Author: Rich Leino

Categories
Theology

Theonomy: Three Questions Answered

Jacob asked the following:

Theonomy is concerned with three irreducible questions, which anti-theonomists cannot answer in an epistemologically satisfactory manner:

1) Which sins should civil magistrates punish?
2) What should those punishments be?
3) How does one justify the answers to the first two questions?

If we are left to govern ourselves by general revelation, then civil laws must be ultimately a matter of opinion, yet laws by their very nature are to reflect what ought to be. Moreover, apart from Scripture inductive inference cannot be justified. Therefore, apart from Scripture it would be baseless to infer that all persons are endowed by nature with the same moral code. Accordingly, it would be tyrannical to impose unjustifiable codes of conduct, let alone sanctions for violations of those codes, upon others who do not claim to share those same codes.

My answer:

1) Which sins should civil magistrates punish?
The sins that God gives them the authority to punish.

2) What should those punishments be?
Generally based on the rule of restitution. The Law gives case law to indicate that you replace that which you take in the offense.

3) How does one justify the answers to the first two questions?
The Bible.

OK, I answered the questions so here’s my “beef”.

I don’t have a problem discussing the general principle that the laws of the magistrate ought to reflect God’s Law. I think, theoretically, if a country wants to punish blasphemy with the death penalty that it is not unjust for them to do so. To be unjust, intrinsically, would point to some sort of justice that is extra-Scriptural and the idea is not extra-Scriptural that blasphemy could be punished by death. Even leaving aside the issue of whether the magistrate should do so, it seems to me at least, to be pointless to argue whether the Magistrate would be making an unjust law if it decided to enforce that idea.

Now, here is where I start to get off the bus because, while I agree with that basic principle, I don’t see the Church’s chief aim as being activism to ensure that the Magistrate is introducing those laws.

The problem I have with those of a theonomic bent (though I don’t have a huge problem with them) is that they seem to devote more time worrying about transforming the Magistrate than the Apostles did. It is an argument from silence and I’m unlikely to win any debates to persuade a theonomist from his path but the general trend of NT doctrine is clear enough to me to believe that it is NOT the Church’s principle focus.

In other words, if all a theonomist wants me to agree to is the idea that a Magistrate would not be unjust for creating a law that punishes blasphemy by stoning a man to death then I am not going to spend a long time arguing that God is offended at the idea that a Magistrate would punish someone for blaspheming Him. It’s all very theoretical to me of course. BUT, if the same man wants me to join him in a crusade to tell the Pastor that he’s not preaching cultural transformation enough and that the Church needs to spend more time leading the charge to storm the State Legislature and lobby for the creation of those laws then I would tell him to pound sand.

The Church’s mission is the preaching of the Word, the administration of the Sacraments, and Church Discipline. Ironically, the most rebellious people I’ve met in the latter category are theonomists who would not submit to Church Discipline even as they wanted pagans to submit to God’s Law.

I believe, however, that as a citizen I have the right to exercise my time and talents to reform Civic institutions. I also believe that Magistrates will be judged for creating and enforcing laws in disobedience to the Law of God written on their consciences and will also be judged for failing to write laws that God has ordained. But that is their responsibility to create and enforce the proper laws and it is not the Church’s job to spend all it’s time, moving away from it’s primary mission, to pick up the slack where the Magistrate is failing. I believe they have a prophetic role to the State and that the State is further condemned for not listening but that does not make it the Church’s mission to do the State’s job.

Categories
Sacraments

Infant Baptism: The Difference between Roman Catholicism and Reformed Theology

What’s the difference between the RC view and the Reformed view of infant baptism?

Peace,

jm

Much in every way! The Roman Catholic view sees baptism first as an act of Grace that occurs “by the working of the works”. That is, the Sacrament itself, infuses Grace and effectively places the child in a state of grace before God. The grace infused, however, is conditional. The grace can be overthrown and killed in the individual by sin.

The Reformed view is that baptism is ministerial. That is, the minister announces what God has promised in His Word concerning the Covenant inclusion of children and it initiates the child into the covenant community. While the sign and seal of Baptism are not separate from what they signify (real union with Christ) they are not identical. That is to say that we do not believe that the minister is actually conferring union with Christ on the child by the “working of the works” but is announcing the promise of God. That promise is that what Baptism signifies (union with Christ) is promised to the child when he places trust in the Gospel. It is the same thing for an adult in fact. As surely as you see the water signifiying the washing of the filth of the flesh, so are your sins washed away if you believe in the Gospel. It is a visible sign and seal of God’s promise to us that we can look to when the enemy is so oft telling us we are not worthy of such Grace.

In RC baptism, you get in by the Church’s ability to infuse God’s saving grace and you stay in by cooperating with that grace lest you kill it and your “grace meter” goes to a point where justifying grace is killed.

In Reformed baptism, the minister declares the promise of God and seals God’s promises to the recipient. Grace, through faith, saves from beginning to end.

I have a problem with the term presumptive regeneration because presumption carries a connotation that I do not believe parents should have. When I presume something, it means I can take it for granted and little is expected on my part. I know that’s a semantic issue but words have consequences. I also don’t like the idea of presuming regeneration simply because I don’t know the hidden counsel of God. I look at it this way: my chilren are Christians and I treat them like that. I don’t treat them like they’re tiny pagans in my household with no different status than my pagan neighbors before God. They are holy because they are in my Covenant household. This gracious God says to me: “I’m not just promising to save you but your children as well.” A glorious thing indeed that those most dear to me in this world, beside my wife, are not my spiritual enemies.

I pray with them like little Christians with a seminal faith – faith as small as a mustard seed (thank you Rev. Winzer). I know that God has promised to save them if they call upon His name just as He has promised to save me under the same Covenant promise. I do not question their election any more than I question mine for my business is God’s precepts and not His hidden decree.

And so, contrary to my Roman Catholic upbringing, when my children sin, I do not raise them to worry that they’re in danger of hellfire as they have just killed the infused grace within them and need to have the Church dispense more saving grace in Penance. Rather, I discipline them as one who believes their sin has been punished in Christ. I train them to ask their Heavenly Father for forgiveness that they have offended Him in their sin, and I teach them to thank Christ for the salvation of sins found only in Him for those that believe in Him.

The difference between Roman Catholic Baptism and Reformed Baptism (aka Christian) is the difference between the doctrine of demons and a visible sign and seal of God’s Grace to His elect.

Categories
Devotion

On Assurance of Salvation

I think I get all my ideas on things to post from the Puritanboard.  We were talking about forgiveness of sins this past week in Sunday School and this conversation brought to mind some reflections on the Gospel and our assurance of salvation.  A brother asked:

If one has trouble or find that one can not seem to forgive someone for a wrong can one really be assured of one’s own salvation? This question is just something that I have been wrestling with.

Have you ever questioned whether you are saved or not? After reading Jonathan Edwards “religious affections” One thought that came to mind is that, I wonder if I am really what I think that I am. If I am not a believer this is truly somekind of self-deception. I need some stuff on assurance. All I know is that Jesus came into my life back in 1993 and I have never been the same since.

This is a very simplistic statement that needs a lot of reflection behind it but the bottom line is that if we never struggled and were never weak then what need would there be of faith in Christ’s work?

Living with the accusation that Satan whispers in our ear every time we sin “You’re not really a Christian are you?” is hard enough. What makes things harder is the error that surrounds us in so many “Christian” circles where people are taught that you’ve not really repented of something unless you stop doing it.

I’m so thankful that God found me and rescued me to the Gospel for it exposed me to Christ’s sufficiency and caused me to stop leaning on my own strength. I had been a Roman Catholic in my childhood and then an Evangelical for years but never found peace. I tried to battle, I tried to wage war against the flesh and the world but I failed repeatedly in my strength and was beaten back. Who was going to deliver me from this body of death?!

But I know now that, ultimately, I’m fighting against a foe that has lost its mastery of me. I know that Christ’s strength will renew me. I hear the Gospel remind me that Christ did not die for me because I was worthy. I see the Sacraments speaking God’s promise of salvation and means of spiritual nourishment. I look back on my own baptism when I cannot believe that God would save me and remember that seemingly insane promise (according to the world) that God would save me simply by trusting in and believing in His Son.

And so I sin and I sin mightily and I want to retreat from God and re-double my efforts and promise Him, on my own strength, that I’m going to try harder. Maybe then, I reason in my denial of the Gospel, will God accept me.

But then He finds me with His Gospel yet again and says to me: “Do you believe?” and I cry out “Lord I believe, help thou my unbelief!” And in the simple trust of a son who loves and is grateful to His Father, I discover again the desire to please Him and the fountain of strength toward that end.

And so I find myself continuing in the fight, striving against sin, with fear and trembling, trusting that God is at work in me to will and do His good pleasure.

