Wednesday, September 27, 2006

Featured Quotes

I have recently begun putting some of my favorite quotes under the title of my blog. From time to time, I'll feature a different quote and to preserve the previous quotes (for posterity's sake, I suppose), I've dedicated a blog entry to them. Thus, as featured quotes pass from title to obscurity, they shall find their final resting place here. You can always find this blog entry by clicking on the "Past Quotes" link to the right.

Quotes from 2006


"I want deliverance. I need forgiveness for what I have done. But I need also deliverance from what I am." - Watchman Nee, The Normal Christian Life

"It's not about your theology. It's about your communion" - John MacArthur

Vengeance Is Mine, Part I

www.reverendfun.com

As the time approached for him to be taken up to heaven, Jesus resolutely set out for Jerusalem. And he sent messengers on ahead, who went into a Samaritan village to get things ready for him; but the people there did not welcome him, because he was heading for Jerusalem. When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, "Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them?" But Jesus turned and rebuked them. [And he said, "You do not know what kind of spirit you are of, for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them."] And they went to another village.

Luke 9:51-55 (NIV)

Vengeance is such a personal thing. When we've been slighted, wronged, injured, or insulted, it's natural to demand justice and it's right to want it, but too often the desire to see justice served gives way to a sense of vengeance.

In the story above, Jesus is heading to Jerusalem, and He has to pass through Samaria to get there. The problem is, Samartians and Jews weren't exactly known for their kindness toward one another. The hostility went way back - to about 500 B.C. After Judea's exile into Babylon, the remnant left behind intermarried with Gentiles and became a nation of their own, Samaria. In addition, these Jews developed their own scriptures and worshipped in their own temple. When the orthodox Jews returned from exile 70 yeras later, the hostilities began and remained strong through the day of Jesus. Each group held nothing but bitter animosity for the other, especially the Jews who held their superiority in lineage and religion over their Samaritan cousins. The hostility went to the end that any Jew on pilgrimage to Jerusalem would gladly walk around Samaria rather than through it, should the nation lie in his path.

Thus, it makes some degree of sense that Jesus (a Jewish teacher), on his way to Jerusalem (the Jewish religious center), would get anything but a warm reception on his way through Samaria. Considering the long-standing and deep mutual hostility these nations shared, James' and John's question of Jesus, "Do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them?" also makes some sense. The Samaritans were the dogs of Jewish culture and they'd just bitten Judea's most powerful rabbi, not to mention God-in-the-flesh.

Jesus' response (omitted in some texts, but useful for purposes of illustration here) is telling of His disciples' attitudes, "You do not know what kind of spirit you are of..."

The King James renders it "manner of spirit". Literally translated, Jesus is telling them "You don't know how serious your attitude problem is..."

So how serious is an attitude or spirit of vengeance?

Check out what God has to say in Amos 1:11,12:

11 Thus says the LORD,
"For three transgressions of Edom and for four
I will not revoke its punishment,
Because he pursued his brother with the sword,
While he stifled his compassion;
His anger also tore continually,
And he maintained his fury forever.
12 "So I will send fire upon Teman
And it will consume the citadels of Bozrah."

Here, God is pronouncing judgement upon Edom - the descendants of Jacob's brother, Esau. In verse 11, the reference to "three transgressions and for four" is the concept of a multiplicity of sin, or the idea of sin upon sin - sin begetting itself. God characterizes Edom's sin as one of vengeance and He describes four things that give us a clue of what a vengeful spirit really is.

1. Because he pursued his brother with a sword

First, Edom is pursuing a "brother". In the Hebrew this could mean "kin" or simply a neighbor with a friendly association. In any case, Edom was ignoring their relationship to the wrongdoer and having their vengeance upon them. Thus, the first sign of the vengeful spirit is a disregard for the relationship to the wrongdoer.

Second, Edom is not only pursuing a brother, but they are doing so with a sword. That is, they are using whatever means are at their disposal to effect thier revenge. That makes the second sign of the vengeful spirit is abusiveness. In our context, this may be a verbal threat, lawsuit, or the use of personal power to exact the metaphorical "pound of flesh".

2. While he stifled his compassion

In the King James, this is a "casting off" of compassion. It translates into a willful supression of any compassionate feelings or thoughts for the wrongdoer. Perhaps the wrong incurred was a result of a misunderstanding - a problem the neighbor struggled with that appered offensive to the Edomites. In our context, we may say the third sign of a vengeful spirit is a refusal to acknowledge the wrongdoer's extenuating circumstances or other issues.

