skip to main |
skip to sidebar
In Luke 10:25-37, in a discussion with Jesus, a Jewish lawyer correctly states that to inherit eternal life one must do two things; love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself.
Then the Lawyer (true to his profession) asks, “Just who is my neighbor?” Then Jesus tells the familiar story of the Good Samaritan. There are three major characters in this story and they are not there by accident. One is a Jewish Priest and the other is from the tribe of Priests. They represent the best of Jewish faith… they possess the truth and they practice the commandments of God faithfully (John 4). The third is a Samaritan who practices a corrupt version of Judaism. The Samaritan does not possess the truth nor does he practice it correctly.
And yet in the story of the “Good Samaritan” the righteousness of the Samaritan surpassed the righteousness of the other two… He truly loved his neighbor.
So who of these three characters is saved according the two things that must be done to inherit eternal life? The Priest and the Jew from the tribe of priests have the truth and have the correct religious practice but fail miserably when it comes to “loving their neighbor”. The Samaritan practices a corrupt version of Judaism, so by definition he is not, “loving God with all his heart” and yet he excells in “Loving his neighbor as himself”.
The correct answer would be that none of the three were saved. To be saved we must love God by doing his commandments and by demonstrating love to our fellow man. We don’t get half credit… it is not enough just to be “good”. Let’s be sure in our pursuit of eternal life that we do everything God asks of us.
I find it interesting that the letter to the Romans contains more than 60 quotations from the Old Testament. That is interesting because the majority of Christians in Rome were from a non-Jewish back ground. And yet Paul makes extensive use of the Old Testament to a people who were totally ignorant of the Old Testament before they were introduced to Jesus Christ.
For comparisons sake we usually say that the Gospel of Matthew was written to a Jewish audience because it contains 64 references to the Old Testament. That makes sense because the Jews knew the Old Testament.
I submit to you that the reason Paul used so many references from the Old Testament to the Roman Christians was because they were very familiar with it… they were converted to Christianity through the teaching of the Old Testament. In fact, when the Gospel is referenced in Romans 1:16 it is referencing the Gospel (or good news of salvation) revealed in the Old Testament.
The “righteousness of God” (Ro. 1:17) that is revealed from “faith unto faith” is revealed in the Old Testament as God dealt righteously with faithful men like Abraham, Isaac, Moses, David, etc.
The “wrath of God” (Ro.1:18) that is “revealed from Heaven” is revealed in the Old Testament as God dealt with righteous wrath against Sodom and Gomorrah, Egypt, the destruction of Jerusalem, etc.
Paul uses over 60 quotations from the Old Testament when he writes the Roman Christians because they had been taught extensively in it. The stories of the Old Testament were their stories, the heroes of the Old Testament were their heroes. Abraham was their father and Sarah was their mother.
Sometimes, in my opinion, we over emphasize the New Testament and under emphasize the Old Testament and relegate it to children’s classes. To do so would be a mistake. After all, the faith of the Romans that was famous world-wide was based upon the teachings concerning the good news of salvation found in the Old Testament.
Julie and I were at a gathering last night and I saw an older couple (probably married 50 plus years) who I know on a casual basis. A friend told me that the wife had gone into the hospital for a cardiac procedure and had nearly died. He added that at the time he was pretty sure she would pull through but he wasn’t sure her husband would. My friend told me the man was so shaken and overcome with worry for his wife that he couldn’t even talk.
I watched the older couple and while everyone else was gathered around tables, playing games and having fun… they sat off by themselves just holding hands and looking at each other and saying a few words to each other and smiling at each other.
And I thought I saw in him happiness and sorrow. Happiness that the thing he treasured the most in this world, his wife, had been given back to him and sorrow that it was just a preview of what was to come.
It was a learning moment for me that things don’t last forever and to treasure the moments with each other and perhaps be a little more patient with each other.
There are a lot of great things in this life but unfortunately a lot of sorrow too. Thank God there is something better waiting for those who believe in Jesus Christ.
Lev. 15-16. “Whosoever curses his God shall bear (the consequences of) his sin. And he that “blasphemes” the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall surely stone him”
The sin of blasphemy (defamatory speech against God) in the Old Testament was punishable by death. Note the scriptures don’t say that the guilty one can pray for forgiveness or offer the blood of an innocent lamb or make any other kind of sacrifice. If you “blaspheme” God in the Mosaic Law you are to be punished with death… there is no forgiveness
.
Which brings us to the New Testament, in Matthew 12:31 we find Jesus teaching that whoever “blasphemes” against the Holy Spirit cannot be “forgiven in this life or in the world to come (Heaven).” Let me suggest that Jesus affirms by this statement that the prohibition against “blaspheming” the name of God in the Mosaic Law carries over to the Law of Christ, i.e., Christians who “blaspheme”(directly) the name of God (or the Spirit of God) cannot be forgiven… ever.
