, to the bitter end, love and nurture each other in caring fidelity. And with that assurance they step in Christian marriage.

Sometimes it goes as planned; sometimes not. And sometimes the “not” shows itself in inexplicable behavior, carnal betrayals that are selfish and wildly inconsiderate. After a few years a porn habit gets discovered, or an affair, or a fetish, or worse. To the woman navigating the maze of her Christian man’s adulterous behavior, the concept of a seemingly godly guy sneaking into dark places, lying, and covering up his indulgences makes no sense. “I really love him”, she muses, “and I was so sure he loved me! There must be something deeper, some hidden reason for his actions. After all, he’s a Christian!” And yet again, the simplest answer can be the hardest to face: He’s a believer, yes, but sometimes what can be said of a non-believing jerk can be said in modified form of a born again husband as well: he’s just not that into Him.

It would be unfair and inaccurate, of course, to say any Christian husband who sexually sins is therefore “not into God.” King David was quite into Him, and also quite capable or horrific deeds. I’ve walked alongside plenty of David’s who’ve deliberately and wrongfully sinned, shown remorse and proven their repentance, and I don’t call a guy like that indifferent to God. But there are other husbands whose ongoing sins display not only a lack of sexual control, but a broader lack of a disciple’s zeal. They had it once, then went lukewarm. They don’t invest in intimacy with Him through prayer, scripture reading, or fellowship. They show little interest for spiritual things in general, and if it weren’t for their occasional church attendance or grace before meals, there’d be no evidence of faith in their private or public lifestyle. They’re just not that into Him.

Which matters, and hugely. Because if you take God out of the equation, Biblical morality can seem not only unattractive but downright unreasonable to a man with a sensual appetite. In an age of easily accessed porn and open celebrations of virtually every sexual variation, why say no? One could argue that a husband might lose his marriage if he doesn’t behave, or could catch a disease, or see his reputation shot. But all of that only encourages a man to be more careful when he sins; it hardly convinces him the sin needs to be abandoned. It’s the intrinsic, not the extrinsic motivation that compels, and the intrinsic comes when a man’s heart is softened towards His maker and savior, reducing him to David’s simple but profound admission upon his own repentance: “Against Thee, and Thee only, have I sinned.” (Psalm 51:4)

Plenty of elements can factor into a man’s immoral behavior. Some of them constitute what’s often called “brokenness” – childhood pain, deep rooted neurosis – while others include wrong decisions, rebellion, or attempts to medicate discomfort. All of these require attention; all should be matters of prayer and concern. But above all, if I were a wife hurting over her husband’s wrongdoing, I’d be praying for God to soften the man’s heart towards Him, wooing him into a deeper communion, convicting him and converting his sin from something pleasurable into something intolerable. And above all, I’d be praying for the man to be brought into a deeper love for God, one that motivates him to say no to something everything in his body wants to consent to.

Because ultimately, whatever else contributed to the problem, when a man is essentially into himself the prognosis is grim. But when a man is into Him, then there’s always real, and realistic, hope.

Every Monday we’ll post something to do with maintaining sexual purity. Hope it helps.

—

“Well, Then, Act Like One!”

Clean before my Lord I stand, and in me not one blemish does He see

When I placed all my burdens on Him

He washed them all from me.

-from ‘Clean Before My Lord’ by Nancy Honeytree

A common parental technique, which I’m no fan of, shames a kid by contrasting what he’s doing to who he is. I understand the frustration churning behind statements like “Are you a boy? Then act like one!” or “Are you 12 instead of 3? Then act like it!” because when a child’s behavior doesn’t match his age, aggravation’s inevitable. Still, there’s a difference between demeaning and appealing. “Grow up!” demeans, since the very phrase has a sneering quality. “You’re better than that, so I want you to act like it” has the same essential message minus the insult. And an appeal to maturity based on a recognition of the child’s age and potential is, to my thinking, better parenting.

