The Spirit of Christ and Liberalism

As a result of an article I wrote in the past, I was accused of lacking the spirit of Christ in that I opposed adulterous marriages and gay marriage, and the accuser surmised correctly that I also opposed freedom of choice for women as pertains to abortion. It was implied that I was intolerant, unloving, and lacked the spirit of Christ. I determined then to write an article dealing with the spirit of Christ.

There are many people in America today who have built their own Christ. He bears only a vague resemblance to the Christ of the Bible, although those who built him refuse to see it that way. Building one's own God does have its advantage in that you can design him as you desire and make his character and nature out as best suits your fancy and your own concept of sin and righteousness. The only problem is the obvious one—it is all a facade. A manmade Christ can no more save than could Jeroboam's two golden calves (see 1 Kings 18:25-30).

It is said Christ loved all people, even those from the worst class of sinners, and that he associated with all. Well, who has ever denied that? Not me. But the idea is, from those who have built a Christ after their own fancy, that with Christ it is okay to continue on in sin as long as you believe in him, love him, and love your fellowman. Christ would and will forgive you anyway, and did not then or now demand repentance and reformation of life. He, it is supposed, just accepted people as they were in their sinful state. Really!

Matthew says Jesus began his preaching career preaching repentance. "From that time Jesus began to preach and to say, 'Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.'" (Matt. 4:17 NKJV) In Matt. 11:20 we read, "Then He began to rebuke the cities in which most of His mighty works had been done, because they did not repent." (Matt. 11:20 NKJV) Furthermore, in the next few verses, he warns those cities of what lies ahead on the Day of Judgment for them. To give one example, he says it will be more tolerable for Sodom in the Day of Judgment than for Capernaum, which he says "will be brought down to Hades." (Matt. 11:23 NKJV)

When Jesus sent the 12 out to preach, what were they sent to preach? Mark says, "So they went out and preached that people should repent." (Mark 6:12 NKJV) Jesus himself said, "Unless you repent you will all likewise perish." (NKJV) He says this twice, in Luke 13:3 and then in Luke 13:5. Don't let anyone tell you that the spirit of Christ was such that he so loved people to such an extent that he would save them while they continued on in an impenitent state, unwilling to repent and render obedience to God the Father.

In the very first gospel sermon ever preached after Christ's ascension, as soon as the crowd was convicted in their hearts, by Peter's preaching, that Jesus was indeed the Christ, they asked, "What shall we do?" (Acts 2:37 NKJV) The first word out of Peter's mouth in reply was "repent." (Acts 2:38 NKJV) At Athens, Luke records Paul's preaching there, saying "God…now commands all men everywhere to repent." (Acts 17:30 NKJV)

But one must beware of this crowd of people who have made a Jesus who does not require repentance but allows one to live on in sin and yet be saved. Some of them want to make Paul out to be a renegade, a rebel against Christ who preached a different theology, a different gospel than Christ taught. The idea they have is that you can live a life based on what Jesus said and did in the gospel accounts and pay no heed to Paul who was out there just doing his own thing—so they say and believe.

For them to be right about Paul, several things have to be proven true. (1) It must be proven Paul was a liar—a liar about his conversion experience (see Acts 9, 22, 26), a liar about how he received the gospel (Gal. 1:11-12), a liar about having the Holy Spirit (1 Cor.2:13, compare Eph. 3:5 with 1 Cor. 15:9 and 2 Cor. 11:5) and not just that he lied about having the Holy Spirit but that Ananias also lied about Paul receiving it (Acts 9:17).

(2) If Paul was uninspired and a rebel against God and Christ, just a man who had his own theology, then it destroys the book of Acts written by Luke for the reason that Luke would then become an unreliable historian, a man no one could believe, because he writes about Paul's conversion three times as historical fact and mentions that one of the purposes of Ananias' visit to Paul was that he might be filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17) which would be untrue. Paul's miracles, recorded by Luke, then come into question. If the book of Acts is unreliable history, then what about the book of Luke itself? Why should it be considered reliable? The same man wrote both books.

(3) If Paul was not a Holy Spirit inspired man but only a rebel against Christ with his own theology what does this say about Peter who wrote of Paul saying, "Consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation--as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures." (2 Peter 3:15-16 NKJV) Peter says Paul's writings are scripture—"as they do also the rest of the Scriptures."