3. His anger tore continually

In the Hebrew, the word "tore" means to disassemble or take apart, one piece at a time. Most people probably don't let it go that far, but a person who deals with a lot of anger eventually lets it dominate their life, leaving them bitter and complaining. Piece by piece, it removes their enjoyment of life and leaves them only with their own anger and resentment to give their days meaning. In a less extreme form, this might be the sort of anger that so completely engulfs a person's mind and thoughts that they can think of nothing else, even if the episode lasts only for a short while. To become so enraged that we are left incapable of thinking of anything but the wrong committed against us is to let anger "tear" at our life and those things in it which make it enjoyable and worthwhile. Thus, the fourth sign of a vengeful spirit is an emotional, angry obsession with the past.

4. And he maintained his fury forever

I especially like this one, probably because it typifies so much of the American "Me" culture. In our lawsuit-happy, "hey-you-get-offa-my-cloud" mentality, Self is sacred. If you wrong me, watch out, Vengeance is Mine! Thus, it's not uncommon to encounter people who live their entire lives bearing a grudge against someone who has wronged them, regardless of the severity of the wrong or time elapsed. Probably one of the most popular lies in American culture is, "I can't help the way I feel". Anyone who says this has not only succumbed to a lie, but also willfully given their emotions reign over their decision-making processes.

One of the principal teachings of Christianity is that our emotions must be held in check by our will. In this case, God is explicit: Edom "maintained" or willfully bore a grudge against their brother. They refused to let the grudget die, no matter how much time had passed. Thus, the fith and final sign of a vengeful spirit is a willful permission to let one's emotions dictate the grudges they bear. Significant chemical / mental issues excepted, such people willfully refuse to exercise their ability to control their emotional life.

Finally, verse 12 reminds us that God doesn't honor a vengeful spirit. Rather, He punishes it, sometimes severely. But we'll get into that next week.

- Graffy

Saturday, September 23, 2006

Spiritual Gifts, Part II

It's Saturday evening and I haven't got a clue what I'm going to talk about tomorrow for our youth group devotional, much less next Tuesday night's bible study. So I suppose it makes a great deal of sense to be sitting here blogging about last week's lesson, eh? If you're a procrastinator like me, it makes perfect sense. Anyway, on to the lesson...

Last week, I started with Romans 12:3 which introduced the idea of what spiritual gifts mean to the individual believer who posesses them. This week, I'm going to focus on the other half - what they mean to everyone else - which is what Romans 12:4,5 focus on:

Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others.

The concept of many members, but one body is hardly new. However, I find it interesting that Paul qualifies the idea that "each member belongs to all the others." The point, most simply, is that as a Christian, service is due to other Christians. This imperative pretty much destroys any justification for the "I'm-a-Christian-but-I-don't-believe-in-church" attitude. If you're a Christian, you need to be in a church or at least be accountable to some local body of believers somehow. Period.

So why does it matter?

Take a look at 1 Corinthians 12:7:

Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.

Note that Paul qualifies the gifts of the Spirit as the "manifestation" of the Spirit. That is, our spiritual gifts serve as visible evidence that God is working within the Body of believers. Thus, the first principle regarding corporate expression of our gifts is our gifts testify to the glory of God. It should be readily obvious to believers and non-believers alike that God is at work in a local Body that is effectively using it's spiritual gifts.

But Paul's real point in 1 Corinthians 12:7 is the second principle of the corporate expression of our gifts: Our gifts are intended to serve the common good. God's glory is often revealed in the meeting of material needs. Why else would Jesus tell his disciples that however one treats the poor, they also treat Him? (Matthew 25)

The last principle is potentially arguable, but I believe it is Scripturally sound enough to state outright. Examine 1 Peter 4:10:

As each one has received a special gift, employ it in serving one another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. (NASB)

First is Peter's command to "employ" or in the King James, "minister" one's gifts unto other people. He also qualifies Christians as "stewards" or "caretakers" of spiritual gifts. I go into greater detail on this point in the first part of this study on spiritual gifts, but it bears repeating: Spritual gifts from God are tools we must care for, and use for, God's purposes. They are meant to help others and glorify God, not make their posessors look good.

Peter qualifies God's grace as "manifold". "Manifold" means "diverse" but not extremely so. There's another word Peter could have used had he meant "diverse in the extreme". To that end, it would seem there is a limit to the expression of the spiritual gifts the Holy Spirit gives to believers. Nevertheless, I think it is yet reasonable to assume the Bible's lists of spiritual gifts is not exhaustive.

