The Historical Development of Philosophical Ethics

About a week ago, a former student named Lauren Horn sent me an email regarding an assignment she received for her History of Moral Philosophy class. The context of the question was the recent controversy surrounding the John Collins announcement and the Chris Broussard response. She was asked to work from her course readings to, "show how the foundations of moral thought have shifted to the point where claims to transcendent, universally valid principles are considered outdated and out of step with the times."  
I thought the question was fascinating, and knew Lauren's answer would be interesting. Therefore, I asked her to send me the paper when she finished. After reading her paper, I was reminded how essential an understanding of the historical development of philosophical ethics is in discussing moral issues with the larger culture. I immediately saw how the brief refresher course would be a helpful reference in several conversations I had been a part of, or had ongoing. I asked her if I could publish it here for that purposes, and hopefully for the edification of any who might read it. She gave me permission, with one note, "I had to remove my Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, and Kant sections and severely reduce all the others." I asked for the full version, but am afraid it was unavailable. 

Homosexuality has been around for almost as long as people have, but at no time during the history of Western Civilization has it achieved more public tolerance in Christian circles than today.  The on-going debate on the acceptance of homosexuality declares anti-homosexual attitudes to be outdated, and even pro-gay Christians declare practicing homosexuality to be an inclusion of expressing God’s love and not a sinful act.  This debate is only a reflection of the deep shift in thought that has taken place in the Western culture today, a thought that has denied transcendent universal absolutes and replaced them with subjective sentiments.  The debate of pro-homosexuality did not happen overnight, however.  Ideas, like bricks, build upon one another, and create worldviews that overtime create cultures in the same way bricks make walls that make buildings.  The growing acceptance of homosexuality in the Western world and Christian church is a result of a progression of ideas that have slowly stacked upon one another to deny innate transcendental truths but have constructed a building that at its foundation leans on them for support.  This paper will 1) ground truth and morality in Scripture, 2) trace a history of ideas from many Western thinkers showing how this conclusion arrived at a denial of transcendental truths, and 3) apply the result to the debate of homosexuality. 
For Christians, if ideas build upon one another to create walls, then Scripture must be the plumb line that tests their verticality to truth.  The Christian’s worldview must be shaped in light of Revelation as well as natural law.  Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologica, espouses that “the natural law is nothing else than the rational creature’s participation of the eternal law” (Question 91, Second Article). Unfortunately, humans do not always rightly participate in the eternal law and comments that it was “necessary for the directing of human conduct to have a Divine law” (Question 91, Fourth Article).  Similarly, Paul wrote to Timothy, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17).  One of the reasons Jesus gives for his coming is to “testify to the truth” (John 18:37) and indeed, he is truth incarnate (John 14:6).  It is necessary to moral principles that they be grounded in the person of Jesus and aligned with the Bible.  The Divine law becomes necessary because of man’s fall in Genesis 3 where they become sinful and destined for eternal separation from God.  Romans 1 supports both God’s revelation of the natural law and the necessity of Divine law because of man’s propensity to unrighteousness: “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen being understood through what has been made, so that they [ungodly men] are without excuse.” (Verse 20)  He further explains in Verse 25 that “God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie.”  God’s Word becomes necessary for how one ought to ground moral principles because without it man’s reasoning capacities would most likely lead away from the truth.  
Setting the first brick in place, Plato pens The Republic.  In this, Plato introduces his concept of the ‘Forms’, the immaterial, transcendent, and perfect ideas of things that exist on earth.  The ‘Forms’ are the highest form of the good and are recognized because they are innate in man.  Plato does not successfully explain however the origin of these ‘Forms’, but does recognize that they do not come from the physical world.  Plato believed that man lived a previous life in the Forms and that man was trying to recollect what they had already seen.  For example, man recognizes a tree because one has seen the perfect tree before in the realm of the ‘Forms’. The soul for Plato was fastened to a dying animal but would be released upon death.  It consisted of three parts, the Will, the Appetite, and Reason.  The Will was seen as good, the Appetite as unruly and negative, and Reason as the means to be virtuous.   His pupil, Aristotle, partially disagreed arguing that there were no perfect Forms and that though there were three distinct souls, all were mortal.  
Epicurus, however, carries on Aristotle’s mortality of the soul.  In fact, Epicurus argues for a purely naturalistic world comprised of atoms, and though many in his day disregarded his ideas, they became popular when Lucretius’s poem On the Nature of Things was rediscovered in the fifteenth century.  This meant deriving truth was solely empirical, and there was nothing beyond this world that had imparted it to man.  Once man died, his soul died as well and returned back into the material world of atoms.  Epicurus then determined that the greatest good was for man to live absent of pain or disturbances.  Living an ascetic life was usually the best way to ensure this.  Pursuing sensual pleasure most often would lead to pain because man could not limit himself.   