If Paul's writings are not from the Holy Spirit, then please tell us how one could twist his writings to their own destruction. If he was uninspired you could twist his words a thousand different ways and it would have no bearing whatsoever on your salvation. Paul had the spirit of Christ, his detractors to the contrary notwithstanding.

Those who want to pit Paul against Christ and claim that Paul's teaching was not of Christ will need to delete Luke's writings from their Bibles, as well as Peter's and all of Paul's, and I hope to soon show that they need to get rid of John's writings also. How?

Have you ever read Gal. 2:9, Paul speaking? "And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised." (NKJV) If John gave the right hand of fellowship to Paul, a man who taught falsely about the commands of God, what does that say about John and his writings? If Paul deceived John, how can we believe the things John wrote, for he might have been deceived about those things as well.

Furthermore, if this James, who is mentioned in Gal. 2:9, is, as scholars think, the James who wrote the book of James, then he too was deluded in giving Paul the right hand of fellowship and his writings, as well as John's, then come into question. I guess, of course, one could say Paul was lying about this since he wrote the book of Galatians, but the book of Acts teaches that Paul was in good standing with the apostles and the church in Jerusalem.

You do see, do you not, where all of this business leads about Paul having his own doctrine separate and apart from the Lord's? You end up having to delete every book of the New Testament Paul wrote, that Luke wrote, that John wrote, that Peter wrote, and that James wrote. That leaves but little of the New Testament. Only a liberal could believe it.

This liberal crowd that wants to make Christ out as a God made after their own image err in another way as well. They define love for God the way they so desire rather than the way God has defined it. Here is God's definition, the definition that they will not accept. "By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome." (1 John 5:2-3 NKJV)

Their desire is to override any concern about keeping the commandments of God, thus keeping the door open for continuing on in adulterous marriages, homosexuality, open the door for gay marriage, and keep it open for abortion. This was not the spirit of John the Baptist, "For Herod himself had sent and laid hold of John, and bound him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife; for he had married her. Because John had said to Herod, 'It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife.'" (Mark 6:17-18 NKJV) There had been a divorce and remarriage but God did not recognize it for he said through John that Herodias was still Philip's wife. John was going to break up an adulterous marriage. No need to worry about that among those who have made their own Christ, for their Christ does not demand repentance and reformation of life for salvation.

Their claim is that God is satisfied with adulterous marriages, homosexuality, gay marriage, abortion, etc., because it would be intolerant not to be, and it is an act of love to accept those things in people, accept them without repentance. Passages like 1 Cor. 6:9-10 mean nothing to them (Paul wrote it after all). "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." (NKJV) They do not believe what their eyes read. They claim Christ is on their side, and Paul was a renegade and a rebel. Who do you think had the spirit of Christ? Was it Paul or the modern-day liberal?

Now, how about the spirit of Christ in his own being? Did Christ have the spirit of obedience to the Father or the spirit of disobedience? First, let it be known that Christ was assuredly under commandment from God just as much as you and I are. Jesus said, "This command I have received from My Father." (John 10:18 NKJV) "For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak." (John 12:49 NKJV) "As the Father gave Me commandment, so I do." (John 14:31 NKJV) "I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love." (John 15:10 NKJV)

Jesus says, "For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me." (John 6:38 NKJV) "I always do those things that please Him." (John 8:29 NKJV) "I do know Him and keep His word." (John 8:55 NKJV) Finally, in Rom. 5:19, Paul speaking of Jesus said, "So also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous." (NKJV) One cannot obey unless one has something to obey, a commandment.

Now I ask again, after quoting these passages, was the spirit of Christ one of obedience to God's commandments or one of disobedience? Let my liberal friends answer. Let them answer this question also—who gave them the right to decide what commands of God love can override? Are not all of God's commandments based on love? When a man says this command can be overlooked or ignored (disobeyed), is he not saying that the commandment lacks love? Is he not saying God gave a commandment here that has no love in it, that is, in fact, unloving? Does he really want to stick his neck out on the chopping block like that?

Why does not Mark 7:9 apply to those who so approach the Bible as do these liberals? "All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition." (NKJV) As long as I think I know more about sin and righteousness than God does, as long as I believe my love and my way of showing love is purer than God's way, just that long do I prove myself, not Paul the apostle but myself, the true rebel against God. 