That how my Dad does it with me, to this day. Yours, too. In Ephesians 4:1 He appeals to us through Paul, who said:

“I beseech therefore you that you walk worthy of the vocation to which you’re called.” The word he chose for “vocation” denotes both an invitation and, according to Strong’s Concordance, a “calling aloud of a title or name.”

Which brings to mind another of Paul’s inspired declarations about us:

“And ye are complete in Him” (Colossians 2:10) Complete, the word used meaning “filled to the top, lacking nothing.”

So thus saith the Lord: You are holy and complete, filled to the brim, seated in heavenly places as a joint heir with Christ to all that God is and has for you. Please, then, act like it!

I hear that appeal today, just as I’ll hear other voices asking me to distract from my true calling and indulge my flesh. I’ll get stressed, bored, depressed, angry, and in response want to do something to medicate or entertain myself. At that time Paul’s admonition will remind me of three things:

First, this is not the real me. A guy who entertains unclean thoughts, flirts with a co-worker, laughs at a dirty joke, gossips or lashes out at others is hardly “filled to the top; lacking nothing.” So when tempted I’ll remind myself not just of the wrongness of the thing beckoning to me, but also of the genuine nature placed in me that He has called complete.

Second, the desire is real; the message is false. That is to say, my desire to briefly comfort myself with something unhealthy is genuine, but the invitation coming along with it, in sharp contrast to the invitation to walk worthily, is patently false. Temptation doesn’t just say “Come closer.” It also promises a reward; something lasting and beneficial. But it never delivers, a lesson I should have learned about fifty years ago. Good grief, if I purchased any product promising positive results only to get bad ones, I’d never be stupid enough to keep coming back for more of the same. Why, then, should I be any less intelligent when dealing with the promises of the flesh?

And yet – third point here – the other desire is real, and its message is true. While I’m the first to say I at times desire the wrong, I also hugely desire the true, the holy, the eternal. And the promises coming alongside the invitation to indulge that desire are indeed true, as I’ve tested them and found them accurate. “To be spiritually minded is life and peace”, Paul said (Romans 8:6) and I know that when I invest in that mindset, then the product truly delivers, because to make choices in harmony with God’s will is to be true to the new nature He’s given us. I’m a chip off the old Rock in that sense, my Father’s son who, if you look real hard, looks somewhat like Him in some ways, more like Him in others, not nearly enough like Him in any.

But it’s not over, and another day – this one – is proof. So today we ask for strength, Lord and Father, having been told what we are, to then act like it, walk like it, be it. There is truly no other way to peace and strength in this life, nor to the immeasurable rewards You’ve promised in the next.

Bash or Bless?

Every Thursday I’ll post an article having to do with either relational or emotional matters. Hope it helps. 

—

Bless the Jerk

There’s no way to navigate a life without getting bumped, bruised or outright wounded by people. No one’s exempt, and generally, the closer we are to people the more capacity they have to wound us. There’s the challenge of intimacy: I want to be known and loved; I don’t want to be injured. And good trying to get the one without the other.  Where there’s closeness, there’ll be, among other things, wounds.

Wounds are injuries to the soul that make themselves known, sometimes years after the injury, either in our current pain or current behavior. They can show themselves in current pain through memories that just won’t die. Sometimes a mental picture of a traumatic event – some childhood humiliation or tragedy, for example – keeps intruding into your thoughts. Maybe you let yourself relive it, and all the pain of the event comes flooding back, reopening the sore and making it worse.

Or it can also show itself in your behavior, when it affects the way you relate. Early rejections, disappointments or traumas can become the root of adult isolation, fear of intimacy, a craving for power, or extreme passivity and dependency. In those cases, the wound affects your ability to love and trust.

I’d have to say that those sort of symptoms are the ones that most often bring people into my office. And in a nutshell, there are four things I recommend to wounded people: Identify, Address, and Bless the Jerk.