During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, men such as John Hobbs, John Locke, and Jean Jacques Rousseau attempted to hedge themselves against Epicurean materialism but still maintained the notion that truth was solely empirical.  Hobbs carried it further deeming truth invalid and fictitious.  Justice and injustices are things that people construct, and the purpose of government is essentially to aid in man’s survival.  Morality is agreed upon by the people through their universal ability to reason, and all men are born with rights.  Jean Jacque Rousseau contributed his social contract theory, but unlike Hobbs, supported a higher view of people.  While Hobbs saw people as violent, Rousseau argued that it was civilizations that corrupted men.  Men are “noble savages” until society changes them.  Their ideas resulted in an inversion of natural rights over natural law where there is no acknowledgment of a God designed ordering of nature.  This conclusion diverges from Epicurus mainly in that morality is not characterized by asceticism but was moving towards hedonism.
The pontifications of these three are carried on with David Hume who remarks, “Truth is disputable; what exists in nature of things is the standard of our judgment; what each man feels within himself is the standard of sentiment.”  Hume grounds morality in his reason and sentiment but believes the senses cannot be absolutely trusted to perceive reality. As a result he ultimately grounds his morality in sentiment, and similar to Rousseau, believes these are derived from charity for others.  Hume naturally fixes his ethics in his sentiment because he can only trust in his opinion because it is his.  He makes himself autonomous and the result of his philosophy is seen in his view of justice.  Laying another brick in the mortar, justice becomes a utilitarian idea, coming and going as the state of men change.  These conclusions would have been in direct contrast with Plato who believed that justice was the greatest good and existed perfectly and forever in the spiritual realm.
John Stuart Mill is a culmination of much of the previous philosophy.  Pulling from Epicurean ideas, he determines that the feelings of pleasure and pain determine morality.  He remarks, “Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce happiness the reverse of happiness.  By ‘happiness’ is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by ‘unhappiness,’ pain, and the privation of pleasure.”  By pleasure, however, Mill is not defining this as a restraint in sensual pleasure.  He concludes that there are greater intellectual pleasures but that most people cannot obtain these and therefore settle for physical pleasures.  Contrary to Epicurus, Mill moved from ascetics and into the arms of hedonism.  
In 1859 The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin made its entry into the history of ideas.  Though this was a book on science, it revealed Darwin’s beliefs on metaphysics and anthropology that clearly banished any notion of absolute truths from a transcendent Creator.  Darwin writes from a purely naturalistic worldview that explains man’s evolutionary process of his coming into being.  Though Darwin postulates that there might be a Creator, he sets Nature up as a sovereign autonomous being that acts to keep the earth from becoming over populated with creatures.  He, in line with Epicurus, states that man has no purpose and no afterlife.  The only purpose he could possibly have is to survive and progress the species.  This ‘Survival of the Fittest’ denies any morality and aims at producing a perfect and pure species at whatever means it takes.
Sigmund Freud assumes a Darwinian naturalistic worldview and understanding the conflict between Darwin and Christianity, sets out in his Civilization and Its Discontents to explain Christianity and religion as “patently infantile” and “incongruous with reality” and laments that most will never be able to rise above this.  Freud explains that suffering is a result of Religion’s and specifically Christianity’s oppressive nature of man’s instinctual desires.  Since Christianity is not true, man has no purpose because religion is the only thing that gives man a purpose.  Man is then free to completely act to fulfill his desires.  Freud, unlike Epicurus, finds the greatest happiness in unrestraint in sensual pleasure.  Sensual pleasure can express itself in any sexual behavior and acting completely on one’s instincts is the greatest happiness and good for everyone involved.  The result of denying transcendent truths from a Creator has found itself in unbridled hedonism as a result of self-autonomy and a loss of man’s purpose.
Concluding with the final philosopher, Nietzsche, with a bang, sets the final brick in mortar with his famous “God is dead.”  With a “Hobbsian” evaluation of human nature, he describes the violent and power hungry nature of man but remarks that this is virtuous and should not be governed.  His contribution of the ‘Transvaluation of Values’ embraces the existentialist conclusion that life is absurd.  This idea encourages the intellectually elite “to get rid of the humdrum character of old valuations” which he means to be the morality found in the Bible and tradition Western civilization.  Since life is nothing and purposeless, the ‘will to power’ or domination of creation is the only thing for man to do.  Embracing the irrational and purposeless universe is true morality.       
In light of these ideas, one can see that many in the Western world have abandoned the designed, ordered, and purposed world found in Genesis1:27-28a and welcomed a nihilistic irrational worldview that has no thought of appropriate sexuality.  There are no absolutes in this ridiculous world.  Man is autonomous and should be allowed to express sexuality freely.  The reality though is that man does not live this way.  The current debate regarding John Collins’ announcement of his homosexuality and the angry response that Chris Broussard received from pro-gay supporters when calling it a “rebellion against God” proves that man adheres to some concept of fairness or rightness in the world.  By arguing for autonomy they actually undermine it by denying another’s autonomy.  It’s a classic case of wanting one’s cake and eating it too.  To return to the wall analogy, they are walking up stairs of a building they have not built nor do they own.  They are constantly categorizing a right and a wrong in their mind whether it is expressive of what Aquinas’ calls ‘eternal law’ or not.  Now this is what one could call absurd.    