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

Is Water Baptism in John 3:5

From time to time, one is surprised by the ideas that people come up with. One idea that was presented to me and surprised me was the thought that the water mentioned in John 3:5 where Jesus says, “most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (NKJV) had reference not to baptism but to the water of childbirth. I was aware that others explain the water away in other ways as not being baptism, but this childbirth explanation was a new one to me.

In any case, I thought it good to write yet another article on the subject, dealing this time not so much on biblical arguments, for that I have already done in other articles, but upon the historical record to show that today’s interpretations of water in John 3:5 as being something other than baptism are modern-day explanations. While it may seem that many support those views today, it was not that way in the past; in fact, just the opposite.

In the book entitled The Gospel Plan of Salvation, first published in 1874, by T. W. Brents, I quote as follows: “The religious world, with one voice, from the days of Christ until quite recently, has ascribed this language to water baptism.” (Page 490) He goes on to quote a Dr. Wall as follows: “There is not any one Christian writer of any antiquity in any language, but what understands it of baptism.” (Page 490, a quote from Wall’s History of Infant Baptism, Vol. 1, page 147)

Burton Coffman, in his Commentary on John, page 81, says, “It is only quite recently in Christian times that interpretations of this verse have been devised to exclude its obvious reference to Christian baptism.” He goes on to quote John Boys, the Dean of Canterbury, a famous preacher and scholar of the Church of England in the seventeenth century who said of his time (1600’s) that some few (he says “few”--not “many”) were saying that the water of the passage we are speaking of, John 3:5, “are not to be construed of external baptism.”

Boys is further quoted as saying, “Origen, Chrysostom, Augustine, Cyril, Beda, Theophylact, Euthymius, in the commentaries on this place (3:5), along with Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Ambrose, Hierome, Basil, Gregory, Nyssen, and many more, yea most of the Fathers—Hooker, a man of incomparable reading, openeth his mouth wider, avowing peremptorily that all the ancients … have construed this text, as our church doth, of outward baptism.” (as quoted in Burton Coffman, Commentary on John, page 81).

One last quote from Coffman’s commentary is from the famous church historian Phillip Schaff, of the nineteenth century, Professor of Church History, Union Theological Seminary, who said, “It seems impossible to disconnect water in John 3:5 from baptism. Calvin’s interpretation arose from doctrinal opposition to the R. Catholic over-valuation of the sacrament, which must be guarded against in another way.” (quoted in Burton Coffman, Commentary on John, page 82)

Online there is an article entitled, “Born Again: Baptism in the Early Fathers,” from whence I quote this: “Every Christian, all the Church Fathers, bishops, and saints who lived after the apostles (and some while the apostles were still alive) interpreted our Lord's words in John chapter 3 that to be ‘born again’ and ‘born of water and the Spirit’ refers to the Sacrament of Baptism. There are no exceptions. And Protestant scholars frankly admit this fact (note the relevant sections on Baptism in Reformed/Presbyterian scholar Philip Schaff's History of the Christian Church, Anglican scholar J.N.D. Kelly's Early Christian Doctrines, and Lutheran scholar Jaroslav Pelikan's The Christian Tradition).” No author is listed for this article but the home page suggests it is by Phil Porvaznik. In any case, there are extensive quotations from what the author says are all the church fathers through the fifth century to back up his statement of what the thinking was in the early years of the church.  As I prepare to post this, the article is still online at:

https://www.evangelizationstation.com/oldsite/htm_html/Sacraments/Baptism/born_again.htm

Hopefully, it will remain online for some time to come, but there are no guarantees of that.

Because an interpretation is old does not make it right, but conversely, because an interpretation is new does not make it right either. Christianity is now about 2,000 years old. For about 1500 years of that, most who considered themselves Christians understood the passage in John 3:5 pertaining to being born of water as a clear reference to baptism. Modern-day interpretations that differ from that should not be considered infallible simply because they are modern. Not everything new is better than the old. “Thus says the LORD: ‘Stand in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; then you will find rest for your souls.’ But they said, ‘We will not walk in it.’” (Jer. 6:16 NKJV)

Here is a good way to read John 3:5 when people want to give a new interpretation to the water of the passage. Read it transposing the meaning they propose into the passage and see if it makes sense. For example, the passage reads “unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” Now transpose the meaning given by my antagonist, “unless one is born of the water of childbirth and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” That is like saying unless one is born a human being he cannot enter the kingdom of God. As the kids today would say, “Well, duh.”