Identify

Does the very thought of a certain person, or the mention of that person’s name, flood you with rage or sadness?  Is there someone you avoid whenever possible because the idea of interacting with her or him puts you into a panic? Do you indirectly punish someone with silence, or sarcasm, or gossip?

Then I’ll bet you have a wound associated with that person. Usually the wound is made up of a series of events that happened between you and him/her, a few of which especially stand out. And usually, the person involved is someone you were close to – a family member or friend – so he could hurt you at the deepest levels.

This is exactly why Jesus said to address a problem directly and immediately:

“If your brother sins against you, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him.” - Luke 17: 3

When you’ve been wronged, although you’re commanded to forgive, you’re also commanded to be honest about the wrongdoing. If you aren’t, you’ll feel unresolved about it, and that lack of resolution easily gives way to resentment.

Address

If this comes close to describing your history with a person you’ve experienced a deep wound with, then you need to address it. To do so, ask yourself four questions:

First, is this person accessible? (Meaning he or she is alive and can be located.)

Second, is a conversation about this feasible? You may still see this person at times, and the wound is still a painful wall between the two of you. If so, move ahead with plans to address it.

Third, is your perception of this person, and what happened between the two of you, accurate?

Fourth, what do you want to say to this person? What questions do you still have? What do you want him to know about you and the way you feel? What, if anything, do you want to see changed in your current relationship with this person? In addressing these questions, you’re finally getting some resolution and clarity, which is a way of cleaning the old wound out.

Bless the Jerk

If you’re able to talk out an old problem with someone who’s hurt you, you should. But even if you can’t, you’re still mandated to forgive. Jesus offered no wiggle room on the matter:

“If you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” - Matthew 6: 15

The Greek word Jesus used for “forgive” is aphiemi, meaning (according to Thayer’s Greek Lexicon) “to let go of a debt by not demanding it.” When you release someone who’s wounded you, you give up the right to punish them and you relinquish any tactics you may have used in the past to “hurt them back.”  In doing so, you also release the emotional battery acid that’s been welling up whenever you think of this person.

If the wounder is unrepentant, unwilling to admit his wrong, or indifferent to the pain he’s caused you, there’s a punishment waiting for him that’s worse than anything you could dish out. Meanwhile, you’ve got a life to live. Does it make sense for you to allow someone’s sin to keep distracting you from what really matters?

When you release the wounder, you relieve yourself of the negative, crippling feelings that weaken you. That, too, is the logic of forgiveness.

And if the old pain resurfaces, make a habit of releasing it as soon as you’re aware of it. Here’s a trick I learned years ago, which is no trick at all. Jesus advised it when He said:

“Bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you.” - Matthew 5:44

Whenever I remember someone’s sin against me, whether in the distant past or the here and now, I try to keep them in prayer.  Specifically, I pray God’s blessings on their lives (sometimes through gritted teeth I’ll mutter ‘Bless the Jerk’ – not very godly, but it’s a start)  and His correction in their lives of any sin that needs correcting. Not easy; often excruciating. But in doing so, I’m released from the burden of hating them, thinking ill of them, obsessing over them.  Because who, in the long run, is punished by my bitterness? No one but me, and I’ve quite selfishly decided I’d rather not punish myself any longer.

I hope you won’t, either.

Every Wednesday we’ll post something having to do with doctrine and purity. Hope it helps.

—

Bad Form

“Having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof; from such turn away.” - 2 Timothy 3:5

My wife and I have followed the NBC series Smash since its first episode, generally enjoying it; sometimes hitting the pause button when the occasional tryst or needlessly suggestive moment is featured. It centers on the evolution of a Broadway musical based on Marilyn Monroe’s final years, and provides a dynamite cast, terrific musical numbers, and the fun of watching a play sprout from inception to opening night, all from the backstage, insider’s viewpoint of the producer, songwriters, director and performers. It’s pretty good tv.