In defense of my view, look at what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 7:7:

I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.

In context, Paul is referring to his comfort level with his bachelor lifestyle or, more specifically, his ability to deny his sexual desires. The word "continence" used to mean specifically that - the ability to control one's desires (usually, sexual). Paul goes on to recognize that other men have other "gifts". That implies Paul thought of his bachelor lifestyle as a gift. Thus, one may say Paul was endowed with the gift of sexual continence.

Most who have taken a spiritual gift assessment probably know that "sexual continence" isn't considered a spiritual gift. Yet, it would be hard to argue that Paul's gift in this area didn't testify to God's glory or build up the Body.

So there you have it. The three principles for the corporate expression of spiritual gifts are:

  • They testify to God's glory.
  • They are intended to meet others' needs.
  • They are diverse and not necessarily limited to any one list.
Have a great week.

- Graffy

Monday, September 18, 2006

Hey. Stupid.


I was recently following a car that had this bumper sticker attached to it's hindquarters.

Of course, I can appreciate the humor. I chuckled at it. I even cracked up a bit when I went searching for the image on the internet.

But really, why would anyone want to put this on their car? Humor aside, what does this really communicate? Obviously, it means the driver of the car considers himself intellectually superior to whomever is unfortunate enough to be following him (or her). Strangely enough, it's precisely that attitude that lies behind road rage:

Everyone on the road is a blithering idiot. Except me.

We joke about it and poke fun at it, but no matter how dangerously or humorously the feeling is expressed, in every form it is the exact same feeling expressed to varying degrees.

I'm not really meaning to blog about road rage. What the bumper sticker really made me think about was how we tend to think of other people largely (if not purely) in terms of how they affect us and our lives. I know I do this. People can have a profound impact on how I feel by a word, gesture, or action and the impact it has on me is purely the result of how these things strike my current mood.

It's often easy to forget that the people with whom I interact on a daily basis, whether I know them or not, have lives all their own. They have their own issues and concerns. And just as I rarely bother to think about their individual lives in my split-second appraisals of their character and intellect, it should go without saying that they rarely bother to think about me in the same way.

Thus, when someone puts a bumper sticker on their car's butt that asks me, "Did you eat an extra bowl of STUPID this morning?" they're publicly professing that I have a vastly inferior intellect. Naturally, my reaction is one of, "Who does this idiot think he's talking to???" I mean, anyone who puts something like that on their car obviously can't be very intelligent, right? If they think I'm that dumb, they have to obviously be dumber. Or dumberer...

Negative criticism polarizes people. It draws battle lines, forces people to take sides, and defines right and wrong based on a label, not on an argument. Criticism evokes emotional, not intellectual, debates. If you don't believe me, try reading a few blogs on politics. For as many that express genuine concern (or admiration) for the latest political events in government, there are those who laud and lambast our president for his decisions and policies purely because he is a Republican. Such people have no regard for who he is or what he really believes as a person. It's simply a matter of how he has personally pleased or offended them, as if their happiness were all that mattered. There was a time in this country when everyone respected the president, no matter their level of agreement with his decisions and policies. They did this simply because he was the PRESIDENT and they shared a common respect for the office and it's great responsibilities. In times past, conservatives and liberals alike understood that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

I admit, I argue my point from a conservative bias. To be fair, I've seen a good number of critical attacks from the conservative side, as well. Bill Clinton suffered a great deal of character asassination from the conservative camp after the Monica Lewinsky scandal. I even recall one particular attack levied by a Christian against Billy Graham because Rev. Graham once described Bill Clinton as a personal friend...

Ultimately, I suppose it doesn't really matter, because conservatives are right and liberals are wrong, anyway.

And if you disagree with me, you obviously had two extra bowls of stupid this morning.

- Graffy

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Spiritual Gifts, Part I

For through the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound judgment, as God has allotted to each a measure of faith.

Romans 12:3 (NASB)

The topic of spiritual gifts has always been surrounded by controversy and confusion among believers. It is not my desire to offer any sort of definitive or authoritative guidance on what is / is not a spiritual gift; rather, I intend to look at what spiritual gifts mean both to the individual believer and to the Body as a whole.