A Mother's Day Message

I was given the honor of filling the pulpit at Morningview Baptist Church on Mother's Day this past Sunday. The audio has been posted on the church website, and I wanted to share it here, with an outline.

Why Did God Make Women? Genesis 1:26-31

I. God's Purpose for Creating Mankind (26-27)

A. Image: 

Image; 

Likeness; 

B. Dominion: 

II. God's Purpose for Making Them Male and Female (28-31)

A. Be Fruitful:

B. Multiply:

C. Fill the earth:

D. Subdue the earth:

III. A Biblical Picture of Womanhood

A. The Church as Bride:

Fruit;

Multiply;

Fill; 

Subdue; 

B. The Church as Wife:

Fruit; 

Multiply; 

Fill; 

Subdue; 

C. The Church as Mother:

Fruit; 

Multiply; 

Fill; 

Subdue; 

Parenting Teens by Randy Stinson

Parents should hear this talk on Parenting Teens from the Renown 2013 Conference
Randy Stinson is the Dean of the School of Church Ministries and the Vice President for Academic Innovation at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY.  He also serves as the Senior Fellow of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.
A recognized authority on the subject of biblical manhood and womanhood, Stinson is a regular conference speaker on the subjects of raising masculine sons and feminine daughters, parenting, marriage, and men’s leadership. He is the co-author of Field Guide for Biblical Manhood and co-editor of Trained in the Fear of God: Family Ministry in Theological, Historical, and Practical Perspective. In his spare time, he enjoys hunting, fishing, and encourages his children in their pursuits of baseball and tennis. He and his wife, Danna, have been married for 21 years and have seven children: Gunnar and Georgia (twin 16 year olds), Fisher (14), Eden (13), Payton (11), Spencer (7), and Willa (7).

Attention Dads of Daughters!

I am almost certain I have never quoted Taylor Swift. However, I was confined to hear one of her songs (Mine) this morning, and think the chorus is a strong reminder to us of our role in their relationships:
Do you remember, we were sittin', there by the water?
You put your arm around me for the first time
You made a rebel of a careless man's careful daughter
You are the best thing, that's ever been mine

Parenting in a Digital Age

I recently read two articles that have to do with parenting in a digital age in Southern Seminary Magazine. I thought they were good and thought provoking. Therefore, I wanted to share them with some of my friends, most of whom are parents. I pray they are encouraging to you all as you seek to raise your children in the fear and admonition of the Lord.

iPhone, iPads and Christian parenting
EDITOR’S NOTE: In the following, Russell D. Moore writes about one of the most pressing implications of parenting in the digital age. Moore is senior vice president for academic administration and dean of the School of Theology at Southern Seminary.
Here’s what I just don’t understand: the trend among professing Christian families to give unrestricted Inter- net access to their pre-teen children through iPhones and iPads or their equivalent devices. It’s not that we don’t have the data to know what happens when sexually forming minds are exposed to pornography. And it’s not that we don’t know the kind of pull to temptation, especially among young males, that comes with the promise of sexual “fulfillment” with the illusion of anonymity. It’s not that we don’t know, moreover, the way that unsavory characters use the Internet to troll for naive children to exploit.