On the Consumption of Alchohol and Christian Liberty

I picked out one of the posts from the PuritanBoard to discuss an issue with respect to liberty. bfrank writes:

A few years ago I was sitting outside on a patio enjoying a pint with a buddy, having theological and personal discussions…there was absolutely no problem in my conscience or faith about the issue. I knew the Scriptures did not condemn alcohol, but drunkeness. One thing we both gleaned from the afternoon was that if Jesus Christ Himself walked into the place we would have no problem whatsoever. However, if some of the members from church walked in it would be a very uncomfortable situation. Of course this caused further study on my part so that I was certain I wasn't using my liberty for license and that I was on solid biblical ground. I had a friend who was meeting with a pastor friend. The pastor told him that drinking in any form should not be tolerated. He said that the Christian should avoid the appearance of evil, so as to not cause a weaker brother to stumble. He preceded to order a virgin strawberry daquiri. My friend began to scratch his head in disbelief…thinking, "Isn't this the appearance of "evil"? LOL

First, I want to correct the "pastor friend" in the story above. The "weaker brother" in Paul's Epistles is the Pastor! The weaker brother is the Christian who is overly scrupulous where God permits liberty of conscience. Jews who were still convicted, for instance, that they had to abstain from pork were "weaker brothers" and Paul is commanding the Gentile brethren not to give unnecessary offense to cause them to stumble.

NOW, here is the rub. I'm starting to think that I am probably too tolerant of what is not a "weaker brother" spirit with respect to things indifferent but a PHARASAICAL spirit with respect to things indifferent. I believe the response to the weaker brother ought to be done carefully and tenderly but the Pharisee ought to be withstood to his face as a Scriptural pattern.

Calvin's treatment of Christian liberty is quoted in part below and he does a great job of differentiating between a personal scruple and a human tradition that super-adds to the Scriptures that binds the consciences of men. Does the Southern Baptist Conventions' ruling that those who consume alchohol should be excluded from Church Office constitute something that Christians should condemn as Pharasaical?  Incidentally, the ruling says that a Southern Baptist is not even permitted to work at an establishment that serves alcoholic beverages.

More basically, however, what if a pastor is teaching this? Should we, like Paul did to Peter, withstand that spirit and, if so, how?  Pastors and Elders, after all, are not supposed to be those that are weak in the faith.  It is, frankly, a sad state of affairs that those who ought to be teachers of men (and are in such positions) need to be taught on the basic principles of the Gospel.  For make no mistake about it:  the issue of Christian Liberty stabs at the very heart of the Gospel and those who begin on the path of the Pharisee run the risk of losing far more than their Christian Liberty.

Without further ado, here is John Calvin from his treatment on Christian Liberty in the Instituties of the Christian Religion

11. I will here make some observations on offenses, what distinctions are to be made between them, what kind are to be avoided and what disregarded. This will afterwards enable us to determine what scope there is for our liberty among men. We are pleased with the common division into offense given and offense taken, since it has the plain sanction of Scripture, and not improperly expresses what is meant. If from unseasonable levity or wantonness, or rashness, you do any thing out of order or not in its own place, by which the weak or unskillful are offended, it may be said that offense has been given by you, since the ground of offense is owing to your fault. And in general, offense is said to be given in any matter where the person from whom it has proceeded is in fault. Offense is said to be taken when a thing otherwise done, not wickedly or unseasonably, is made an occasion of offense from malevolence or some sinister feeling. For here offense was not given, but sinister interpreters ceaselessly take offense. By the former kind, the weak only, by the latter, the ill-tempered and Pharisaical are offended. Wherefore, we shall call the one the offense of the weak, the other the offense of Pharisees, and we will so temper the use of our liberty as to make it yield to the ignorance of weak brethren, but not to the austerity of Pharisees. What is due to infirmity is fully shown by Paul in many passages. “Him that is weak in the faith receive ye.” Again, “Let us not judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling-block, or an occasion to fall, in his brother’s way;” and many others to the same effect in the same place, to which, instead of quoting them here, we refer the reader. The sum is, “We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let every one of us please his neighbor for his good to edification.” elsewhere he says, “Take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling-block to them that are weak.” Again “Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake.” “Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other.” Finally, “Give none offense, neither to the Jews nor to the Gentiles nor to the Church of God.” Also in another passage, “Brethren, ye have been called into liberty, only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.”46 455455 61 461 Rom. 14:1, 13; 16:1; 1 Cor. 8:9; 10:25, 29, 32; Gal. 5:13. Thus, indeed, it is: our liberty was not given us against our weak neighbors, whom charity enjoins us to serve in all things, but rather that, having peace with God in our minds, we should live peaceably among men. What value is to be set upon the offense of the Pharisees we learn from the words of our Lord, in which he says, “Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind,” (Mt. 15:14). The disciples had intimated that the Pharisees were offended at his words. He answers that they are to be let alone that their offense is not to be regarded.

12. The matter still remains uncertain, unless we understand who are the weak and who the Pharisees: for if this distinction is destroyed, I see not how, in regard to offenses, any liberty at all would remain without being constantly in the greatest danger. But Paul seems to me to have marked out most clearly, as well by example as by doctrine, how far our liberty, in the case of offense, is to be modified or maintained. When he adopts Timothy as his companion, he circumcises him: nothing can induce him to circumcise Titus (Acts 16:3; Gal. 2:3). The acts are different, but there is no difference in the purpose or intention; in circumcising Timothy, as he was free from all men, he made himself the servant of all: “Unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; to them that are without law, as without law (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ), that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some” (1 Cor. 9:20-22). We have here the proper modification of liberty, when in things indifferent it can be restrained with some advantage. What he had in view in firmly resisting the circumcision of Titus, he himself testifies when he thus writes: “But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: and that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: to whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you,” (Gal. 2:3-5). We here see the necessity of vindicating our liberty when, by the unjust exactions of false apostles, it is brought into danger with weak consciences. In all cases we must study charity, and look to the edification of our neighbor. “All things are lawful for me,” says he, “but all things are not expedient; all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not. Let no man seek his own, but every man another’s wealth,” (1 Cor. 10:23, 24). There is nothing plainer than this rule, that we are to use our liberty if it tends to the edification of our neighbor, but if inexpedient for our neighbor, we are to abstain from it. There are some who pretend to imitate this prudence of Paul by abstinence from liberty, while there is nothing for which they less employ it than for purposes of charity. Consulting their own ease, they would have all mention of liberty buried, though it is not less for the interest of our neighbor to use liberty for their good and edification, than to modify it occasionally for their advantage. It is the part of a pious man to think, that the free power conceded to him in external things is to make him the readier in all offices of charity.

Categories
Sacraments Theology

Responding to a concern that I misrepresented Greg Welty

I have been very busy as of late and was deployed to Korea for an exercise.  While there, a reader who is a friend of Greg Welty had concerns with my post A Critique of Greg Welty's Use of Galations in "From Circumcision to Baptism".  Here is the concern raised:

Greg had said in his paper: 

"What was the heresy of the Judaizers in the book of Galatians?

Fundamentally, their error was to contend that the command to circumcise was essential to the perpetuity of the Abrahamic Covenant and its promises and blessings. Thus, according to them, Gentile converts were required to be circumcised in order to be members of the family of God."

On Greg's view, central to the "promises and blessings" of the Abraham Covenant is *justification itself*. The error of the Judaizers was that you needed to be circumcised in order to be saved. As you rightly observed  "The error was trust in the Law. The error was a reliance upon the Law as a means of Justification." What he says is exactly what Greg believes.

Greg affirms that the Abrahamic Covenant was an administration of the covenant of grace, and is a redemptive covenant. And it's because he holds to classic covenant theology, that I stated things as I did.

His point in the material you cited was *not* to say that the error of the paedobaptist, in his view, was identical to the error of the Judaizer. He explicitly distinguished the two. In the very next paragraph (which you didn't cite), Greg wrote:

"While their error is usually not as serious as that of the Judaizers, the paedobaptist commits a similar error, by contending that the command to apply a covenant sign to one's children is essential to the perpetuity of the Abrahamic Covenant, and its promises and blessings."

The only reason he brought up the Judaizing error is to expose an *analogy* between it and the paedobaptist error. That's all. Also, that analogy bears little argumentative weight in his presentation. It's illustrative at best. My argument that the paedobaptist position is indeed an error is made on other grounds.

So, essentially, you seem to have latched onto an illustration as if it's an argument, but neither I nor Greg is sure you understood his illustration, since you seemed to impute a position to Greg that he does not hold, and that isn't entailed by what he wrote.  You might want to go back and revisit that particular entry.

First, let me state that I am not above reproach.  I carefully read what I wrote and I believe my criticism stands.  I criticized Mr. Welty on his exegesis of Galatians 3 and 4 and I believe that criticism is still valid.  My criticism at this point was not to suggest that it was material to his entire argument but his misappropriation of the "fundamental error" of the Judaizers is indicative of a larger error.

 If Mr. Welty had stated that their fundmental error was a reliance on the Law as a means of Justification then I would have no problem with the statement.  He zeroes in on the actual act of Circumcision, however, and then tries to attribute paedobaptism to a form of the Judaizing heresy, analogy or not.  I never said that Mr. Welty equated paedobaptism with the Judaizing heresy.  That he even put them in the same neighborhood is aggregious enough especially the way in which the analogy is formed.