There are four basic ideas that need to be grasped when dealing with spiritual gifts from the individual perspective. Romans 12:3 introduces us to the first:

1. The individual believer posesses a specific amount of a spiritual gift (a "measure of faith")

Paul echoes this idea in Ephesians 4:7 where the word "measure" is used again, this time in reference to the spiritual gifts that God gives believers. The word "measure" in the Greek is "metros" from which we derive "meter" or more aptly, "mete". It communicates the idea of a very specific, exact amount, as opposed to it's antonym, "an abundance". In other words, God has given us an exact amount of faith and the spiritual gifts He gives us is in proportion to that faith. It is not an abundance of faith. It is exactly what we need to serve Him.

2. Natural talent does not make a spiritual gift.


Many people seem to think that just because they enjoy doing a particular thing (or show some proficiency at it), then that must be a spiritual gift. I don't think that's a reasonable way to look at the issue. Note what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12:11:

But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.

The Holy Spirit determines who gets what gifts and just how much of each gift they get. As a result, I tend to question the spiritual gift assessments that many churches use to help believers discover where they fit in the Body of Christ. In fact, some of the spiritual gift tests are based on the Meyers-Briggs Personality test, which, in turn, is based on the work of Carl Jung, a humanist. You'll pardon me if I question the ability of such tests to help us understand our spiritual gifts.

So how do we know what gifts we have? That's something I'll get into later, but if the Holy Spirit gives you a gift, He shouldn't need a man-made test to make it apparent to you that you posess a gift.

3. God expects us to return His gifts in better shape than He's given them.

Examine part of the parable that Jesus relates in Matthew 25:14-20:

"Again, it [the kingdom of God] will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his property to them. To one he gave five talents of money, to another two talents, and to another one talent, each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey.

The man who had received the five talents went at once and put his money to work and gained five more. So also, the one with the two talents gained two more. But the man who had received the one talent went off, dug a hole in the ground and hid his master's money.

"After a long time the master of those servants returned and settled accounts with them. The man who had received the five talents brought the other five. 'Master,' he said, 'you entrusted me with five talents. See, I have gained five more.'

Parables are not strict allegories - not every element in them corresponds to one thing, but the story as a whole is intended to relay a spiritual truth.

In this case, we have three significant elements, the master, the slaves, and the talents. The master represents Christ. The slaves are Christians. The talents, then, are the gifts that God has given us.

It's important to note that the master gave each slave talents "according to his ability". "Ability" literally means, "strength of spirit".

On a side note, the definition of "talent" in contemporary English comes to us by way of this allegory. It's an allusion to the ability of the slaves to do what they could to increase the master's profits in this parable.

Though the gifts are material in this parable, that does not necessarily mean that Jesus is talking about the material blessings God gives us. It may be reasonably applied to the gifts that come by the Holy Spirit as well. In either case, part of the moral of the parable is that God rewards us for doing what we can to multiply the gifts he has given us. See Matthew 25:14-30 for the entire story.

4. In order to increase God's gifts, we have to practice them.


Paul tells Timothy in 1 Timothy 4:14:

Do not neglect your gift, which was given you through a prophetic message when the body of elders laid their hands on you.


He echoes the idea in 2 Timothy 1:6:

For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands.

Paul incidentally records a siginificant aspect of Timothy's ministry in these two letters. It seems Timothy was given a spiritual gift by the "laying on of hands" of Paul and other elders. Judging by the context of 1 Timothy 4:13-16 that the spiritual gift was one of teaching and pastoring. In these verses, Paul exhorts Timothy to "take pains", "be absorbed" "pay close attention ... to your teaching" and "persevere" so that others may see his "progress" or increasng skill in teaching.

In review, it's important for a believer to understand four things about their spiritual gifts:

  1. The gifts are given in a specific amount, according to their faith, not in an abundance.

  2. The gifts are given according to the will of the Holy Spirit - natural talent carries no weight.

  3. God gives us His gifts with the intention that we improve them.

  4. In order to improve these gifts, we must devote ourselves to practicing them.

Stay tuned next week for the rest of the story...

- Graffy

Sunday, September 10, 2006

Driving Me Crazy

I had a funny experience the other day at work. I had decided to leave my rather stifling cubicle confines and drive to a nearby town to deal with a report concerning misbehaving traffic signals. It was close enough to quitting time that I wouldn't be able to do much when I got there, but it beat sitting at my desk trying to keep my eyes open. So, I hopped in my blue Dodge pickup (the only blue Dodge pickup the State of Illinois seems to own) and I took off down 7th Street toward my destination.

7th Street in Dixon is a very hilly street - especially between my place of employment (the Illinois Department of Transportation) and IL Route 26. Heading away from my office, the road drops considerably into a deep vally and then rises even higher to a peak where sits a Catholic church and a small park.