Why would you put your child in a situation with that kind of peril?
Given what we know about sexually developing adolescents and pre-adolescents, and the Internet itself, it is impossible to rank unrestricted access to the World Wide Web in a category with watching television or freely roaming the neighborhood. This is more like sending your adolescent male to spend the night in an adult movie theater because you trust him not to look up from his Bible, or allowing your daughter to grow marijuana in her room because she likes the bud as decoration.

This is astounding not primarily because it militates against the higher standards of Christian parenting but because it militates against the natural ordering of human parenting itself.
Jesus, in describing the Fatherhood of God, told the crowd that no one, even being evil, would give his son a serpent when he asked for a fish (Matt 7:10). Why not? It’s because natural affection impels a father to seek to protect his child from something harmful. In this case, we see a culture, even among Christians sometimes, that’s quite willing to give a child a serpent, as long as he really wants it, and we think he’s trustworthy as a snake-charmer.
Don’t get me wrong. I think the digital revolution is largely a good thing, and I think children need to be raised up to use technology as a gift for dominion. But there’s too much at stake to turn a child loose, with no boundaries, with a technology that could psychically cripple him or her (and his or her future family), for a lifetime and thereafter. —RUSSELL D. MOORE

Charting the new digital engagement: the gospel and your iPhone

We have all seen it. The father, surrounded by t-shirted kids clamoring for his attention, lost in the alternate universe of his iPhone. “Daddy! Daddy! Daddy! Daddy!” they shout, little arms straight up in the air, as if they can physi- cally pull his attention back to them. It’s enough to make a casual bystander want to jab the guy in the ribs.
The jabbing of ribs is like the casting of stones, though: it’s easy for us to do it to other people, but hard for us to apply the same rules to ourselves. We see how people around us are tuning their families out, and we shake our heads. But then — bing! — we get a new email or text message, and suddenly we’re swimming in the vortex, feverishly pounding out an instantaneous response to a minor matter. All the while, our wife, our kids, our friends are waiting. “There he goes again.” “I remember what life used to be like before smartphones.” “Maybe if I jabbed him in the ribs?”

But we can’t turn back the clock. Though it’s worth think- ing about, it’s not feasible to expect busy people who are now accustomed to a new technological culture — who live and move and have their beings within it — simply to opt out of it. For many of us, including many pastors and Christian leaders, doing so would involve failing to participate in many important matters. We can bemoan this situation, yes, and it does have some negative consequences. But that’s not the full story. To an unprecedented degree, we are able today to communicate, decide, bear burdens, encourage and lead in a minute-by-minute way. Our challenge is our opportunity, in other words.
We see that the new digital engagement presents us with an age-old question, accelerated since the Industrial society, how do we honor God by loving our families even as we do ministry in an increasingly connective world? Our lives have gotten faster; even as we accept this real- ity, how do we maintain personal presence with those we love?
Here are five principles by which we can chart a new form of digital engagement.
DEFINE PRIORITIES
First, remember what is of the utmost importance. We already may be aware of this truth, but we will need regularly to remind ourselves that our relationship with God, our spouses and our children matter more than anything else in the world. The potentially addictive nature of smartphones and tablets and laptops makes such daily reminders nec- essary. Let’s be honest: it’s fun to use this new technology, much of which is like toys for adults. Important as work-based communication may be, though, our marriages come first. Our kids aren’t being annoying much of the time when they protest our lack of presence with them. They’re getting it exactly right.
SET RULES
Second, set rules for digital engagement. The gospel, we remember, is not opposed to wise living. Loving God through his gospel means fearing God. Fearing God is the beginning an ordered, sensible, balanced life. Because we are tempted by our sinful natures to live disordered and foolish lives, we will of necessity discipline ourselves in godliness (1 Tim 4:7). This will mean limiting our use of our smartphones and tablets at home, for example. If you use technology in personal devotions, don’t let yourself get distracted and surf the Web. After work, I would suggest taking a hiatus from tech- nology from dinnertime until the kids’ bedtime. Even after the kids go to bed, husbands should be careful about digital engagement. Spend time with your wife. If you need to check your email, fine. But give effort to invest in your marriage. So you won’t have Justin Bieber’s Twitter legions. It’s okay. God’s kingdom continues to advance, right?