I also, purposefully, did not deal with the portion where Mr. Welty merely calls the paedobaptist position a "similar error" (I wonder if the anathemas in Gal 1 are "similar").  Why?  Because he gets the Judaizing error wrong.  The Judaizers were not after a mere physical circumcision of the flesh.  To believe otherwise is to mis-read Paul's arguments.  They want the Galatians to take on the requirements of the Law as a means to Justification.  It was not "…the command to circumcise…" that was "…essential to the perpetuity of the Abrahamic Covenant and its promises and blessings…" as Mr. Welty insists.  The Judaizers expected far more than a mere circumcision of the flesh.  Their fundamental error was not even looking to the Abrahamic Covenant as I pointed out and am told that Mr. Welty agrees with.

So I'm left wondering:  If Mr. Welty agrees that it was a belief that Torah keeping=Justification then how does he go from that idea to the idea that the actual physical application of the covenant sign is what Paul has in view as the Judaizers fundamental error?  It's nice to hear from a friend that says that Mr. Welty understands the Judaizing heresy but, in his paper, he errs outright.

 I humbly submit, then, that my original critique be re-read to see that my focus was very specific:  the exegesis of Galatians 3-4 does not permit Mr. Welty to claim that the fundamental error of the Judaizers was that the command to circumcise was essential to the perpetuity of the Abrahamic Covenant.

While I bear no ill will toward either Mr. Welty or the person who asked me to reconsider, I cannot back off of this original critique. 

Categories
Prophets

Holy, Holy, Holy – Isaiah 6:1-8

It’s with a bit of trepidation that I share the below.  Some will see the fingerprints of Dr. R.C. Sproul all over it.  I delivered the following message to Central Baptist Church, Okinawa, Japan on Sunday, Aug 6, 2006.  My prayer is that it helped awaken some to the Holiness of God.

 “Holy, Holy, Holy”

One of the problems that I have with modern Protestants is that I often want to tell them:  “Your God is too small.”  In fact, that is the title of a Book by J.B. Phillips.  Why do I say that?  I say that because most people have a small view of the power and Glory of God.  It’s bad enough that many Americans want to acknowledge a “higher power” as long as it doesn’t involve the name Jesus Christ.  It is worse to me that those who claim the title “Christian” make God out to be weak.  They make Him to be a kindly grandfather or cosmic Santa Claus who can’t get over how much He loves us human beings.  Some see him as powerless to thwart Satan in this world unless we help Him.  Others picture Him as powerless to act on human hearts without the permission of human commands.

Think of this common phrase:  “Jesus is waiting outside the door of your heart pleading to come in.”  What image comes to mind?  Does it make Jesus seem strong and powerful?  Does it make Him seem like King of Kings and Lord of Lords?  Does it match up with the picture of Him found in Scripture?  You see, we live with certain conceptions for so long that we start to accept them as Biblical.

The second Commandment prohibits the making of idols.  God forbids that any man should form anything and bow down to it.  God is the only one worthy of worship.  But idolatry begins in the mind.  There are all kinds of idols of the mind concerning God.  Islam, for instance, rejects the Son and Spirit as God and make God completely distant from men.  Though they do not bow down to statues exactly, but their god is no god at all but an idol of the mind.

I’m training my children to learn about God at an early age by teaching them answers to basic questions.  When I ask my son James, “What is God?”, his answer is, “God is a Spirit and doesn’t have a body like men.”  That’s a good answer for a four year old but a more thorough, but still brief, answer is:  “God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, And unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.”

That’s a great, short answer.  It obviously doesn’t tell us everything about God but it gives us a rich way of thinking about Him.  Each of those terms (infinite, eternal, wisdom, power, etc) are what some like to call the attributes of God.  God is all of those things and not just one of them.  You cannot merely say God is eternal but not wise.  You can’t say He is infinite but not powerful.

When you ask most people:  “What is God?”  They’ll say:  “God is love.”  That’s Biblical, right?  The New Testament does say that God is love but God also calls Himself Just, Jealous, Angry and a lot of other things throughout Scripture.  But LOVE is something we can get behind isn’t it?  If God is just Love then He’s cuddly.  He’s cute.  I can handle a God who is Love because then I can just make up whatever I want to think about what love is and say:  “That’s God.”  I once remember watching Oprah and some lady said:  “I don’t know if I believe in God.”  Oprah responded, “Do you believe in love?”  The lady said “Yes” to which Oprah responded “Then you believe in God.”  To most people “God is Love” has become “Love is God.”

Remember I said that some Christians can create idols in their own minds concerning God?  Well, the way that many speak of God as being love is so imbalanced and so completely ignores everything else that He is, that they twist and contort who God is to the point of creating an idol in their minds.

But Christians are not supposed to worship idols in their minds.  We want to know God as He is.  We want God to tell us who He is so that we might know better who we worship.

So we might better understand that God, we will be considering the Holiness of God.  Let us read Isaiah 6:1-8.

Isaiah 6

1 In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple. 2 Above it stood seraphim; each one had six wings: with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3 And one cried to another and said:

      ” Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts;
The whole earth is full of His glory!”

 4 And the posts of the door were shaken by the voice of him who cried out, and the house was filled with smoke.
5 So I said:

      ” Woe is me, for I am undone!
Because I am a man of unclean lips,
And I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips;
For my eyes have seen the King,
The LORD of hosts.”

6 Then one of the seraphim flew to me, having in his hand a live coal which he had taken with the tongs from the altar. 7 And he touched my mouth with it, and said:

” Behold, this has touched your lips;
Your iniquity is taken away,
And your sin purged.”

8 Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying:

” Whom shall I send,
And who will go for Us?”

Then I said, “Here am I! Send me.”

The passage opens with Isaiah reporting the year of this event.  It was the year that King Uzziah died.  Uzziah had reigned in Judah for 52 long years – two and a half generations.  Though significant in the history of the nation, more significant for Isaiah here is what happened.  Isaiah reports:  “I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple.”

In his vision, the first thing he reports seeing is the Lord sitting on a throne.  Kings sit on thrones.  This throne is not merely any throne, however, but one that is high and lifted up.  This conveys power.  This conveys majesty.

Isaiah notes that the train of the Lord’s robe literally fills the temple.  Throughout history, royalty have worn robes with long trains.  Very important kings would have many attendants that would carry the long trains of their robes.  The robes were a sign of power and of majesty.  The longer the train, the more powerful the king.  The Lord’s robe is so majestic that the train literally fills the temple.

Isaiah continues in verse 2:

Is 6:2 “Above it stood seraphim; each one had six wings: with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew.”

Did you catch how many wings the Seraphim have?

Six.

How many are actually used for flying?

Two.

An interesting design isn’t it?  God has created angels that fly around in His presence and they have six wings with only two used for flying.  The other four have a very definite purpose, however.

Notice what the angels are using them for:  two are covering their eyes and two are covering their feet.  God, in His mercy, created these beings to be protected in His presence.  They have wings to cover their eyes, for God is too majestic to look upon.  They have two wings to cover their feet as the Scriptures repeatedly connect holiness with uncovered feet.  Think of Moses at the burning bush.

What do these Seraphim do?

Is 6:3 And one cried to another and said:

      ” Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts;

      The whole earth is full of His glory!”

When we use the English language to emphasize a point, we have different ways of doing so.  We can put something in bold letters.  We can underline the text.  We can add an adjective to say that my wife is the most beautiful woman in the whole world.

The Hebrew language also has those tools but it uses another tool when a Hebrew really wants to emphasize something.  If something is really going to be emphasized in the Hebrew it is repeated.  There is an amusing piece of Hebrew literature that refers to a “pit pit”.  This is a very, very, very deep pit.  If you fall into a pit then you’re in big trouble but if you fall into a “pit pit” you may never get yourself out.  It sounds very funny but using the term twice emphasizes it.  Christ, when making an important point, would sometimes say, “Amen, amen” before teaching something.  Paul in Galatians 1:8-9 repeats a curse twice for anyone who distorts the Gospel.

Repeating things twice in the Scripture for emphasis is relatively rare.  If everything was repeated twice to make extra emphasis then it would be hard to distinguish between all the really important things.

While repeating things twice in the Scriptures is rare, repeating things three times is so rare that it occurs only three times in the Scriptures.  This is one of them.

You see, the Scriptures do not just say God is Holy.  They do not say God is Holy, Holy.  The Scriptures teach us that God is HOLY, HOLY, HOLY.

The Scriptures don’t teach that God is love, love, love or mercy, mercy, mercy or kindness, kindness, kindness.  Those are all true of Him but nothing in Scripture is so underlined and emphasized as the fact that God is Holy, Holy, Holy.

Notice also the term that God is given here:  LORD of Hosts.  Some of you may have Bibles that show the difference in the Hebrew Word used here.  In verse 1, Isaiah sees the Lord on the throne but the spelling is L-o-r-d.  Here, in verse 3, the spelling is L-O-R-D.  Why?  Because they are two different Hebrew words.  The Hebrew word translated to Lord in verse 1 is Adonai while the Hebrew word translated to LORD in verse 3 is Yahweh.  Yahweh is God’s covenantal name given to Moses at the burning bush.  It is the name He uses when He commands that His name not be taken in vain in the 10 commandments.  The Hebrew people had so much reverence for the Covenant name of Yahweh that they would not speak it for fear of pronouncing it incorrectly.  When they would encounter this name in the Scriptures they would actually substitute the name Adonai.  We note the difference here because it is important to show the difference to which we let God’s name fall of our tongue with no reverence or even as a curse compared to our ancient forefathers who were very careful to respect His name.