But last Monday it crossed a line many will applaud, some will boo, and others will miss altogether. Count me among the boo-ers, as this episode presented something I not only believe to be false, but also representative of a growing trend I call the “Nice-ification” of the faith. Nice-ification works something like this: If it’s Christian, it should be nice; if it’s nice, it’s good. If people do nice things, then God’s working in them, and a person’s niceness in general justifies his behavior in the specific.

Nice-ification took center stage Monday night in an episode concluding in a lively church service attended by a cast member fresh out of a one night stand with the man who’d been in a live-in relationship with the lead’s understudy; a writer whose adultery with a recently fired then re-hired cast member had nearly shipwrecked her marriage; the openly gay songwriting partner of the aforementioned writer; and the Marilyn Monroe understudy whose lover had the fling with aforementioned cast member and whose near obsessive relationship with the move star lead in the play had led to public speculations about her lesbianism, though at this point homosexuality seems not to be on her menu. Got it?

Oh, and they’re all in church at the invitation of the gay boyfriend of the gay songwriter, a thoroughly likeable young African American whose Christian family embraces his homosexuality, whose church and pastor likewise seem to have no objections, and who is the most decent, honorable and seemingly God-fearing character in the show.

Glad they’re all in church, truly. When non-believers walk through our doors we should rejoice. Trouble is, in this scene no distinction is made of belief versus non-belief; righteous living among believers versus immorality; saved versus unsaved. The Pastor opens the service enthusiastically, followed by the openly homosexual young singer who invites his friend the understudy (who’s been portrayed throughout the show with no reference to personal faith whatsoever) to join him at the altar to sing a blistering duet version of Kirk Franklin’s Stand. Everyone is moved; all characters are visibly tearful, excited, jumping out of their seats. And as a result of non-believers hearing good gospel music sung by an apparent non-Christian and a gay church member, they leave the church not saved, not repentant, but much nicer. And that’s what passes these days as fruit of the Spirit.

Nice is good, but truth is more than nice. Truth makes necessary distinctions, distinctions found in Scripture and traditionally held in high regard. Accordingly a believer in unrepentant sexual sin ought not to be leading worship; a non-believer should be welcomed but not given the platform; and evidence of regeneration will be specific faith in the work of the cross, a new nature, a new life. Nice will no doubt be part of the package, but not its essence. Here Smash, deliberately or not, promoted Nice-ification at high decibel in a bit of propaganda so artful it had Renee and I singing along with the performance, then muttering “How false!”, then singing and jiving again.

A form of godliness features the music, the lingo, the warmth and many of the good works associated with Christianity, absent regeneration, repentance, sanctification. It’s powder without power, an attractive presentation of what appears to be the gospel but is, in fact, another gospel. And while I hardly expect NBC to present sound doctrine, I hope its viewers take time to discern whether something with Christian trappings is inevitably Christian, and whether they’re viewing a form of godliness or godliness itself.

Because there’s genuine power in one; persuasion absent power in the other. It’s not necessarily nice to say it, but the difference between the two is critical.

Every Tuesday we’ll post something to do with strengthening marriages. Hope it helps.

—

Morphing Marriage

“Know you not that from the beginning He created them male and female? For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” - Mark 10:6-9

Morph: (as verb) Change smoothly from one image to another by small gradual steps using computer animation techniques.

It’s changing as you read this, undergoing a steady morphing generating applause, condemnation, incessant commentary and general confusion. Marriages’ definition is under reconstruction, not for the first time, and the political, emotional and cultural stakes are immeasurable. Thus our President, who has steadily been on record as opposing the re-definition of marriage to include same-sex coupling, now cautiously describes his views on the matter as “evolving” even as his vice president has all but come out in favor of the morph. Washington state is embroiled in the debate with the outcome quite possibly favoring redefinition; North Carolina’s voters will have their say which will almost certainly veer from the direction their West Coast friends are taking.