INVITE ACCOUNTABILITY
Third, invite accountability from loved ones and friends. If we’re not careful, we can get into habits and not even know it. This will happen with fast-paced technology that is fun to use. Accordingly, we should invite accountability from those close to us. Give your spouse the green light to talk with you about your digital engagement. Ask friends if you’re “that guy” or “that girl,” who treats the smartphone like “the precious,” to quote Middle Earth’s famous obsessive, Gollum. Actually, calling Gollum to mind just might be what we need to avoid unhealthy patterns. Picture yourself like him. Then put your phone down.
ACCEPT LIMITATIONS
Fourth, accept limitations when it comes to email and com- munication. We have all despaired upon opening our inbox. I recently saw a ministry leader exult on Twitter when he deleted all his emails. It’s a common dream of many pastors. Yet this will be difficult for many of us to pull off. Where does that leave us? It leaves us needing to give grace to others and to accept limitations for ourselves. I suspect the demands of email won’t go away, but I do think that accepting our God- given fragility can relieve us of unnecessary guilt and help free us to love our families. I also think that systems like “Get Things Done” — described helpfully by Matt Perman and others — can help in this area.
PROMOTE THE GOSPEL
Fifth, use technology to promote the gospel and enhance personal ministry. The crucial challenge for us is not to allow technology to master us, which all of creation — trees, wind, phones, images — tries to do in a post-fall world (Gen are established and accountability is in place, Christians should feel free to use technology and new media to promote actively and enthusiastically the gospel. We can be tempted to be modern Luddites, but gospel concern and church history won’t let us. The Reformation that birthed the Protestant and evangelical movements was driven by the printing press, a revolution in itself. Even as Luther and Calvin and the early Baptists spread their ideas like wildfire through printing, so we spread the gospel through Facebook, Twitter and whatever else is coming down the pike.
In summary, we need to be careful in handling technology. But we should not fear the new digital engagement. Prayerfully, wisely and out of love for God and his gospel of grace, we should practice it. We may need a few jabs in the ribs as we go; technology must not master us. Provided we establish godly rhythms, we can, in fact, master it, and turn the digital world upside down for Christ.
Owen D. Strachan is assistant professor of church history and Christian theology at Boyce College, the undergraduate school of Southern Seminary 

Crazy Christmas Chaos

I pray this finds you all resting in the joy and peace of the Lord. That really is what Christmas should be about, isn't it? Instead we find ourselves exhausted and worn as we hustle from party to party and scurry from store to store. We do this in preparation to celebrate the birth of one who was born in a stable, spent his childhood on the lam, apprenticed as a carpenter, was homeless in his prime and was buried in a borrowed tomb. Seems crazy, doesn't it? Well, we also do it because he was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, died a substitutionary death as an atonement for sins, was raised from the grave, sits at the right hand of God, and will return to judge the living and the dead and to take the church as His bride. Still seems crazy, right? Yet we do it, and fight for the right to call it Christmas, because we are in, but not of the world. We do it both because of our cultural Christianity and we are Christians in a pagan culture. It still seems strange that we run past a holiday called Thanksgiving to get to the business of Christmas consumerism as a means of celebrating the birth of an impoverished, crucified man, who reigns as the eternal King of a spiritual kingdom. Oh well, peace on earth, good will to men. I pray we will all find a place beyond the noise to be still and know that He is God.

Family: A Theological Crisis

I wanted to pass along an article published yesterday How Did This Happen? The Family Crisis as a Theological Crisis by Albert Mohler. It is a great look at how our the theology of family can contribute to the current family crisis in our culture, or how it can defend the family form this crisis. He does so by looking at four main theological facts about the family, and how they relate to the current crisis. I pray it is clarifying, encouraging and challenging.