This event that Isaiah describes is so powerful that the doorposts of the place he sees are shaken and the temple is filled with smoke.

So how does Isaiah react?  Does he start joking with God saying “Hey God how are you doing up there?”  Does he yawn and say “Man, this religious stuff is BORING!”

Not quite.  Isaiah’s response is:

Is 6:5

” Woe is me, for I am undone!

      Because I am a man of unclean lips,

      And I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips;

      For my eyes have seen the King,

      The LORD of hosts.”

There are two basic type of prophetic utterances in the Scriptures.  They are sometimes called the Oracles of Weem and the Oracles of Woe.  An Oracle of Weem is when a Prophet blesses a nation or a person.  Christ is pronouncing an Oracle of Weem (blessing) when He says:  “Blessed are the poor in spirit, blessed are you when they persecute you, etc.”  Those are nice.  If you’re the recipient of an Oracle of Weem then smile, the favor of God is upon you.  Those are bearings of good tidings.

Oracles of Woe are the exact opposite:  “Woe unto you Pharisees, hypocrites!”  That is a prophetic curse being called down, by God’s prophet, upon the heads of the people cursed.  God help any of us who hears an Oracle of Woe and it concerns us.  One of the other examples of the triple repetition in Revelation 8:13 when a bird calls out to the Earth:  “Woe!  Woe!  Woe!” to announce judgment.  The sound of that herald will be absolutely terrifying.

So what does Isaiah do when He sees the Lord on His throne?  He says:  “Woe is me!  For I am undone!”  What?  He is cursing himself!  The prophet is cursing himself for having seen the majesty of God.  God’s majesty has overwhelmed him so much that he is literally cursing himself for having seen it.

When Americans say:  “That guy has it together…” we mean that he’s got a lot of things going for him and is someone to be respected.  Isaiah says he is literally undone at the sight of God.  He is coming apart at the seams.

Why is this so bad?  I thought seeing God would be like seeing Santa Claus?  I’ve never been undone at the sight of Santa Claus.

Isaiah says he is undone because:  “I am a man of unclean lips, And I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips;”

Isaiah recognizes that, as upright as he seemed in the community, he was unclean in the presence of a Holy God.  It is our mouths that speak falsehoods and repeatedly dishonor God.  James says that our tongues are a restless evil, full of poison that we both bless and curse God with.

Isaiah not only sees his own sin here but notes that he lives among a people that are as wicked as he is:  a people of unclean lips.  I wonder how we would stack up to the people of Judah and how unclean our lips are in comparison.  At least they were careful with the name of God.  We use God’s name as a curse word constantly in this society.

If you had a chance to only make 10 rules for society then what would they be?

How many of you would have made the very first four rules that honored God and His Holiness?  That’s the order that God gives to His rules.  If you were an Israelite and cursed the name of God then you had a lot more to worry about than dirty looks from Christians who said “I don’t appreciate that.”  Blasphemy was a capital crime and punishable by death.  THAT’S how serious God takes His holiness and His holy name.

By now I hope you are getting an idea at the difference between the pictures that the Bible uses to describe God and the idols we often fashion in our minds.  But you might be saying to me:  “Rich, that’s the Old Testament.  God was mean back then.  He was angry.  He mellowed out when Jesus came.  Now He’s cuddly.”

Well I could point out to you that God is the same yesterday, today, and forevermore.  God does not change.  Maybe it’s just the Father though and the Son is cool.  The Son wouldn’t scare a prophet would He?

Some atheists, in their lame attempt to justify their rebellion against God, have come up with an “evolutionary” explanation for religion.  They say that nature is a scary thing and primitive man had to have a way to escape that fear so they came up with a God that would protect them from all the disasters in nature that would befall them.  Well, I believe the reasons Atheists refuse to acknowledge God is because men are more afraid of God than they are of nature.  Let’s consider, for a moment, Mark 4:35-41:

Mark 4:35-41

35 On that day, when evening came, He said to them, “Let us go over to the other side.”

 36 Leaving the crowd, they took Him along with them in the boat, just as He was; and other boats were with Him.

 37 And there arose a fierce gale of wind, and the waves were breaking over the boat so much that the boat was already filling up.

 38 Jesus Himself was in the stern, asleep on the cushion; and they woke Him and said to Him, “Teacher, do You not care that we are perishing?”

 39  And He got up and (AA)rebuked the wind and said to the sea, “Hush, be still.” And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm.

 40 And He said to them, “Why are you afraid? (AB)Do you still have no faith?”

 41 They became very much afraid and said to one another, “Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?”

Experienced fishermen are on the sea when a sudden storm descends upon that valley and makes the sea so violent that they fear for death.  They wake Jesus up and He rebukes the waves.  If you notice in the account, they are only afraid of the waves but after Jesus stills the waters by the power of His authority, they are very much afraid.  Afraid of what?  Afraid of HIM.  That’s what Holiness strikes in man:  fear.  This is but one of many examples where Christ’s Holiness frightens men.  When Peter is first called He tells Jesus to depart from him because Peter has just seen the power of God and realizes he is a sinner.

If any of you are hearing about Jesus’ holiness scaring people for the first time then let me really surprise you with something.  Turning to John 12:37-41 we read:

John 12:37-41

37 Even after Jesus had done all these miraculous signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him.

38 This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet:

   “Lord, who has believed our message

      and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”

 39For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere:

 40″He has blinded their eyes

      and deadened their hearts,

   so they can neither see with their eyes,

      nor understand with their hearts,

      nor turn-and I would heal them.”

41 Isaiah said this because he saw Jesus’ glory and spoke about him.

John is quoting Isaiah right after the passage we’re looking at in Isaiah 6.  Remember, we have Isaiah groveling on the ground, stunned into cursing himself.  Who is it that He sees high and lifted up?  Whose train fills the temple?  Who is it that is Holy, Holy, Holy?

It is JESUS!  It is the Son of God before He had taken on flesh.  That is who Isaiah sees.

Do you understand why I have a problem with the picture of Jesus knocking on the door of sinner’s hearts pleading to come in?  THIS is the Biblical picture of the Son of God’s power and majesty.  The thought of Him pitiful and weak outside the door of a man’s heart is unbiblical and dishonors God.

But in all of this we forgot about poor Isaiah.  While we’ve been busy, Isaiah is still on the ground crushed by the fear of God’s Holiness.  Does God leave His servant in agony?  Of course not.  Our God is a merciful God.  This is the Son of God who Isaiah is standing in front of and the Son is the Redeemer.

Isaiah 6:6-7 reports

6 Then one of the seraphim flew to me, having in his hand a live coal which he had taken with the tongs from the altar. 7 And he touched my mouth with it, and said:

      ” Behold, this has touched your lips;
Your iniquity is taken away,
And your sin purged.”

The picture here is unexpected.  A hot coal is taken from the altar and touches the mouth of Isaiah.  We would expect this to be searing hot and cause a great deal of pain but the quick remedy provided by the angel takes away Isaiah’s iniquity.  It purges his sin.  With his iniquity taken away he can stand upright in the presence of God.  With his sin purged, he is brought back to his right mind and he is capable of thinking again.  Our iniquity must be taken away or heaven would not be a place of pleasure in the presence of God.  Sin cannot stand to be in the presence of a Holy God and a Holy God cannot bear to look at sin.  I think it might be the realization of God’s hatred toward sin that makes being in His presence so unbearable.  I think he exposes the ugliness of it and we are starkly aware of our condemnation before Him.  Is it any wonder that the Scriptures speak of unbelievers asking the mountains to cover them at the Judgment.  God’s Holiness is a terrible thing to look upon when your sin remains with you.

So with a purified heart, Isaiah hears God ask:

8 Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying:

      ” Whom shall I send,
And who will go for Us?”

Then I said, “Here am I! Send me.”

In the presence of God, he hears God ask for a volunteer to go out for Him.  Isaiah immediately responds:  “Here I am!  Send me.”

“Here I am.”  Isaiah has not lost his identity.  His personality is not swallowed up into the majesty of God as some pagan ideas of God teach.  Even after seeing God as He is, he’s still a person.  He still has an identity.  He’s still Isaiah.  He answers:  “Here I am!”

“Send me.”  Isaiah is eager to serve His God.  He has seen the crushing majesty of God’s Holiness and had his sin forgiven.  His Savior, the mighty God, wants a volunteer.  Who wouldn’t answer yes having received such a gift of Grace?

Isaiah was only beginning his prophetic ministry and what a hope he now had.  Isaiah was privileged to serve His Savior for many years prophesying to a people who would not listen.  Tradition has it that Isaiah was eventually martyred by being sawn in two.  But this was a man who had seen Adonai.  This was a man who had seen Yahweh of Hosts.  He had seen Him high and lifted up.  He had even lived to report the event because his sin was purged.  And Isaiah was to go on to prophesy of this same Son of God He had seen on the throne in Isaiah 53:

Isa 53:4-9

4 Surely He has borne our griefs

And carried our sorrows;

Yet we esteemed Him stricken,

Smitten by God, and afflicted.

5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,

He was bruised for our iniquities;

The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,

And by His stripes we are healed.