Look for ongoing referendums, state challenges and the inevitable US Supreme Court showdown, all over what really constitutes marriage.

I have one of those, as do many of you, and those of us who are both wedded and committed to the traditional concept of a wedding can expect scrutiny of the way we’re treating this institution we claim to value, especially in the heat of our current national clash of values. If I’m against the morph (which I am, clearly and strongly) I’d best first be certain my valuing of marriage as defined by its Creator is evident not in the way I protest its redefinition, but in the way I protect, nurture and invest in my own. One solid marriage has more impact than fifty brilliant apologetic defenses.

Which calls to mind an old argument between my two sons over the oldest one’s discarded bathrobe. He hadn’t used it for years; it hung untouched in his closet. The younger was at that age when all things Older Brother were cool and there for the trying, so he began wearing Big Bro’s robe, strutting around in what appeared to be a tent covering his small body, enjoying himself hugely. Big Brother was outraged – What’s he doing wearing my robe! – when I pointed out that he had essentially discarded it, so why complain when someone else wanted it?

Click here for a few of the many ugly statistics floating around the internet on the prevalence of porn use among Christian men. Or here for stats on adultery committed by Christians. Or do your own research, which won’t take long if you simply Google in words like “sexual sin among evangelicals.” It’s no surprise that Christians error, but discouraging to see the numbers who do. Especially in light of the numbers who also howl, when gay couples walk the aisle, What are they doing wearing our robe? What’s not cherished may as well have been discarded; what’s been discarded may well get picked up by someone else who really wants it.

Of course, the majority of believers are by no means guilty of these transgressions, so the Church at large cannot be indicted for hypocrisy. But perhaps our outrage itself should morph into a bit more in-rage, addressing the sins among us at least as aggressively – no, more so – than we address those on the outside. Amidst our rightful protest of a morph many of us fear will come back to bite us in a not-too-distant future, let’s remember the need to first address problems in our own ranks, then humbly yet clearly continue standing for what’s sacred and proven to work when operated as the Manufacturer intended. Living out the standards we preach is reasonable obedience, but it’s also sound policy when wanting to impact a surrounding culture growing ever more cynical about all things conservative Christian. Episcopal seminarian William Frey envisioned this approach some time ago, and, as he relates it, it sounds like nothing more than basic Christianity:

“One of the most attractive features of the early Christian communities was their radical sexual ethic and their deep commitment to family values. These things drew many people to them who were disillusioned by the promiscuous excesses of what proved to be a declining culture. Wouldn’t it be wonderful for our church to find such counter cultural courage today?” (as quoted in Time Magazine June 24, 1991)

Wonderful, yes, and entirely doable. There’s a hopeful note in to clutch when the trends alarm us, and a legitimate challenge to rise to as well.

Every Monday we’ll post something to do with maintaining sexual purity. Hope it helps.

—

I Was Born (Again) This Way

“And having been set free from sin you became slaves of righteousness.” -Romans 6:18

Pop singer Lady Gaga made a huge splash with a dance single extolling the virtues of self-love, self-congratulations and general self-celebration in her song Born This Way. The lyrics proclaim that whatever we are (with emphasis on our sexual passions) must be good simply because it is, the fact that it is meaning God intended it. Plenty of room for theological debate right there, in light of scripture’s clear explanation of our fallen nature, but never mind. A primary point the Lady makes is that birth endows us with certain attributes that must be acknowledged, embraced, trumpeted. To do less is to deny your primary self.

I could strongly agree with the sentiment if it were only qualified with a brief “re.” Re-birth indeed endows us with certain attributes to be acknowledged, embraced, even trumpeted. Birth? Well, yes, in some ways – race and gender, for example – we can say amen to the “God made me this way” line, but when it comes to feelings, sexual or otherwise, it’s downright scary to consider a scenario in which we collectively decide that whatever we feel must be inherently good and should be acted on. Just ask the guy who I nearly ran over (almost accidentally) when he arrogantly jaywalked in front of me last Thursday. He’ll tell you he’s glad Joe Dallas doesn’t celebrate his natural inclinations.