There is no warrant for understanding the water of John 3:5 being anything other than baptism. We see multitudes of people being baptized in water in the book of Acts. That practice, plus many other passages emphasizing the need for water baptism in the scriptures, ought to settle any questions about the matter.

I understand I have not discussed John 3:5 with regard to making scriptural arguments. I said in the beginning that the purpose of this article was to throw some light on the historical record and not do what I have already done before in several different articles where I have discussed the passage in depth from a scriptural perspective.  

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

The Christian, Politics, and the Government

What role, if any, should the Christian play in politics? All any man can know about the subject is what the Bible says and since it was written for the benefit and enlightenment of all men in all ages from the time it was first penned until the last day of this earth’s existence and for all cultures and under all the different kinds of governments it speaks to us not in specifics but in general statements on the subject. As it relates to specifics, it is sometimes hard to know exactly what one ought to do under some scenarios that arise but we have God given principles to guide us.

That America is a deeply divided nation, no one doubts. There are two very distinct trains of thought in our society about what the nature of our country ought to be, and it seems any middle ground has disappeared, leading to anger and bitterness on both sides. So where does a Christian fit in, what does he do, what should he do? What does the Bible teach?

First of all, it should be clear to all who truly want to be what a Christian ought to be that one’s first order of business is to be as much of a Christian as he/she can be every single day of his/her life. What does that mean? It means I should live a spiritual life daily. “The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.” (Gal. 5:22-23 NKJV) Just above this passage in Gal. 5:19-21 are listed the “works of the flesh” (V. 19) of which I would like to list two of those works as they pertain most directly to the topic at hand (politics), namely, “hatred” (v. 20) and “outbursts of wrath” (v. 20). The reader can clearly see the contrasts between the works of the flesh and those of the spirit.

Furthermore, there is a passage in Eph. 4:31 which also speaks directly to the issue, “Let all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking be put away from you, with all malice.” (NKJV)

When we Americans are so deeply divided over the issues, it is very easy for a citizen who is also a Christian to become bitter and angry and think and speak evil of others who are in opposition, and even reach the point where he/she despises them in his/her heart. Yes, the Bible teaches we ought to hate evil, “You who love the Lord, hate evil!” (Psalms 97:10 NKJV, see also Prov. 8:13 and Amos 5:15) Hate the evil but love the person. “He who does not love does not know God, for God is love.” (1 John 4:8 NKJV)

We ought to hate the evil a government does when it enacts laws that are contrary and supportive of evil (say, as examples, laws supporting gay marriage and abortion), and it must be admitted, for it cannot be denied, that government is made up of the men and women who make the laws. Yes, they are responsible for the evil a government may allow or do in its lawmaking and governing capacity, but in a democracy, we are also accountable in that we vote the lawmakers and the executive into or out of office. We, as a nation, will be held accountable, which means we need to vote for those candidates running for office who are most supportive of Christian principles.

We can and ought to hate laws that are contrary to God’s teaching in the New Testament, and the kind of thinking that leads to those laws, but yet have compassion for the misguided lawmakers who made them in that each has a soul that is worth more than all of the wealth of this world combined. “For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?” (Matt. 16:26 NKJV) Jesus said, “I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.” (Mark 2:17 NKJV) That was his mission. What is the mission of his servants? Are we in the condemning them to hell camp or are we in the converting them to Christ camp?

If our reaction to ungodly laws that are passed is one of hatred, anger, bitterness, railing, and reviling against the lawmakers then we have done two things--(1) we have allowed politics to destroy our own soul and our hope for heaven and (2) we have ended any hope that those responsible can be converted due to our unchristian attitude and reaction toward them.