6 All we like sheep have gone astray;

We have turned, every one, to his own way;

And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.

7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,

Yet He opened not His mouth;

He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,

And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,

So He opened not His mouth.

8 He was taken from prison and from judgment,

And who will declare His generation?

For He was cut off from the land of the living;

For the transgressions of My people He was stricken.

9 And they made His grave with the wicked –

But with the rich at His death,

Because He had done no violence,

Nor was any deceit in His mouth.

The Son of God, come to Earth to be reviled and rejected, hated by men.

Can you understand all the more how much Christ emptied Himself to come on the Earth and to be abused and hated by men?  He who knew all Glory and Majesty in heaven came to Earth because sinful men would never be able to be in His presence without His atonement.  He was bruised for our iniquities and bore on Himself the sins which we deserve to bear.

This is the Gospel!

A Holy God.

No.  A Holy, Holy, Holy God in whose presence we would be unable to stand.

  Because we could not go to Him, He came to us.  Because we could not obey, He obeyed for us.  Because we only spoke unclean things, He always spoke the good, the beautiful, and the pure.  Because we could not pay for our transgressions and the sin was greater than we could bear, He died, He became sin for us.

THAT, beloved, is a God worthy of your worship!  That is a God who must be worshipped.  Praise Him that He makes us anew that we can come into His magnificent presence and proclaim:  “Here am I, Send me!”

Categories
Former Prophets Scripture

Lame in Both Feet

2 Samuel 1

1  Now it came to pass after the death of Saul, when David had returned from the slaughter of the Amalekites, and David had stayed two days in Ziklag, 2 on the third day, behold, it happened that a man came from Saul’s camp with his clothes torn and dust on his head. So it was, when he came to David, that he fell to the ground and prostrated himself.
3 And David said to him, “Where have you come from?”
So he said to him, “I have escaped from the camp of Israel.”
4 Then David said to him,”How did the matter go? Please tell me.”
And he answered, “The people have fled from the battle, many of the people are fallen and dead, and Saul and Jonathan his son are dead also.”
5 So David said to the young man who told him, “How do you know that Saul and Jonathan his son are dead?”
6 Then the young man who told him said, “As I happened by chance to be on Mount Gilboa, there was Saul, leaning on his spear; and indeed the chariots and horsemen followed hard after him. 7 Now when he looked behind him, he saw me and called to me. And I answered, ‘Here I am.’ 8 And he said to me, ‘Who are you?’ So I answered him, ‘I am an Amalekite.’ 9 He said to me again, ‘Please stand over me and kill me, for anguish has come upon me, but my life still remains in me.’ 10 So I stood over him and killed him, because I was sure that he could not live after he had fallen. And I took the crown that was on his head and the bracelet that was on his arm, and have brought them here to my lord.”
11 Therefore David took hold of his own clothes and tore them, and so did all the men who were with him. 12 And they mourned and wept and fasted until evening for Saul and for Jonathan his son, for the people of the LORD and for the house of Israel, because they had fallen by the sword.
13 Then David said to the young man who told him, “Where are you from?”
And he answered, “I am the son of an alien, an Amalekite.”
14 So David said to him, “How was it you were not afraid to put forth your hand to destroy the LORD’s anointed?” 15 Then David called one of the young men and said, “Go near, and execute him!” And he struck him so that he died. 16 So David said to him,”Your blood is on your own head, for your own mouth has testified against you, saying, ‘I have killed the LORD’s anointed.'”

17 The Song of the Bow

Then David lamented with this lamentation over Saul and over Jonathan his son, 18 and he told them to teach the children of Judah the Song of the Bow; indeed it is written in the Book of Jasher:
19 “The beauty of Israel is slain on your high places!
How the mighty have fallen!
20 Tell it not in Gath,Proclaim it not in the streets of Ashkelon
“” Lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice,
Lest the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph.
21 “O mountains of Gilboa,
Let there be no dew nor rain upon you,
Nor fields of offerings.
For the shield of the mighty is cast away there!
The shield of Saul, not anointed with oil.
22 From the blood of the slain,
From the fat of the mighty,
The bow of Jonathan did not turn back,
And the sword of Saul did not return empty.
23 “Saul and Jonathan were beloved and pleasant in their lives,
And in their death they were not divided;
They were swifter than eagles,
They were stronger than lions.
24 “O daughters of Israel,
weep over Saul,
Who clothed you in scarlet, with luxury;
Who put ornaments of gold on your apparel.
25 “How the mighty have fallen in the midst of the battle!
Jonathan was slain in your high places.
26 I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan;
You have been very pleasant to me;
Your love to me was wonderful,
Surpassing the love of women.
27 “How the mighty have fallen,
And the weapons of war perished!”

What a story!  I might add to the end of this Song the editorial comment:  “So passes Saul, the first King of Israel.”

His was a reign that had begun with such promise.  Saul, the man who stood a head taller than every man in Israel looked the part of the king.  He even delivered Israel from the hands of its enemies.  He was, indeed, a mighty warrior.  But he repeatedly disobeyed the command of God.

His disobedience by our standards would seem very small.  He offered a sacrifice before Samuel arrived in 1 Samuel 13.  Come on, the people are getting tired of waiting for Samuel.  But Saul was not a Levite.  Then he let his men keep the sheep and cattle of the Amalekites  in 1 Sam 15 and Saul spared their king.  But God had commanded that the Amalekites and all their livestock be utterly destroyed.  God commanded it.  It is both an amusing and gruesome story in 1 Sam 15 when Samuel arrives and Agag, King of the Amalekites, thinks he’s safe.  Samuel didn’t give him long to be relieved as he literally hacked the king to death.  Samuel didn’t hesitate to carry out God’s commands faithfully.

You see, God demands our complete obedience.  What was convenient or seemed “right” in Saul’s eyes was against the direct commandment of the Lord.  God is not only God when we allow God to be so-called “Lord of our Lives”¦.”  He is God always and everywhere for all people whether they rebel against Him or not.  I wish we would just remove that language from our speech.  It is very unbiblical.  God is God and we are not.

Anyhow, from that moment on God determined to remove the kingdom from Saul and give it to another.  You will recall that Samuel, right after this event, took a trip to Bethlehem shortly after the event with the Amalekites and he anointed David as King of Israel.  But David was not to inherit the kingdom immediately.  In fact, he went back to tending his sheep.  Until one day a dude named Goliath came on the scene.

Shortly thereafter, David became a bit of a celebrity in Israel and an incredible military leader.  He became the protector of Israel under Saul’s command.  Then one day, Saul heard some women singing a song about Saul killing his thousands and David his tens of thousands.  From that moment on, Saul and David had a “strained” relationship.”  Even though David was his son-in-law and was a faithful servant, Saul repeatedly tried to kill David.  He perceived David as a threat to his throne.  This was the way of the Ancient Near East and the way of many monarchies.  Kings maintain power by killing off those who are gaining too much influence.  Of course God had different plans.

So began literally years and years of Saul pursuing David all over Israel.  David spent many years hiding in caves and living outside of Israel’s borders.  David had at least two opportunities to kill Saul as, in one instance, Saul literally stopped for a “pit stop” in the cave that David was hiding in.

But David was a man who loved his God and he would not lift his hand against God’s anointed.
And so we come to this story we have just read in 2 Samuel 1 and we can appreciate why the man running to bring the news of Saul’s death would think he was the bearer of happy news for David.  Saul is dead.  David has long known he would ascend the throne and the man who has been pursuing his life is now dead.

So we react with maybe a little bit of a surprise at how David reacts to the news:

2 Samuel 1:11

Therefore David took hold of his own clothes and tore them, and so did all the men who were with him. 12 And they mourned and wept and fasted until evening for Saul and for Jonathan his son, for the people of the LORD and for the house of Israel, because they had fallen by the sword.

David has just been brought the crown and scepter of Saul and, instead of rejoicing, he mourns.  Beloved, that is faith.  That is a man after God’s own heart.  What a tragic story Saul is.  A man who once prophesied and had received the Spirit in power.  David had seen Saul slowly degenerate and go mad over years as he had rejected God and God had rejected him.  David knew that, apart from God’s grace, so might he walk.  We also find this interesting note:

2 Samuel 1:13-16

13 Then David said to the young man who told him, “Where are you from?”
And he answered, “I am the son of an alien, an Amalekite.”
14 So David said to him, “How was it you were not afraid to put forth your hand to destroy the LORD’s anointed?” 15 Then David called one of the young men and said, “Go near, and execute him!” And he struck him so that he died. 16 So David said to him,”Your blood is on your own head, for your own mouth has testified against you, saying, ‘I have killed the LORD’s anointed.'”

Did you catch what race the man was?  An Amalekite, that’s right.  What race was Saul supposed to wipe out in 1 Sam 15?  The Amalekites.  How ironic.  This kid should have showed Saul just a bit of gratitude.  Saul lost his kingship because he disobeyed God by not wiping this kid out!   How very ironic.  Well, David had him executed for killing Saul.  If you recall, this was at Saul’s request.  He wanted to be put out of his misery.  But you just don’t lift your hand against the God’s anointed.