But there are other inclinations placed in you and me by our rebirth, fruit of the new nature He gave us when we became His. “If any man is in Christ he is a new creation”, Paul affirmed. (2 Corinthians 5:17) and the nature bestowed on His new creation cannot be satisfied with sin (Romans 6: 1) and is, as Paul said above, a literal slave to righteousness.

An unwilling slave, perhaps, at least from my perspective. There are too many times in a given day when I’ll chafe at the yoke I’m under. But there is a Master to be served who, unlike an earthly one, has not only bought me but given me His nature as well, and that fact that there’s any struggle at all between my natural desires and my supernaturally bestowed hunger and thirst for righteousness is literal, inarguable proof of His ownership and my re-born status. And as I think it over, that’s awfully good news.

It’s good news because, much as I’ll hate saying no to myself today when I’m pulled towards lust, temper, sloth, whatever, the fact I even care that I’m being pulled will point to the divine spiritual man created in this very un-divine hairy carcass. The beast got captured and beauty was placed in him when the gospel was manifest in yet another redeemed sinner, and as a result the slave to righteousness will make decisions today that would have been inexplicable to him thirty years ago. When sin, a former master who after all these decades still wants his old servant back, says jump, the former slave who used to say “How high?” will yawn, mutter “Oh, jump yourself” and keep moving. Can’t be helped. This business is under new management; I was born again this way, and to proclaim or do anything else would be to deny my primary self.

And that’s a truth that can get even this die-hard NOT Lady Gaga fan to dance a few disco steps, but only in the privacy of my own office, blinds drawn, so don’t worry. There’s enough ugliness in the environment already.

Every Thursday I’ll post an article having to do with either relational or emotional matters. Hope it helps.

—

Warts and All and Camera Ready

“But by the grace of God I am what I am.” - 1 Corinthians 15:10

I’m not a fan of self-labeling, whether it’s positive or negative. It can lead to a limited, even inaccurate view of ourselves if our primary form of identification is our personality type (I’m a sanguine; I’m a Type-A) or our area of weakness (I’m alcoholic; I’m co-dependent) Certainly within a support group environment these markers are important as we identify what we’re dealing with, and admitting both that we have a problem and what the problem is can help us better manage it. Still, we’re so much more than that and shouldn’t, to my thinking, box ourselves into labels defining us too narrowly.

That said, I’m also not a fan of minimizing our weaknesses, nor of presenting ourselves as being above them, though I’ve repeatedly been guilty of both. I’d rather keep my warts covered up, even when the situation calls for showing them, or at least acknowledging they exist. To say God has worked in my life and brought about changes is good and true. To imply the work is complete, or even further along than it really is, misleads and misrepresents. And there’s the rub. Personal testimonies inspire, and I love hearing them, but at times the testifier can sound like he zoomed from Point A to Z, leaving the rest of us Point M folks wondering what he did right and what we’re doing wrong.

In no area do I hear more hedging along those lines than in the area of purity. Often those souls brave enough to admit they’ve had a problem with sexual sin feel compelled to give us the true dirt on their past, then air brush their current state, as in “I once was sleazy but now I’m completely delivered from that and never struggle, even in my thoughts or temptations.” Very understandable. Who, after all, wants to testify to an ongoing struggle with lust, then walk down the aisle knowing the rest of the congregation wonders who he’s mentally violating? Still, there must be a way for honesty and modesty to co-exist.

I stumbled onto it when I was giving my own testimony on a live Christian talk show. The format called for each guest to be interviewed one on one, then sit on a couch while the next guest was interviewed, until all of us were together for the final segment. The subject was purity, and the first guest was a lovely Christian young lady who testified as to how God had kept her pure during turbulent times, followed by a youth pastor who similarly said God had kept him from losing his purity and thus he’d go to his wife as a virgin. Then a middle aged couple came on, recalling how God had kept both of them pure until marriage, encouraging others to follow their example. All the guests had sterling, very authentic testimonies of God’s ability to keep them from falling into the sins so commonly practiced these days.