Do not misunderstand, the unjust are not going to heaven, which includes lawmakers who have promoted sin via the laws they have helped pass. The Bible does not teach that they are. It does teach, however, that the Christian’s job is to do his/her best to bring the world to Christ. We must teach the truth of the Bible on every Bible subject. If the powers that be in government reject the truth, God will deal with them on the last day. “'Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.” (Rom. 12:19 NKJV) As for the Christian God says, “give place to wrath” (Rom. 12:19 NKJV) or as the ESV translates it, “never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God.” (Rom. 12:19 ESV)

The Bible teaches we ought to pray for those in authority. “Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” (1 Tim. 2:1-4 NKJV)

One might say what do we pray for when we pray for them? We might pray a number of things. We might pray that they be given wisdom, that if there is need that they might be led to repentance, we might pray that God would work providentially in their life to help them see the light, we might pray for their welfare and that of their family, and as the text says, we should give thanks for them. We might say sometimes what is there to be thankful for in some men? Well, we ought to look for the good.

No one was ever more unjustly mistreated by the government than Jesus himself. Pilate declared Jesus innocent when he said, “I am innocent of the blood of this just person” (Matt. 27:24 NKJV) and then turned right around and had Jesus “scourged” (Matt. 27:26 NKJV) and handed him over to be put to death. Do you think that might have aroused bitterness and anger in most of us had we been in Jesus’ shoes or been a family member or close friend? Yet, Jesus “was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth.” (Isa. 53:7 NKJV)

Peter says, “When he was reviled, did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but committed himself to him who judges righteously.” (1 Peter 2:23 NKJV) God is the ultimate judge of all things and everyone. The government may do great evil, but the Christian answer is to follow the example of Jesus. “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” (Rom. 12:21 NKJV) “Do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.” (Rom. 12:19 NKJV)

That God judges governments (thus countries) cannot be doubted by anyone who has ever read the Old Testament prophets. It was not just Israel and Judah that God judged and brought to ruin because of their sins. If you read the Old Testament, you will read of nation after nation that God prophesied judgment against through his prophets and eventually brought them to their downfall.

Even before that, we can go back to the time when the children of Israel were given the land of Palestine after they departed from Egypt. Why did God drive out and destroy those nations that occupied the land before Israel? Because of evil, of sin, of wrongdoing. Moses speaking on behalf of God told Israel prior to their entry into the Promised Land that “it is because of the wickedness of these nations that the Lord is driving them out from before you.” (Deut. 9:4 NKJV) Every nation God brought judgment against in the Old Testament was brought to judgment because of its sin and evil.

A couple of points need to be made here. (1) Generally speaking, a country comes to be whatever its leadership leads it to be or allows it to be. Thus, in the Old Testament history of God’s people, we read of good kings and bad kings. When a bad king ruled, idolatry and other evils were in the ascendancy; when a good king came to power, a check was put on that and some, if not all, of the evil was rolled back. Leadership (government) is always for the better or the worse. (2) God will eventually judge a nation for its evil, even if the leadership led it to be that way, unless there is repentance. Needless to say, repentance is hard to come by. (The reader would do well to read Jer. 18:7-10.)

Unfortunately, from a human point of view, when God brings judgment on a nation, the just often suffer along with the unjust, even if it is only for a time. When Judah was carried away into Babylonian captivity for the sins of the nation, Daniel and his three friends had to go too, even though guilty of no sin themselves. The just became captives along with the unjust.

Romans 13 is the chapter that tells us our duties as Christians toward the government. “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” (Rom. 13:1 ESV) Paul goes on to say, “Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.” (Rom. 13:2 ESV) Paul then goes on to explain that government is meant for our good, not to bring evil upon us. (Rom. 13:3-7) I think we all understand the need for government and how there must be laws, rules, and regulations for our safety and well-being. Try and imagine living in a world of utter chaos and lawlessness where there was no government at all and it was every man for himself.

There is also a passage in Titus we need to take note of, “Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men.” (Titus 3:1-2 NKJV) So, we are to obey the government, but there is more in this passage for our consideration. One who desires to get involved in politics ought to ask himself this question: Can I do it and obey the scriptures at the same time? Will it lead me to be peaceable, gentle, to be humble, and to never speak evil of another, or will it make all of that harder for me?

By getting involved, I am not speaking about running for office (although that would be included) as much as I am about becoming immersed in politics so intensely that it comes to be a major part of one's life and being. We need to be informed citizens and know the issues and the candidates, but when I become so immersed in politics through the news outlets and programs that it begins to dominate my life, almost like being possessed, that is what I have in mind and what I am talking about. Is that good for the Christian? Will it help or hinder you in developing the fruit of the Spirit in your life?