Division of Worldviews

We were confronted with the undeniable reality this week. What we learned on Wednesday morning is more important than who the next president will be. It was something many of us had already suspected, that the culture we live in has changed. One article pointed out, “The changing U.S. electorate split in two Tuesday, not only along lines of political party and ideology but also by race and ethnicity, gender and marital status, region and religion, education and age.” The divisions are even sharper than they were four years ago. Republican pollster Whit Ayres says, "We have never had a more polarized electorate."¹ Dr. Mohler noted that “millions of Americans went to the polls and voted according to a contrary worldview." What does that mean for us as believing families? He goes on to say, "I think this was an evangelical disaster." He is right, and says “there's a danger that evangelicals won't see this larger lesson.” Mohler points out, “The popular vote reveals a deeply divided nation. The nation is divided politically, but that divide points to a division at the level of worldview.”²

He illustrates the point in an article published November 7, “The 2012 election makes clear that Americans are divided over fundamental questions. Americans are divided into camps that define and see the world in fundamentally different terms. The election did not cause this division, it merely revealed it. This deep division at the level of worldview is an even greater challenge for the church. The electorate is becoming more secular. Recent studies have indicated that the single greatest predictor of voting patterns is the frequency of church attendance.” 79% of those voting for Romney attend religious service as much as once a week, while 60% of those voting for Obama never attend any religious service. “Far fewer Americans now attend church, and a recent study indicated that fully 20% of all Americans identify with no religious preference at all. The secularizing of the electorate will have monumental consequences.”³

Clearly, we face a new moral landscape in America, and a worldview challenge that is far greater than any political challenge. Christians must never see political action as an end, but only as a means. Our main concern is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This is, however, an urgent call to action. Maybe Jimmy Scroggins, Senior Pastor of The First Baptist Church of West Palm Beach, tweeted it best, “This election ought to force evangelicals to change identities. Abandon 'moral majority' mindset & embrace living as 'missional minority.'”

The culture we live in is different, and now we know it. We ought to be raising our children according to this mindset, and training them to live in a throughly secular humanist culture. As I have already said this week, even though we are not the stumbling block, the culture will stumble over the gospel. When the culture stumbles over the gospel and is lost in the confusion of their own sinfulness, and we are faithful to confront the confusion and lostness with the truth of the gospel, in love, then we will receive persecution. It will come, and we must be prepared to receive it as a blessing from God. We must see it as a confirmation of our righteousness in Christ; that we are being held up by God, like Job before Satan, and sifted out like Peter. We must see that God has used it throughout history to strengthen His people and expand His kingdom; from Noah to Abraham, to the nation of Israel, to Christ himself, to the Church. When we have no other hope for rescue, and nothing else in which to trust, it causes us to look more to Christ and to rely on Him, for He is all we have. And, it is the remnant who trust in Christ that God always uses as a means to deliver his people and to draw a lost and dying world to himself. I have found that I, almost strangely, am already looking more to Christ. This has been the effect throughout history, and today I understand anew.

1http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/11/07/analysis-nation-moves-further-apart/1688031/

2http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/11/08/164711265/for-religious-conservatives-election-was-a-disaster

3http://www.albertmohler.com/2012/11/07/aftermath-lessons-from-the-2012-election/

Let There Be Thanksgiving

We have entered into my favorite month, probably because the cool weather always reminds me of the beginning of basketball season and Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday. One of the first things that come to mind when I think of thanksgiving is Ephesians 5:4, Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving. Thanksgiving should be the leaning of our soul, attitude of our heart, and fruit of our mouth. There is a definite and consistent relationship throughout scripture between the heart and the mouth. That relationship is best summarized, I think, in Luke 6:45, The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.Therefore, the opposite is true, an evil or undisciplined tongue is an indicator of a wicked attitude of heart, and a sinful leaning of the soul.