And so David sings a beautiful song of tribute to Saul.  He actually curses  the mountains of Gilboa and asks that no rain fall on them.  One morning the mountain wakes up, a battle takes place on its heights and a king dies.  Next moment it’s being cursed for being a mountain.

And so David continues his beautiful lament for Saul and his son Jonathan who were slain on the mountain.  He laments that the death of Saul will give God’s enemies a chance to dance in the streets.  The rejoicing of the wicked is always so short-lived isn’t it?  One minute they’re dancing at a victory.  They’re only looking immediately in front of them and not at the judgment to come.
Finally, at the end of the lament, called the Song of the Bow, David sings of his love for Saul’s son Jonathan:

2 Samuel 1:25-26

25 “How the mighty have fallen in the midst of the battle!
Jonathan was slain in your high places.
26 I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan;
You have been very pleasant to me;
Your love to me was wonderful,
Surpassing the love of women.

Do you know Jonathan?  What a man!  What an incredible Biblical figure.  He and David were closer than brothers.  When I read this passage I always think:  “Poor Jonathan.  Saul deserved to die but not him.  Poor Jonathan.”

Usually the Scriptures have a predictable pattern:  Dad becomes unfaithful to God and the son ends up worse.  Not here.  Jonathan is one of the most faithful people you’ll ever find in the Scriptures.  He was a man’s man too.  In 1 Samuel 13 he took on an entire Philistine garrison ““ just he and his armor bearer against dozens of men.  He reasoned this way:  “Well if God shows me that I will defeat these men then I’ll defeat them.”  God showed him he would prevail and he took them on.  What faith!

Jonathan had every right to ascend to the throne after his father died.  He had every right in the eyes of men.  He was the son of the king and he was a warrior.  He was brave.  He was faithful in all things.  Jonathan had succeeded in everything he did and had every confidence in the flesh to take the throne after his father died.

But one day Jonathan was at war with his father and he saw a tall man named Goliath.  A man that towered 9 feet tall and bore spear and shield that weighed hundreds of pounds.  He watched as all the men of Israel cowered before this big man.  As he was looking out over the field and heard the big man Goliath heaping insults on the Army of Israel and blaspheming God he saw a teenage boy step out of the crowd wearing nothing but his normal clothes.  No armor.  He had nothing in his hand but a sling and some stones.  No shield.  No sword.  Who is this kid?!

He watched as the big Philistine laughed and called the teenager a dog and that he would kill the boy and feed him to the birds.  I’m sure he could just barely hear the words as the young boy told Goliath:

1 Samuel 17:45-47

“You come against me with sword and spear and javelin, but I come against you in the name of the LORD Almighty, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied. 46 This day the LORD will hand you over to me, and I’ll strike you down and cut off your head. Today I will give the carcasses of the Philistine army to the birds of the air and the beasts of the earth, and the whole world will know that there is a God in Israel. 47 All those gathered here will know that it is not by sword or spear that the LORD saves; for the battle is the LORD’s, and he will give all of you into our hands.”

“What’s happening?”, thinks Jonathan,  “He’s running toward the Philistine!  What faith!”

And you know the rest of the story.  By the way, we like to think of David and Goliath as the great story of the Underdog.  Just remember who is the Underdog when God is on your side!

Well, shortly after this incredible event, the boy is talking to Jonathan’s father Saul in 1 Sam 18 and he finds out that the boy’s name is David.  1 Sam 18 reports the following:

1 Samuel 18:1-4

1 After David had finished talking with Saul, Jonathan became one in spirit with David, and he loved him as himself. 2 From that day Saul kept David with him and did not let him return to his father’s house. 3 And Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. 4 Jonathan took off the robe he was wearing and gave it to David, along with his tunic, and even his sword, his bow and his belt.

Wow!  That’s just incredible.  Jonathan meets a young man that has a love for God.  As a man who loves God Himself, Jonathan is immediately knit to David and they love each other in the Lord.  This is something you can only understand if you are a believer.  He who shares Christ with me is my brother.  I love my immediate family ““ my mother, father, brothers, and sister a great deal.  But they don’t serve the Lord.  The Saints of God are more dear to me because we share Christ.

And so Jonathan loves David that very day.  He even chooses sides for the future.  How?  He gives David his tunic, sword, bow, and belt.  He’s essentially telling David:  “Every claim I have to the throne is yours.  I know God has given the kingdom to you.  That’s OK.  I trust God.  God has anointed you King and far be it from me to ever try to take it.”  THAT is faith!  That’s why I always lament that Jonathan died.  What a man of faith he was.

Eventually Jonathan must even side with David against his own father who is determined to kill him.  He protects David and even lies to his father about knowing where David is.  This is just very strange activity for a Jewish son because family loyalty is everything in that culture.  But Jonathan put no confidence in the flesh but had faith in God’s anointed.

And so in 1 Samuel 20, Jonathan comes to the stark realization that Saul is trying to kill his beloved friend David and it breaks his heart.  He meets David in the field to tell him to flee and they embrace each other and weep over their parting.  It was to be the last time they would see each other.  And 2 Samuel 20:42 reports:

2 Samuel 20:42

42 Then Jonathan said to David,”Go in peace, since we have both sworn in the name of the LORD, saying, ‘May the LORD be between you and me, and between your descendants and my descendants, forever.'” So he arose and departed, and Jonathan went into the city.

And so we understand all the more why David is weeping over his friend Jonathan’s death in 2 Samuel 1.   It’s just so sad.  But sorrow for the House of Saul and Jonathan is not over.  Right after Saul and Jonathan’s death, Saul’s son Ishbosheth contends for the throne of Israel.  A Civil War ensues and David eventually rises to the throne of Israel.  At the end of reporting all the details of the Civil War, 2 Sam 4:4 reports this sad event:

2 Samuel 4:4

4 Jonathan, Saul’s son, had a son who was lame in his feet. He was five years old when the news about Saul and Jonathan came from Jezreel; and his nurse took him up and fled. And it happened, as she made haste to flee, that he fell and became lame. His name was Mephibosheth.

As if things couldn’t be more sorrowful for the House of Jonathan, his only son, Mephibosheth, who is only 5 years old at his death, is dropped by his nurse as she hurries away upon learning of his death.  Poor kid.  He was a normal child but his nurse drops him and from that moment on he is lame in both feet.  He walks around only with great difficulty.  Something we could probably heal with modern medicine but he was a cripple for the rest of his life.

My goodness!  If you don’t feel bad for Jonathan after all of that then you’ve got a heart of stone.  He dies on the mountain with an unfaithful father even though he was faithful.  He never gets to live out his days with his friend David as the King.  To make matters worse, his only son becomes lame after being dropped by his nurse.

But God is rich in mercy.

Many years later, David has firmly established himself on the throne and has defeated the Philistines.  He is on his throne one day and probably finally has a brief moment to think and he starts to remember his beloved friend Jonathan:

2 Samuel 9

1Now David said, “Is there still anyone who is left of the house of Saul, that I may show him kindness for Jonathan’s sake?”
2And there was a servant of the house of Saul whose name was Ziba. So when they had called him to David, the king said to him, “Are you Ziba?”
He said, “At your service!”
3Then the king said, “Is there not still someone of the house of Saul, to whom I may show the kindness of God?”
And Ziba said to the king, “There is still a son of Jonathan who is lame in his feet.”
4So the king said to him, “Where is he?”
And Ziba said to the king, “Indeed he is in the house of Machir the son of Ammiel, in Lo Debar.”
5Then King David sent and brought him out of the house of Machir the son of Ammiel, from Lo Debar.
6Now when Mephibosheth  the son of Jonathan, the son of Saul, had come to David, he fell on his face and prostrated himself. Then David said, “Mephibosheth ?”
And he answered, “Here is your servant!”
7So David said to him, “Do not fear, for I will surely show you kindness for Jonathan your father’s sake, and will restore to you all the land of Saul your grandfather; and you shall eat bread at my table continually.”
8Then he bowed himself, and said, “What is your servant, that you should look upon such a dead dog as I?”
9And the king called to Ziba, Saul’s servant, and said to him,”I have given to your master’s son all that belonged to Saul and to all his house. 10You therefore, and your sons and your servants, shall work the land for him, and you shall bring in the harvest, that your master’s son may have food to eat. But Mephibosheth  your master’s son shall eat bread at my table always.” Now Ziba had fifteen sons and twenty servants.
11Then Ziba said to the king, “According to all that my lord the king has commanded his servant, so will your servant do.”
“As for Mephibosheth ,” said the king, “he shall eat at my table* like one of the king’s sons.” 12Mephibosheth  had a young son whose name was Micha. And all who dwelt in the house of Ziba were servants of Mephibosheth . 13So Mephibosheth  dwelt in Jerusalem, for he ate continually at the king’s table. And he was lame in both his feet.

They found Mephibosheth!  I just love this story.  Mephibosheth limps into the king’s chambers and falls on his face before David.  David speaks his name:  “Mephibosheth?”

“Here is your servant.”

“Don’t fear Mephibosheth.”

I’m sure the young man thought he was at risk because it was the custom of kings to remove threats to the throne.  Mephibosheth was the last remaining person alive from the House of Saul.

But David tells him:  “I knew your father.  I loved him.  I’m going to show you kindness for his sake!”