Does there ever come a time when government must be resisted? Peter answered that question in Acts 5:29 when he said, “We ought to obey God rather than men.” (NKJV) He was not speaking to the Roman authorities when he spoke, but rather to the Jewish authorities. Nevertheless, the principle would be the same. If our government were to fall into the hands of Islam and we were commanded by law to abandon the Bible and Jesus as Lord, do you think God would say okay, obey the government you are now under, become a Muslim? To ask is to answer.

When I say that under such circumstances we ought to resist the government, I do not mean by taking up arms. Christians do not go to war to fight, kill, and maim, but we ought to do as Peter and the other apostles did. What did Peter and the other apostles do? They simply continued to go on about their business of being Christians and doing the Lord’s will. Now I grant you some Christians did die because of it (Stephen and later James come to mind) but they were to “rejoice to the extent that you partake of Christ’s sufferings.” (1 Peter 4:13 NKJV) “Therefore let those who suffer according to the will of God commit their souls to him in doing good, as to a faithful creator.” (1 Peter 4:19 NKJV)

The Christians in the church of Smyrna were told, “Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.” (Rev. 2:10 KJV) Here is an example of the government throwing Christians into prison (who else had that power) and possibly, if I understand the passage correctly, ending in their death, although the phrase does not have to mean that. It is certainly, however, an admonition to faithfulness even if death is the result.

The Bible does not teach that every single government that has ever existed has been good and done what is right. If so, why did God destroy the nations he did in the Old Testament? If so, why were Christians murdered by the Roman government in the first two to three centuries after the Christian faith came to be? It does teach us to submit to government and only resist in the way I have spoken of, and only do that when the laws made by men violate the law of God. The resistance consists of living as a Christian despite what the government demands.

The God given purpose of government is for the good of man. However, as long as men are the governing body, men will be men, which inevitably means there will be some ungodliness in them. That is not God’s fault but man’s.  Both David and his son Solomon were great kings but both also proved to be sinners.

So, to what extent should a Christian become involved in politics? I will ask a better question, one that is also easier to answer and is more personal. To what extent do you think you can do so and still maintain the fruit of the Spirit and be the person God would have you to be?

When I answer that question, I know it sets some severe limits on my involvement. As a Christian living in a democracy and having been given the right to vote I feel I have the duty to go vote, even if it means for the lesser of two evils, so to speak. Beyond that, I think I need to leave it with God for my soul’s sake.

If we believe God is still an active God in the affairs of man (I believe the Bible teaches he is) then he is going to work it all out eventually in the way that is in accord with his will and righteous nature. Yes, that may mean sometimes evil men rule, but they rule for a reason if they do (God knows why). But always bear in mind God is in charge. Daniel talks about a decree made against King Nebuchadnezzar in Dan. 4:17 and says it was made, “In order that the living may know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, gives it to whomever he will, and sets over it the lowest of men.” (NKJV)

God is in charge. Evil governments may arise for a time but they shall be punished for their evil eventually. If you think your government is evil and doing wrong, and you are right about that, God will take care of it in due time, one way or another, unless there is repentance. Sin never goes unpunished unless repented of and forgiven. But the question is for me as an individual--what do I do as it relates to politics and the government? The answer is I live as a Christian. 

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

The Parable of the Ten Virgins

The parable of the ten virgins found in Matt. 25:1-13 has more to say to us than we often realize. One of the things that troubles a person most, that nags and gnaws at our spirit, is when we mess up, make a bad mistake, and then have to pay for it when we knew from the beginning what it was we needed to do, which would have avoided the whole mess, but simply failed to do it for one reason or another. We blame ourselves for the trouble we get ourselves into, and rightly so. There is much of that in the parable of the ten virgins.

You likely know the parable but I will give a brief summary. In ancient times in the Middle East, when there was a wedding, it was the Jewish custom for the bridegroom to go to the house of his father-in-law to receive his bride and then to return to either his own home or a designated location for the wedding and all that went with it. There would be appointed a company of virgins to meet him and his beloved with lanterns to accompany them upon their return to the place of the festivities and to enter with them and enjoy and take part in the celebration.