Mark Ross says, “Scriptural warnings about the control of our tongues are many and urgent. Yet for all their importance, they are too often disregarded by otherwise sincere and devoted Christians.”¹ One example of how this ought to apply to our lives is how we speak in a judgmental way toward one another. Matthew 7:1-2 tells us that Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.This is not a command to not judge, it is a command to judge according to the measure, or standard, by which you wish to be judged. It is judgment according to the golden rule. Matthew 7:12 sums up the whole law and prophets by this “ethic of reciprocity,” So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. Jesus does this because there are only two measures by which we can be judged; the measure of grace according to Christ's righteousness, or the measure of works according to Christ righteousness. As Ross explains, “One would think that such a warning would encourage us toward the most generous view of others that could be taken.” However, this is often not the case. We want grace for ourselves, and judgement for others. “Even within the church, we adopt the patterns of the world and allow our speech toward one another to be corrupted.”²

This is why it is such a serious matter when students speak in a judgmental or hateful way toward one another, or when they are disrespectful to their parents. Or when parents provoke your children to anger, or model judgmental behavior toward one another. Matthew 5:21-22 has made clear, You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. With this kind of warning, I find it hard to believe that we take such chances with our speech. James 1:26 gets to the point,  If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless. He goes on to develop the point in James 3:3-10, comparing the tongue to a bit in a horses mouth and the rudder of a ship, So also the tongue is a small member, yet it boasts of great things. How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire! And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, and set on fire by hell. For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so.

Ross concludes, “Bridling our tongue will require a change in our hearts as well s an effort to sift what comes out of our mouths.” That is why law and command can not control our tongue. “It is love that proves most effective: love for our neighbor, love for our enemies, love for the household of God especially.” I would add that a love for God is foundational because it supposes that by grace He has first loved us. “Then our words will be pleasing in the sight of our great God and Savior.”³

1Ross, Mark E., Guarding Our Speech, Tabletalk; October 2012, Page 62.

2Ibid, 62.

3Ibid, 63.

Blessed Reformation Day!

ONE Day Away (almost forgot)

Reformation Day: Now Just 2 Days Away

Reformation Day: Now Just 3 Days Away

Now Just 4 Days Away

Cultural Fascination with Evil

This time of year, I am always surprised at the lack of seriousness with which we generally take the occult. It is concerning to me how many of our students are entertained by the dark side of our culture. Dr. Mohler, in an article called Christianity and the Dark Side: What About Halloween?¹ that he has publish at least three times in the past ten years, places Halloween at the center of a “cultural fascination with evil and the demonic.” He says, “Over a hundred years ago, the great Dutch theologian Hermann Bavinck predicted that the 20th century would 'witness a gigantic conflict of spirits.' His prediction turned out to be an understatement, and this great conflict continues into the 21st century. The issue of Halloween presses itself annually upon the Christian conscience. Acutely aware of dangers new and old, many Christian parents choose to withdraw their children from the holiday altogether. Others choose to follow a strategic battle plan for engagement with the holiday. Still others have gone further, seeking to convert Halloween into an evangelistic opportunity.”

Is Halloween really that significant? Mohler answers, “Well, Halloween is a big deal in the marketplace. Halloween is surpassed only by Christmas in terms of economic activity.” He sites cultural experts who view “a celebration of Halloween as a transgressive holiday that allows the bizarre and elements from the dark side to enter the mainstream,” and study it by “looking at the cultural impact of Halloween on the rise of horror movies and the nation’s fascination with violence.” After a review of the origins of Halloween and the Christian response throughout history, he notes, “This fascination with the occult comes as America has been sliding into post-Christian secularism. While the courts remove all theistic references from America’s public square, the void is being filled with a pervasive fascination with evil, paganism, and new forms of occultism.”

Dr. Mohler presents the various ways that the church has dealt with this phenomenon in recent years, acknowledging that some Christians, “argue that the pagan roots of Halloween are no more significant than the pagan origins of Christmas and other church festivals.” He concludes, “the issue is a bit more complicated than that. While affirming that make-believe and imagination are part and parcel of God’s gift of imagination, Christians should still be very concerned about the focus of that imagination and creativity. Arguing against Halloween is not equivalent to arguing against Christmas. The old church festival of 'All Hallow’s Eve' is by no means as universally understood among Christians as the celebration of the incarnation at Christmas.”