Anyway, as I was descending into the valley, there was a mini-van in front of me. I'd paid little attention to it, until it's left turn signal started blinking. Normally, when things like this happen, the average driver makes decisions almost subconsciously. You don't really think about what's happening, you just respond because experience has taught you what most drivers will do when they turn on their left turn signals. So I didn't think much about her blinking signal, except, "Where's she going to turn?" There didn't look like a good place for her to make a left turn any time soon, judging by the rate she was slowing down.

Then she did something that caught me by surprise. With her left turn signal still engaged, she swerved to the right and pulled up next to the curb.

"Ok," I thought, "She's getting out of the way of traffic, so I'll just zip past her."

I had no more than laid my foot on the accelerator to speed past her mini-van when she very suddenly pulled directly into my path. Naturally, I hit the brakes. It was close, but I managed to avoid a collision, but not without getting her attention. She then completed her u-turn in front of me, parked her car on the opposite side of the street next to her apartment and leaned out the window to yell at me, "Hey! Didn't you see my turn signal?"

I moved on, not wanting to spark a confrontation. By the time I got to the top of the hill, I was mad. I'd realized that if I were a cop, she'd have had a ticket in hand by now. By the time I got to the signals at Route 26, I'd chewed her out three times in my head, each time telling her that first, what she did was completely illegal, turn signal or not, and second, the next time she decides to do something like that, to pull over and let the traffic go by so no one sees her doing it, much less gets in a wreck with her. And I was still chewing her out as I left Dixon's city limits.

There's a certain sweetness about the bitterness we can bear toward someone who's wronged us. It's almost delectable, being furious at someone who has so clearly wronged you and deserves to be punished for it. Yet that same sweetness that captivates our minds, indulges our emotions, can easily ruin a moment, a day, a week, or even a lifetime. Anger itself is not necessarily a bad thing, but when we fall in love with our anger, it's bound to end up hurting us. I realized as I drove farther down the road that I was becoming infatuated with this sense of having been wronged. In short, I was letting her crazy driving drive me crazy!

One of my favorite artists is Don Chaffer of Waterdeep. A couple years ago he put out an album entitled Whole 'Nother Deal which ranks among the greatest albums I've ever owned - secular or Christian. The third track on this album is a song entitled "On Our Way To Crazy" wherein Chaffer intones the refrain:

"Once we love those things that hurt us, we're on our way to crazy..."

In Deuteronomy 32:35, God states simply, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay". This verse popped into my head and it prompted me to give the whole thing over to God in a quick prayer. I prayed for my attitude and finally let go of the issue.

Yet there remained one problem: no matter how I felt toward this nameless woman, she'd done something wrong. It wasn't simply wrong, it was stupid and dangerous. Her response to me after the incident showed me that she didn't think she'd done anything wrong - which means she'd be likely to do it again.

It seems to me that we often confuse forgiveness with the denial of justice. Many people presume that to forgive someone of their wrong is to deny the service of justice in that case. Rather, the purpose of forgiveness is to ensure that a skewed justice is not being enforced: that the punishment fits the crime and is not skewed or biased by the personal feelings of those wronged. It gets at a central idea that a lot of Christians overlook: Our emotions are secondary to our will and our will is to be held subject to God's will.

In this case, I had cleared myself of any possible ill feelings I may have had at this woman who wronged me. The issue was no longer whether or not I had been wronged, but whether this woman posed a danger to other drivers. Something had to be done about that. As a result of that conviction, I didn't hesitate to get her license plate number as I drove past her minivan parked alongside the road on my way back to the office.

Once I got back to my desk, I called the local police station and reported the incident. The officer on the other end thanked me and said, "We'll go yell at her." Later, I was thinking about that comment. He acted as though I wanted them to "yell" at her. It seems he presumed that I was irate over this situation, just seething and fuming over what had happened, desperate to sick the cops on her and get back at her.

And at one point, I was.

- Graffy

Wednesday, September 06, 2006

Is The New Testament Reliable?

www.reverendfun.com

Call it Apologetics Wednesday, but I thought perhaps I'd briefly treat questions of the accuracy of the Bible (here, the New Testament).

1. How can we know that the original books of the New Testament were anything like what we have in our Bibles today?

When examining the authenticity of an ancient text, it's rare that the original texts still exist. Thus, historians rely on more indirect methods of establishing authenticity, like how many copies of the text exist, and how close the earliest copy is to the original writing.