In the account found in Matthew, the bridegroom tarried and did not arrive nearly as soon as expected. The ten virgins fell asleep but were awakened by the cry of his imminent appearance and prepared immediately to go out and greet the couple and fulfill their duties to bring them in to commence the wedding. The problem was that five of the ten virgins found they were running out of oil for their lamps, which were going out, and had brought nothing with them to carry them over in such a contingency. The other five had prepared for such a thing but had not enough extra oil to give out lest they too run out. The five who lacked sufficient oil made a hasty trip to purchase from those who sold but upon their return found that “the door was shut” and they were not allowed entrance.

The main lesson of the parable is about the need to be prepared for the Lord’s return--“Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming.” (Matt. 25:13 NKJV) But, I want to take as in-depth a look at this parable as I am capable of doing and get from it everything I can for there are lessons here that I am persuaded are often overlooked.

(1) Not every person who will be lost, who has the door shut on them, is a bad person by human standards. I do not know a single charge that could be brought against the five virgins who ran short of oil other than that they were negligent in their lack of adequate preparation. Nothing negative is said about their character or conduct whatsoever aside from this one charge. From all we can tell they seemed to be good people with but one fault.

Thus, one lesson we see in this parable is that being a good person by itself is not enough. Not all good people by society’s standards obey the gospel. Good people, by human standards, will be lost. Peter asks, “What will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel?” (1 Peter 4:17 NKJV, see also 2 Thess. 1:7-9) To ask is to answer.

I know families as honest as the day, morally above reproach, kind, generous, do not drink, do not curse, have a great family and family life, yet have no interest in religion, in Christ, the Bible, or God, although they may offer a prayer at the Thanksgiving meal. They may, if pressed, make a claim to believe in God but a Bible would last them a thousand years for it would never be used, nor would there ever be any point in expecting to see them in public worship. In many ways they are good people, good like the five virgins who were lost. They are lost because they have made no preparation.

The rich young ruler was an example of an otherwise good man who was lost. We find his story in Matt. 19:16-30, Mark 10:17-22, and Luke 18:18-30. He comes to Jesus and asks what he must do to inherit eternal life. Jesus lists a number of commandments and he answers and says, “Teacher, all these things I have kept from my youth.” (Mark 10:20 NKJV) Did he lie? No! But, he lacked one thing--he loved his wealth and was not yet willing to give it up. The Bible says Jesus loved this man (Mark 10:21) and yet despite the good life of the young man in keeping all the commandments and despite Jesus’ love for him, he was lost. Yes, people you and I might call good can and will be lost. God does not measure by society’s standards.

(2) Not every person who will be lost has a bad heart. The five who fell out of favor wanted the right thing. They had a desire to do well and be with the right people. In the parable, the wedding party and guests represent the saints, with the bridegroom being Jesus, so we could say that even the five unprepared virgins were seeking the company of God’s people.

I sometimes hear people talking about their heart and how their heart tells them they are okay with God. We must have a clear conscience before God, but Paul’s heart was good while he was persecuting Christians for the simple reason that he thought he was doing God’s will. He said after his arrest in Jerusalem, while before the council there, “I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.” (Acts 23:1 NKJV) One cannot have a good conscience while having a bad heart pricking his soul.

To us, the heart seems right, and so we are at peace with God in our minds even though we may well be at war with him unknowingly. One must be very careful about his heart. “The heart is deceitful above all things; and desperately wicked; who can know it?” (Jer. 17:9 NKJV)

How applicable that is to the hearts of the five virgins who were unprepared. They had no inkling of anything being wrong whatsoever until the very end. The heart (the emotions in their case) felt right, but the mind was not thinking, not considering the possibilities, and thus they were given in the end, each according to their ways.

(The Bible heart consists of the emotions, the will, and the mind of man. Sometimes in speaking of the heart, the Bible will have reference to only one of these constituents, while at other times it takes the comprehensive view; thus, one must take care in reading carefully the text in context. The five foolish virgins had the proper emotions, but evidently that overrode what should have been a proper concern by the mind of contingency plans and the will to provide for such an eventuality. Trusting in emotions is a risky business at best which is why many bad marriages are made--the mind is thrust out of the decision-making process.)

(3) Not every person who is lost is totally negligent. The five unprepared virgins had made preparations up to a point. It is no easy task to prepare for a wedding. They had worked, no doubt, preparing for the occasion, if in nothing else, in getting themselves prepared with proper dress, etc. They were also prompt, on time, in fact, early as it turned out. Early but not adequately prepared.