And Mephibosheth answers very humbly, it’s even sad to read the way he refers to himself:  “What is your servant, that you should look upon such a dead dog as I?”

Can you imagine growing up lame in both feet with a father like Jonathan.  Songs were probably sung of his exploits:  “Remember the time that Jonathan killed an entire Philistine garrison with just his armor bearer?!”  But Mephibosheth would never do anything like that.

It would be a great insult to call anyone a dog in the Near East but Mephibosheth calls himself a “dead dog”.  “Why are you showing me such favor?  I don’t deserve this kind of love from you.”

But David was a man after God’s own heart.  David kept his promises even if he was a little slow in getting to them.  Remember that he had promised with Jonathan to be good to his descendants?

And so he restores the lands of Saul, everything, to Mephibosheth.  He tells Ziba to care for the lands but Mephibosheth isn’t just going to receive the blessing of land.  No.

“As for Mephibosheth,” said the kind, “he shall eat at my table like one of the king’s sons.”

David adopted him and loved him as a son.  He loved him for Jonathan’s sake.  And the story concludes about the young man:  “And he was lame in both feet.”

I just love the Word of God.  This story is such a powerful picture of our redemption and shows these beautiful strands of God’s redemption that have been woven throughout redemptive history.  King David the Great was the forefather, in the flesh, of Christ to come.

Have we not all been made Spiritually lame and worthless in the flesh by a Fall.  We have received an invitation to the King’s chamber.  We have every reason to fear.  In Mephibosheth’s case he feared just because he was the grandson of Saul.  In our case, we are summoned knowing we have sinned against a Holy and Righteous God.  We enter with fear and trembling.

But the Father’s Son loved us and died for us.  He re-creates us and causes us to love Him in return.  And so we enter the chamber and the King announces:  “You are to eat at my table continually.”

“Who am I, God, that you should look upon this dead dog and show me such favor?”

But God love His Son and, for His sake, I am beloved by Him, and I am going to eat at His table continually as one of His sons.

We love Him because He first loved us and poured Himself out for us.  The King’s table is available for all who would call on the name of Jesus Christ.  Unless you see your unworthiness to be in the King’s presence, you cannot gain entry through the door of Christ’s death and resurrection.  It’s all grace.  Christ died so that all who believe in Him might say to Him:

“I am wretched.  Take my sin away.  I deserve death but I believe.”

And through the foolishness of that simple faith, Christ does take away our sin and becomes our righteousness.  We enter the throne room of Grace boldly then, as Sons, and gladly take our seats at the great wedding feast that knows no end.

The feast is available to all who believe.  Believe and live.  Enter and feast, you are a son of God!

Categories
Gospels and Acts

Unclean!

Luke 17:11-19

Now it happened as He went to Jerusalem that He passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee.  Then as He entered a certain village, there met Him ten men who were lepers, who stood afar off.  And they lifted up their voices and said, “Jesus, Master, have mercy on us!”
So when He saw them, He said to them, “Go, show yourselves to the priests.” And so it was that as they went, they were cleansed.
And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, returned, and with a loud voice glorified God,  and fell down on his face at His feet, giving Him thanks. And he was a Samaritan.
So Jesus answered and said, “Were there not ten cleansed? But where are the nine?   Were there not any found who returned to give glory to God except this foreigner?”  And He said to him, “Arise, go your way. Your faith has made you well.”

And so we come to an event in Jesus’ ministry as He is on His way to Jerusalem.  Luke mentions, in passing that Jesus is passing between Galilee and Samaria.

Samaria was considered an unclean region for Jews.  They viewed the Samaritans as dogs, as unclean people.  The Samaritans were related to the Jews as the Northern Kingdom of Israel had existed there.  But the Northern Kingdom had passed away centuries before due to the idolatry of that nation.  The Samaritans had intermarried with the pagan nations and had only retained a perverted form of the religion of the Scriptures.  They worshipped in the high places in the North and not in Jerusalem as commanded nor did they offer sacrifices in Jerusalem.  And so, many Jews would walk completely around Samaria if they ever had to venture outside of Judea.  They would rather go days out of their way by foot then even touch the unclean soil of Samaria.

And so it is in passing that Luke mentions that Christ is passing near that region on His way to Jerusalem.

As Christ is entering a village He encounters ten lepers who stood afar off.

Why did they stand afar off? Why did Luke mention that Christ encountered them outside of the town? Let us turn to Leviticus Chapter 13.

I will not read the entirety of Leviticus 13 but it gives several different examples and rules for the Priests to use to determine whether not a person has leprosy. Leprosy is a term to refer to different types of skin diseases, the worst of which would cause hands, legs, nose, and other body parts to wither as the person became increasingly disfigured until they eventually died a horrific death. Whether a milder form of the disease, Leviticus 13 gives many examples of how to diagnose and the end result is the same in all cases for the leper. Let me read for you the concluding verses in Leviticus 13:45-46
Lev 13:45-46

Now the leper on whom the sore is, his clothes shall be torn and his head bare; and he shall cover his mustache, and cry,’Unclean! Unclean!’  He shall be unclean. All the days he has the sore he shall be unclean. He is unclean, and he shall dwell alone; his dwelling shall be outside the camp.

Have any of you ever had friends who have found a spot on the skin and gone to the doctor who grows concerned about it?  The person has to come back after a number of days to have a biopsy performed on the spot and even wait further as lab results reveal whether or not that person has cancer.  What concern we all have for the person as we wonder:  “Does my dear friend have cancer.”  What prayers might we lift up for that person as they undergo treatment and receive the blessings of modern medicine.  We may even embrace that friend and let them cry on our shoulder as they express their fear that the cancer might spread.

Beloved, a leprous man could only be so lucky to merely get a diagnosis of cancer.  Consider Levticus 5:2-5

“…if a person touches any unclean thing, whether it is the carcass of an unclean beast, or the carcass of unclean livestock, or the carcass of unclean creeping things, and he is unaware of it, he also shall be unclean and guilty.  Or if he touches human uncleanness — whatever uncleanness with which a man may be defiled, and he is unaware of it — when he realizes it, then he shall be guilty.
‘Or if a person swears, speaking thoughtlessly with his lips to do evil or to do good, whatever it is that a man may pronounce by an oath, and he is unaware of it — when he realizes it, then he shall be guilty in any of these matters.
‘And it shall be, when he is guilty in any of these matters, that he shall confess that he has sinned in that thing;”

Do you understand the implications for leprosy?  A leper was considered human uncleanness.  You could not hug a leper who received a diagnosis from the priest.  You could not even touch him or her.  That was a sin.  If you did so, even by accident, you had to confess your sin and offer a sacrifice at the Temple.  I don’t mean to state the obvious here but lepers were human beings too.  They had mothers and fathers, they had wives and children at one point.  Then one morning they wake up and find a spot on their skin.  They try washing it but, over days and weeks the spot doesn’t seem to go away.  What fear they must have experienced as they walked to the priest.  Can you even imagine the horrible words of the priest as he says to a man or a woman:  YOU HAVE LEPROSY.  YOU ARE UNCLEAN.

Oh the horror of it.  I cannot weep with my wife.  I cannot hold my children.  I cannot embrace a friend and cry on his shoulder.  Even worse, according to the Law he must stay outside of town and every time a person comes near him he must yell out “Unclean!”  I cannot even imagine such a horrible condition.

And so it is with people in misery that the unclean gather together as lepers would into colonies and Christ meets ten of them on His way to Jerusalem.  We understand all the more now why in Luke 17:12, why the lepers are afar off.  We should also appreciate why in verse 13 there is anguish in their voice as they cry:  “Jesus, Master, have mercy on us.”

And Christ, the one who came to give Mercy, told them to present themselves to the priest.  A very strange command is it not?  Not so strange and I again commend to you the Study of God’s Word.  You see in Leviticus 14, it gives the instructions for the cleansing of healed lepers.  The ceremony is very elaborate and requires the sacrifice of doves and washings and, after a week, the leper may be pronounced clean by the Priest and rejoin his family.  This was unfortunately, very rare, and the OT only records a couple of miraculous healings of leprosy in the Old Testament.

So the lepers are obeying this command and, on their way, shortly after leaving, they realize they are cleansed.  Perhaps some of them had withered hands restored.  Christ’s healing was always so powerful in Scriptures that people knew, without a doubt, they had been healed.

What joy!  What a blessing!  I am cleansed!  Years of pain.  Years of private suffering.  Years of reproach calling out to passersby:  “Unclean!”  No more pain of seeing little children run from you afraid.  I will see my family again!  I’ll embrace my wife.  I will hold my child!

And so, as dutiful Jews, 9 of the 10 continue on their way to the Priest to obey the requirements of the Law and be pronounced clean.   But they don’t all continue on their way.

No.  One man,  A SAMARITAN, returns in a loud voice, glorifying God.  Not only that, He falls down at Jesus’ feet in worship of Him, thanking Him for healing Him.  He thanks Him for delivering Him from His leprosy.

But we have a problem here don’t we?  The problem is that this man has not undergone the cleansing rite specified by the Law.  Leviticus 14:9 makes it very clear that one must undergo the full ritual cleansing, wait a week, shave off all their hair all over their body and then they will be pronounced clean by the priest.  This man has not been pronounced clean and so, according to the Law, he is very much UNCLEAN.  Add to that, he is a Samaritan, a dog, a person from an unclean land.