Consider then the individual in Hebrews 6 (vv. 1-8), he was a Christian, believed in Jesus Christ, etc. but rejected (blasphemed) the name of God by his rejection of God. The text says it is impossible to renew him to repentance (v.6) and he will be “rejected and whose end it is to be burned” (v. 8). He was guilty of the unforgiveable sin of “blasphemy” against God.
Also, 1 John 5:16, “If any man see his brother sinning a sin not unto death he shall ask and God will give life…” Perhaps the visible sin that we are to evaluate as a “sin unto death” and decide not to pray for is the sin of” blasphemy” against the name of God because as God has instructed… there is no forgiveness for that sin… don’t waste your time praying for it.
The sin of “blasphemy” against God or the Spirit of God (Holy Spirit) is unforgiveable in the Old and New Testaments. The only difference is that in the New Testament God does not compel his people to mete out punishment for this specific crime against God… God will take care of that himself.
Of course we have to remember that the father lived under the Mosaic Law but he apparently was faithful to it. What about the two sons? The older brother apparently was a Jew in good standing and certainly faithful to the rule of his father but he had some problems… he lacked compassion. Still, no problem with him as far as his father’s Elder qualifications.
What about the younger son? He too was apparently a Jew in good standing and was faithful to his father’s rule. However like his older brother he too had a problem… he was enamored by what the world had to offer… drunkenness, sex, etc. And given the first opportunity acted upon those desires… although still in a manner respectful (superficially) of his father. He asked for his inheritance and left the country before acting upon his desires.
Get this… the only difference in the two sons was the “visibility” of their chosen sins and the “opportunity” to come up short of God’s word.
So based upon what we know of the father’s leadership in his family he could have qualified to be an Elder in the Lord’s church.
So… based upon the subsequent actions (drunkenness, fornication) of his younger son could he have continued as an Elder in the Lord’s church or would he have to step down?
Many would say he would have to step down because he has to “maintain” the qualifications and when the younger son went wild he was no longer qualified. In my opinion this concept is short sighted. The father exhibited the exact qualities one would want to find in an Elder of the Lord’s church… patience and compassion and the temporary failures of his two sons did not make him less of a servant in the eyes of God.
The father addressed both of his son’s sins as the opportunities presented.
One of my all-time favorite movies is “Ground Hog Day”. I bet I’ve watched it a 100 times. The movie centers on a local weatherman who travels to a city he despises to cover an event he despises… a groundhog who predicts the future weather. Weatherman Phil Collins (played by Bill Murray) is arrogant, condescending, and prideful.
While covering the event in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania he wakes up to find he is living the same day over and over again… in the same miserable city covering the same miserable event. At first he takes advantage of the situation and seduces women, steals money, flaunts the law and gets thrown in jail but every morning he wakes up bearing no consequences for his actions… but there is one woman who despite all his efforts he cannot seduce… Rita, his program manager.
Eventually he despairs of taking advantage of people and tries all kinds of methods to kill himself, but he wakes up every morning still alive.
Then one day gives up the futility of trying to seduce Rita and decides to start living to serve other people. He fixes flats for old people, he saves a kid who falls out of a tree everyday, etc. Women (not Rita) start trying to seduce him. Along the way he learns a foreign language and how to play the piano and becomes the type of caring, giving person that Rita falls in love with.
At the complete transformation from being arrogant, condescending and self-serving to being compassionate, caring and humble Phil finally wakes up in a new day… and wins Rita.
That, my friends, is a microcosm of the futility of life and the acceptance of Jesus Christ so that like Phil we can be transformed and find true happiness. The problem with Phil was… Phil.
“And be not drunken with wine… but be filled with the Spirit, speaking one to another in psalms, hymns and spiritual songs making melody with your heart to the Lord...” (Eph. 5:18-21)
This verse contains a spiritual imperative… we are to be filled with the Spirit. That filling is our responsibility not Gods. We are filled with the Spirit when we sing, when we give thanks and when we subject ourselves to one another.
These verses and the preceding verses are instructions given to individual Christians, i.e., not assembly instructions. The singing instructions then are not primarily regulating congregational (assembly) singing but are primarily about an individual being “filled with the Spirit” by singing. That can be done as an individual, a group of individuals or the assembly. If we say that these verses concerning singing only regulate congregational singing then by the same reasoning “giving thanks” and “subjecting ourselves one to another” would also have to be exclusively congregational (assembly) related. Simply… not true.
Be filled with the Spirit by actively following the instructions listed in Ephesians 5; Sing, give thanks, and place the needs of others before your own needs. It is your spiritual responsibility.