Being unprepared in one aspect of one’s life is enough to ruin the whole thing. So I have faith. What if I do not have works? James says, “Faith without works is dead.” (James 2:26 NKJV) The Christian life is a balanced life. In what area is one to be unprepared? Is it in faith, in works, in love, in worship, in longsuffering, in self-control? Where are we to be unprepared? This is not to say we can reach perfection, but it is to say we cannot be negligent in developing Christian character and fulfilling Christian responsibilities. Remember, as far as we can tell from the account given, the five foolish virgins were prepared fully in every way but one.

(4) When a door is shut, it is shut. There comes a time, even in this life, when doors are shut never to be opened again. This thought was really the catalyst for this article. There are so many things that need to be done today, but we procrastinate. There are relationships that need to be repaired. It ought to be done today, but we are betting on tomorrow or waiting on the other guy to make the first move. Doors only stay open for a time, and many once closed will always remain so. When you are eighty-five, it is a little hard to say you are going to college, and by doing so, it will open financial doors of opportunity for you.

The lesson is simple enough. Do today what you need to get done, and do not put it off any longer. The Bible never promises a tomorrow. “You do not know what will happen tomorrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away.” (James 4:14 NKJV) “Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.” (2 Cor. 6:2 NKJV) When Noah built the ark and entered therein, God shut the door. (Gen. 7:16 NKJV) That door, when shut, remained shut. We need to act today before our doors are shut never to open again.

The five foolish virgins had a door of opportunity to prepare, as do we, but time runs out, and when that happens, we can say in all truthfulness the door has been shut.

(5) Presumptions are dangerous. Certainly, all would agree the foolish virgins presumed an early arrival and plenty of oil for their needs. They lived with that presumption and suffered with it as well. The word “presumptuous” as in “presumptuous sins” as found in Psalms 19:13, where David prayed, “keep back your servant also from presumptuous sins,” (NKJV) has reference to sins of pride which proceed from an over-reliance on self-confidence. The five foolish virgins were self-confident in their preparation. They certainly thought they had everything under control. We ought to learn from that.

It is dangerous to rely on oneself and make presumptions. Rather than make presumptions, why not just take God’s word on matters relating to life and godliness? The Bible today has basically been rewritten by many of the major religious bodies in existence. They will live and die with their new interpretations of what God’s word says (means). It is a life of religious presumption. They presume this or that pleases God without any word from God. As we live, so we die. On that day, the door is shut forever.

(6) There is danger in living a foolish life. “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” (Psalms 14:1 NKJV) The five virgins who did not prepare adequately were foolish and paid for it. Amos, the prophet, warned Israel, “Prepare to meet your God, O Israel!” (Amos 4:12 NKJV) We will all meet God one day. The day of death is, for all practical purposes, that day. That is the day the bridegroom cometh. Will we be found wise and prepared or foolish and unprepared?

We are often foolish out of ignorance, but why are we ignorant? In religious matters, it is often because we refuse to become serious students of God’s word. We live a life of religious emotionalism rather than of serious study of God’s word. We don’t know what God teaches. We only know what we hear on TV or what the preacher says. 

God speaking through Hosea said in days gone by, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” (Hosea 4:6 NKJV) Have things improved among mankind?

The five foolish virgins should have been aware of the possibility of a delay. Surely, this was not the first time a bridegroom had ever been delayed in his coming. But they refused to give the thought any serious consideration. They had the knowledge to know what could happen, but rejected knowledge and refused to give it serious consideration, just as people do with God’s word today.

(7) Finally, there is no such thing as living off the godliness of another. I cannot loan you love for God, or faith, or works, or give you godly character. Those are personal things we each must develop for ourselves. If Christ is to live within me, then I must be the one who cultivates that relationship, seek and desire it. It takes time and effort to develop mature Christian character. I can no more get you a college degree with your name on it and all the knowledge and benefits acquired from the pursuit of it than I can make you a godly Christian. Both require individual effort.

If you want to know the Bible, you must study it. I cannot do it for you. If you want to live a faithful life, you must do it; I cannot do it for you. If you want to serve God and mankind, you are the one who must do it. So, the bottom line is the choice is ours, each one of us. On the last day, we will either be among the wise or the foolish. It is our choice.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]