Then out came Old Slimeball.

The tone certainly changed when I gave my testimony, and try as I could to clean it up for mixed company, you simply cannot turn The Exorcist into The Sound of Music. Then the host, wanting to put the best possible spin on things, listened to my story, leaned forward and enthused:

“Well, Joe, after all that I can see you’re God’s man. You’ve clearly been delivered, and I’ll bet you never so much as even think about these things anymore, or ever have to deal with them at all, right?”

Never have I wanted so badly to publicly lie.

Instead I gave, by God’s grace, an honest response I could live with, explaining that while these others had testimonies I wish I had, mine was that of a prodigal who by no means was beyond struggling with temptation but who, by God’s grace, was kept from giving into it. “My miracle”, I said, “is not that I’m temptation free, but that when it comes I’m now able by the power of God to say ‘no’ to it.”

No unnecessary details; nothing graphic, but nothing misleading, either. I don’t qualify as a Before and After photo, so a Before and Later shot will have to do, with the promise of a stunning After portrait soon – hopefully very soon – to come.

Let the Potter be glorified in His ongoing workmanship while He fashions, corrects, adds to, and guides His vessels from glory to glory. And let those who see the vessels taking on new shape inquire “Who’s your maker?” so the vessel can say, as did a Samaritan lady blown away by her recent encounter with Him, “Come and see.”

Every Wednesday we’ll post something having to do with doctrine and purity. Hope it helps.

—

Kept

“You who are kept by the power of God — “ -1 Peter 1:5

I was baptized 40 years ago this month, then served God fervently for 7 years, spent the next 6 backslidden, then came home to my Father’s house in 1984 where I’ve happily resided since. 40 years, 34 of them lived in consistency.

That’s not what I call impressive, especially by normal standards. But for me, even 2 years of going in the same direction is miraculous. Consistency’s not my style. “Great Start; Poor Finish” would go nicely on my tombstone, as countless books, diets and projects that were started then discarded can attest to. I mean well, if that counts for anything, but it doesn’t, so never mind. The point is, if I have been consistent in anything, much less something as critical as living a life separated to God, that’s one of the Red Sea parting, manna falling, sun standing still-type miracles. And those are God’s department.

So said Peter. “Kept by the power of God”, he notes, describing us. And he chose an interesting word for kept – phroureo, which references, according to Strong’s concordance:

“To protect by a military guard, either to prevent hostile invasion, or to keep the inhabitants of a besieged city from flight.”

You gotta love that. You and I are kept two ways – hostile invaders are kept out and, if our own rebellion makes it necessary, we are kept in.

My military guard keeps watch for countless invaders trying to trip me up. Wanna tempt me, discourage me, attack me? Talk to the guards; you have to go through them first. I’m kept.

They can get pretty aggressive with me as well. Wanna run, Joe? Escape your responsibilities? Step outside the prescribed boundaries? Sorry Sir, we have orders. Stubborn, those boys. They’ll keep me whether I’m screaming for help, or kicking and screaming. Either way, I’m kept.

I won’t wade into the Calvinist vs. Arminian debate here, since it’s an issue I haven’t fully settled myself. I do know that I have free will, and much of my life is determined by how I use it. But if free will alone determined whether or not I’d serve God, faithfully and with longevity, then I also know hands down that my stats would look awfully different than they do today. So while I’m not sure whether you’re in or out of God’s grace apart from any choice of your own, I do know this: You’re foreknown (Romans 8:29) you’re chosen (John 15:16) you’re tenaciously held by Christ (John 10:28) and you’re kept. That much we can all joyfully agree on.