THIS MAN IS TOUCHING JESUS!

Beloved, this is powerful stuff.  You see, a normal Jew could not touch an unclean thing and remain undefiled.  A normal person became unclean and had to undergo cleansing and repent of sin when they touched unclean things.  Unclean things made the ceremonially “clean” people unclean.  That’s the way of the Law.

But not Christ.  This is the power of the Messiah.  This is the power of the Son of God.  Christ was the truly CLEAN one.  He was the only Clean One in fact.  When Christ came forward and reached out His hand to touch the unclean thing, that thing did not have the POWER to corrupt the Son of God.  No.  Christ made that which was unclean, CLEAN.  He touched unclean dead bodies and they rose from the grave.  He touched women with discharges and they were cleansed.  All through the Gospels we see Light dispelling the darkness.  We see Christ, the clean one, the whole one, making that which was broken, that which was unclean, restored.

Christ looks down with compassion on this Samaritan man at His feet and receives the worship that is due Him for Christ is the Son of God.  Angels refused worship as being only worthy of God.  Christ receives the Worship from this man whom He has restored and then He marvels:

Luke 17:17-19
So Jesus answered and said, “Were there not ten cleansed? But where are the nine?  Were there not any found who returned to give glory to God except this foreigner?”  And He said to him, “Arise, go your way. Your faith has made you well.”

What do you mean Jesus?  The nine are on their way to the Temple.  That’s what the LAW requires.  That’s what a Pharisee would have said.

Jesus remarks that only the foreigner, the only one who wasn’t a Jew, was the one who came back to Worship God.  The other’s missed the whole point.

You see beloved, Christ did not come to be a magic worker.  He didn’t just beam out powers to show off and to merely cure disease.  Sure Lazarus rose from the dead but, years later, he did die and they had a funeral all over for him.  Sure, it’s great that these men were free of their physical affliction here on this Earth but they too are now dead.

Ten Lepers had heard about Jesus and ran into Him that day.  They must have heard that He healed people.  Ten lepers called out to Jesus that day.  Ten lepers went on their way in obedience to His command.  Only one returned and worshipped God.  The other nine were healed in their body but missed the whole point of their healing.  Their healing attested to the Son of God.  Their healing attested to His authority over the Law itself.  In obeying the letter of the Law they missed the Spirit of the Law.

And so it was that Jesus said to the Samaritan:  “Your faith has made you well.”  All of the lepers had received healing but only one returned to express His faith in the Son of God.  Only one of them understood that the most important healing of all was the healing that Christ was to provide to reconcile mankind back to a Holy God.  And so Christ sent a true Worshipper of God on His way.  A man saved by faith in the Son of God.

Leprosy is a great picture of our fallen spiritual condition.  We were all once enemies of God.  We were the unclean ones.  Our first parents were born clean and then rebelled against the Lord of the Universe.  All of their descendants, including us, have been born unclean spiritual lepers.  Our souls are spiritually dark and decaying.  As the Pharisees were, we often look really good on the outside, but the inside is a cesspool of filth and sin.  As Romans 1:29-32 so accurately expresses about mankind:

Rom 1:29-32
…being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

And so at one time, in God’s presence, we were forced to draw our hands to our mouths and shout “UNCLEAN!”  And God had every right to leave us to die in the horrible state of sin.  It is we who had sinned against Him and not He against us.

But God is rich in Mercy.  God is rich in compassion.  He sent Christ to live for us in complete obedience and He sent Christ to die for us so that our sin, our filth, might be washed away.

And so, Christ is being proclaimed to you this day.  If you have never heard the call for the healing of your souls and you yet remain defiled in your sins then Christ is being lifted up before you in your midst.  Do you see the filth of your sin?  Do you smell the stench of a life that is causing your very soul to rot from the inside out?  Christ is before you.

“JESUS, MASTER, HAVE MERCY ON ME.”

He will cleanse you from your sins so that you may fall at His feet and worship Him.

Categories
Sacraments Theology

A Critique of Welty’s Use of Galatians in “From Circumcision to Baptism”

In a previous article, I posted Philip A's critique of Welty's article From Circumcision to Baptism.  I have posted my own critique of a foundational error made by Greg Welty and I include it here for your consideration.

Welty writes

What was the heresy of the Judaizers in the book of Galations? Fundamentally, their error was to contend that the command to circumcise was essential to the perpetuity of the Abrahamic Covenant and its promises and blessings. Thus, according to them, Gentile converts were required to be circumcised in order to be members of the family of God. But in this they were greatly mistaken, for in the New Covenant order of things, "circumcision is nothing" (1 Cor 7:19), and "neither circumcision or uncircumcision means anything" (Gal 5:6; cf. Gal 6:15). What they took to be essential to this everlasting covenant was in fact nonessential, and therefore done away with.

Welty is just flat wrong about the error of the Judaizers in Galatians. Read Galatians 3-4 for yourself. Nowhere does Paul once condemn the Judaizers for their trust in the sign "…as essential to the perpetuity of the Abrahamic Covenant." He misses the "fundamental" problem of the Judaizers. In fact, as I'll show, the Judaizers aren't even preserving the Abrahamic Covenant in the least. Listen to Paul:

Galations 3 1 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth,[a] before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? 2 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? 4 Have you suffered so many things in vain””if indeed it was in vain? 5 Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

The error was trust in the Law. The error was a reliance upon the Law as a means of Justification. So who does Paul roll out as an example that the Judaizers' belief is all wet? Abraham!

6 just as Abraham “believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”[c] 7 Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, “In you all the nations shall be blessed.”[d] 9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham.

Paul then returns to the point that he repeatedly hammers regarding the Judaizing heresy. He says it so often that one cannot miss his repeated refrain: Justification by the Law only brings a curse. So much for your trust in the Law Judiazers.

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.”[e] 11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shalllive by faith.”[f] 12 Yet the law is not of faith, but “the man who does them shall live by them.”[g] 13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”[h]), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

"You knucklhead Judaizers! Circumcision isn't even about keeping the Law!" is what Paul says here (Covenant Theology 101):

15 Brethren, I speak in the manner of men: Though it is only a man’s covenant, yet if it is confirmed, no one annuls or adds to it. 16 Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And to your Seed,”who is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ,[j] that it should make the promise of no effect. 18 For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Who do you think Paul is correcting here if not the Judaizers who think that Circumcision = Torah Keeping = Righteousness. This is the error that Paul is rebuking. Paul doesn't even have a problem with the physical act of circumcision, per se, but if you circumcise for the reason the Judaizers want you to then you've rejected the Gospel because you've rejected Grace.

Frankly, the problem with Welty's argument is that he needs to go back and read Galatians. This is frankly my biggest complaint as I've interacted with some other Baptists on these texts. Philip A alluded earlier to the way Welty wrests "circumcision is to no avail" snippets out of context and their meaning as Paul uses them. It's like Philip stated earlier, if you come to the text looking to justify Baptism and separate it from Circumcision then you run the danger of doing what Welty does by blowing by the basic error of the Judaizers. It turns the error on its head from Paul condemning the Judaizers for trusting in the Law (when it could only bring a curse) to an error of tying the sign to the perpetuity of the Abrahamic Covenant. The Judiazers weren't even looking at the Abrahamic Covenant but were preserving their perversion of it!

Thus, the basic "error" here is Welty's exegesis of Galatians 3. Since he misses the point of Paul's condemnation of the Judaizers, he applies an erroneous conclusion to paedobaptism.

Categories
Apologetics Defending the Faith

Debate Between Paul Manata and Dan Barker

If you haven’t listened to the debate between Paul Manata and Dan Barker on the question “Is Christianity or Atheism More Rational?” then please check it out at Unchained Radio

I just listened to the debate this morning while working out. Great job Paul!

I’m not precisely sure that Paul was talking over Dan Barker’s head. Dan just knows he doesn’t have reasonable answers to real questions so he disallows the questions. This is typical of Dan Barker from what I’ve heard before. I just realized that he is popular because he is irrational and unthinking and populist. He is a postmodern populist atheist.

I’m waiting for the transcript but Barker’s closing statement (as was the rest of his stuff) was a vaccuous “we have meaning because we say we have meaning” and “we have purpose and are good because we say we are good”. He admits that, cosmically, we have the value of broccoli but “here and now” we believe we have meaning so we do. It’s idiotic but it might as well have been a Finney-like altar call for atheism with the mindless atheists weeping and coming forward to embrace belief for belief’s sake.

Barker preaches to the choir. He makes atheists feel good about who they are. He doesn’t present arguments but, because atheists are only looking for affirmation, he gives them what they like. Paul’s analogies were very good and very funny at times (I burst out laughing a few times in the gym). In the final analysis, however, Paul was appealing to rational thought and Barker was making populist statements.

Paul concluded with a call to Barker’s repentance. The general call of the Gospel. He held out words of life to Dan. He presented argument for the Christian faith and Barker had no answer except to play the fool. In the end, Barker heaped curses upon himself. He gnashed his teeth and shook his fist at Christ and then turned His hatred toward God the Father.

I fear that Mr. Barker will have all eternity to contemplate the folly of his words last night.