Compare to two texts of antiquity, Homer's Iliad and the Bible:

Iliad - 643 existing copies; 900 years from original.
Bible - 24,970 existing copies (5,000 of the New Testament); 200 years from original.

In reality, few ancient manuscripts are as well-documented as even the Iliad. Many have only a handful of copies existing (5 to 10) and the earliest copies are dated 1,300 years or more after the original writings.

2. What about the "other" gospels?

There's some 80 or more supposed "gospels" that exist apart from the four in the New Testament. History shows us that Christians in the early centuries of the church believed a wide variety of doctrines that are rejected today by most Christian denominations.

It's important to remember first that the other gospels have late dates - 100 years or more after Christ. Comparatively, most Biblical scholars agree the original New Testament books were written within 65 years after Christ's resurrection.

Also, a majority of those gospels belie a "Gnostic" doctrine. Gnosticism was the chief heresy the early church battled against. As early as 110 A.D., we have church fathers quoting from the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), as well as some of Paul's letters and the book of Hebrews. These quotations indicate they considered those books to be Scripture. These books contain the foundations for the vast majority of Christian doctrinal beliefs, especially Christ's purpose, divinity and resurrection.

3. What about "disputed readings" of the New Testament?

There are parts of the New Testament (esp. the gospels) where the original text is not certain. Evidence of later "editing" has brought into question the original text - what it said or whether it was ever there. A couple points to remember:

i. A disputed reading usually consists of two potential renderings

ii. In no case do disputed or missing readings affect any significant Christian doctrine.


4. What about contradictions?

Contradictions typically arise from misinterpretation. Below is a list of 15 basic principles to consider when interpreting the Biblical text:

1. The unexplained is not necessarily unexplainable

2. Fallible interpretations do not mean fallible revelation

3. Understand the context of the passage

4. Interpret difficult passages in light of clear ones

5. Don't base teaching on obscure passages

6. The Bible is a human book with human characteristics

7. Just becase a report is incomplete does not mean it is false

8. New Testament citations of the Old Testament need not always be exact

9. The Bible does not necessarily approve of all it records

10. The Bible uses non-technical, everyday language

11. The Bible may use round numbers as well as exact numbers

12. Note when the Bible uses different literary devices

13. An error in a copy does not equate to an error in the original

14. General statements don't necessarily mean universal promises

15. Later revelation supercedes previous revelation


There's much more. Most of what I have stated here can be found in Josh McDowell's book, The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict

- Graffy

Saturday, September 02, 2006

Romans 12:1,2 Review Notes

I have recently posted two studies of Romans 12:1 & 2. The first is Celebrity Spirituality and the second is The Pig of God?. Technically, this would be the third part of a three-part series, but for the sake of time, I've simply opted to post a semi-outline of both verses here. Anyway, we begin with our key text:

Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual act of worship. Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.

The verses break simply into three parts: verse 1, verse 2a, and verse 2b.

Offer your bodies as living sacrifices (v. 1)

1. Sacrifice is "holy"

2. Sacrifice pleases God

3. Sacrifice is a "logical service" (in the original Greek).

4. Sacrifice costs us in various ways (financially, emotionally, physically)

Do not conform to the pattern of this world (v. 2a)

1. Conform - in Greek, to "unite one's appearance"

2. "Pattern of this world" - in Greek, an "age" or time chacterized by popular ideas / beliefs.

3. Literally means, "Do not join your appearance to the popular trends of the day" (Think Bill Clinton or Oprah Winfrey, here)

Be transformed by the renewing of your mind (v. 2a)

1. Transform - in Greek, "metamorphoo" or "change form"

2. Renewing - in Greek, implies a sense of freshness as opposed to youthfulness.

3. Literally means, "See yourself changed by the continual freshness of your mind"

Paul is describing the process of sanctification (not the event). The "change in form" is to mirror the Godly inner nature the Christian already posesses. The "freshness" of mind is the conviction of the Holy Spirit / God's Word.

Test and approve God's will (v. 2b)

1. "Test and approve" ("prove") - in Greek, means to test with the expectation of passing.

2. God's Will - God's desire (not God's sovereign will). God's desire is:
i. That you be sanctified (see v. 2a and 1 Thess. 4:3)

ii. Good - in Greek, "good by nature" (intrinsic goodness) not "good in appearance"

iii. Pleasing - "fully agreeable" (to God)

iv. Perfect - "Complete" - it's all a Christian needs for spiritual and mental well-being.