I don’t get it, but I’ll revel in it, and I know I’m not reveling alone. Have a great day. Nice being kept with you. Say hi to the guards for me.

Every Tuesday we’ll post something to do with strengthening marriages. Hope it helps.

—

Married with Impact: Part I, The Prayer Bond

“ — and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.” - 1 Peter 3:7

Two areas of married life couples often neglect are two of its most important aspects, to my thinking: the Prayer Bond and the Sexual Bond.

Both are easy to ignore since they don’t demand immediate attention. The kids have to get to school; that can’t be put off. Meals need cooking; bills won’t politely wait; the house doesn’t care how tired you are, it wants cleaning and repairing now. So the list of “have to’s” is made of things requiring immediate attention and energy, leaving husband and wife drained and distracted. Time for devotions or physical intimacy gets shoved into the “when we can” category and the household machine keeps going while the relationship, too often, withers because what’s vital doesn’t seem urgent.

I’d like to talk about both these areas, the joint prayer life this week and the sexual bond next Tuesday. At the outset let me say that virtually all couples Renee and I have worked with are deficient in these areas, making them all the more vulnerable to a number of other problems as well. So investing well in mutual prayer and physical bonding seems critical to the lifeblood of a healthy marriage.

Regarding joint prayer, Peter used an interesting word for “hindered” in the scripture mentioned above. It’s ekkoptō, meaning “cut off” like the branch of a tree that’s been axed. It’s the same word Jesus used in Matthew 18:8 (“When thy hand or foot offend thee cut them off”) and it puts Peter’s admonition to husbands and wives in an interesting light. In the verses leading up to this observation about prayer, he’s charged both towards love and respect, mutual submission and even a certain reverence for each other. Then the contingency: a couple’s prayers that should be answered may, if these charges aren’t followed, get cut off. This isn’t to say God will not hear the prayers of either spouse, but it points to the power of a couple’s combined prayers, a power thwarted when division pries them apart. Two takeaway points stand out to me as I read this: First, if my treatment of Renee isn’t careful, our spiritual bond will be violated and all kinds of troubles will follow. Second, there’s an impact to that bond which I should covet, protect and invest in.

The first is a bit of a no-brainer, I’m sure, but it bears remembering: When things aren’t right in my home life, nothing’s right; everything suffers. Fighting is inevitable, and allowable, but leaving a quarrel unresolved isn’t. So when I stomp out of the house mad I subject myself to a miserable day of trying to work while I’ve got this bowling ball in my gut which simply won’t digest. It sours everything I do to the point where out of sheer exhaustion less than true humility, I call Renee with profuse apologies and oaths to never leave my underwear on the counter again. The bowling ball dissolves; the bond’s back. Nobody wins when it’s ruptured, much less if it stays that way.

The second – our need to invest in the prayer bond – also seems pretty basic but is in fact ignored by a surprisingly high number of families. When man and wife pray together things happen, things they should value and protect. Spiritually they grow closer, exercising faith and praise as one unit. Petitions are heard and answered. The kids come to see prayer as a natural part of life, like washing dishes and brushing teeth. The house itself takes on a tranquil, holy quality, as does any place where God is regularly sought and acknowledged. We can have that and more, and we should, and we rob ourselves immeasurably when we don’t.

Time is, of course, the catch, and anytime we consider adding something new to our routine we have to reckon with that. But I’ve come to believe it’s not the amount of time spent in prayer that matters so much as the regularity of that prayer time. Consistency, not volume, seems key to this. So if a couple isn’t in the habit of daily mutual prayer I always suggest starting with a commitment of five minutes per day, same time each day, rigidly adhered to. You do have five minutes, and if you’ll begin protecting that brief chunk of time for prayer I’ve no doubt you’ll see immediate changes and long term improvements in your home life.

There’s a wealth of blessing and powerful impact waiting for Christ centered couples, an impact everyone benefits from. I hope today we’ll see, afresh, both its importance and its availability.