Dr. Mohler says, “Christian parents should make careful decisions based on a biblically-informed Christian conscience. Some Halloween practices are clearly out of bounds, others may be strategically transformed, but this takes hard work and may meet with mixed success. The coming of Halloween is a good time for Christians to remember that evil spirits are real and that the Devil will seize every opportunity to trumpet his own celebrity. Perhaps the best response to the Devil at Halloween is that offered by Martin Luther, the great Reformer: 'The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to texts of Scripture, is to jeer and flout him for he cannot bear scorn.' On October 31, 1517, Martin Luther began the Reformation with a declaration that the church must be recalled to the authority of God’s Word and the purity of biblical doctrine. With this in mind, the best Christian response to Halloween might be to scorn the Devil and then pray for the Reformation of Christ’s church on earth. Let’s put the dark side on the defensive.”

By God's providence, we talked about some of this in FUEL Wednesday night, in the context of Acts 19:11-20. I have included some notes below. I pray it will provide a good context for a family discussion on the topic.

When Paul came to Ephesus on his second missionary journey he left Aquila and Priscilla in Ephesus to establish the infant church there until his promised return. While Paul is away, God raised up a new generation of church leader, in the person of Apollos, to take Paul's place in Corinth. We saw that while Apollos was competent and eloquent, he was deficient in at least one way. Apollos knew only the baptism of John, and was not teaching people about the person and work of the Spirit of God.

When Paul arrived back in Ephesus, on the heels of Apollos' ministry, he had to correct the people, and teach them about the Spirit of God. We will see that meant correcting misunderstandings about the spiritual realm, misuse of spiritual authority, and rooting out evil. Paul worked many miracles at Ephesus, as previously in Acts, opening the door for hearing the gospel and giving confirmation that God himself was working through Paul and his message. However, he encountered others who pursued a false way of working “miracles,” including some Jewish exorcists and those who practiced cultic faith in magical spells. Now this is a sensitive subject, as we have to find a balance and respect regarding the Holy Spirit and the spiritual realm.

The Power of God (11-12)

God was doing this. We are not told that Paul did these unusual miracles, but that God worked them by the hands of Paul. Luke states that these were unusual miracles, and gives an example; Paul’s handkerchiefs or aprons could be laid on a person even without Paul present and that person would be healed or delivered from demonic possession. Literally, the phrase “unusual miracles” could be translated, miracles “not of the ordinary kind.” This implies and assumes miracles of an ordinary kind. However, even if we should “expect” miracles, these are the unexpected sort! We should not expect that God would continue to use this method to bring healing, or deliverance. It was unusual for God to use handkerchiefs or aprons used by Paul in such a way. The handkerchiefs or aprons worked in the same way that the shadow of Peter (Acts 5:15) or the hem of Jesus’ garment (Matthew 14:36) might heal: the item became a point of contact by which a person released faith in Jesus as healer. So, we receive whatever is proven to be from the hand of God, but pursue only that for which we have a Biblical pattern.

Why was God acting in such a manner among these people? God delights in doing things in new and different ways. God will stoop down to meet us even in the context of, and in order to confront our crude superstitions; as had happened at Samaria (8:9–13), Cyprus (13:6–11), and Philippi (16:16–18). As we will see, the superstitious practice of magic and sorcery was prevalent in Ephesus. This never means that God is pleased with our superstition, but that in His mercy He may supersede it in order to reveal Himself and affirm the work of the gospel. The powerful forces of pagan magic and religion connected to demonic activity were confronted by the far more powerful work of the Holy Spirit ministering through Paul. But, it should not surprise us that some took a quite superstitious view of the miracles done through Paul.

Occult Religion (13-16)

Here, a group of itinerant Jewish exorcists try to imitate Paul’s “formula” for success. At that time, there were Jewish exorcists who practiced their “trade” with a lot of superstition and ceremony. There are records of extensive ceremonies and spoken formulas that Jewish people in the first century used to try to free themselves from the influence of evil spirits, but it is unlikely that these were very effective, since the people were astounded when Jesus was able to cast out demons with “authority and power” in Luke 4:36. These seven sons of Sceva, seeing the power Paul had, tried to invoke the name of Jesus. They failed because they had no personal relationship with Jesus, they only knew Jesus as the God of Paul.

Similarly, there are many people, even churchgoers, who name the name of Jesus and will perish in Hell because they have no personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Some of you are in this danger. You only know “the Jesus the pastor preaches” or “the Jesus my parents believe in” instead of the Jesus of your own salvation. Do you have the “right” to use the name of Jesus? These sons of Sceva did not, because they had no personal relationship with Jesus, they were not in Christ.

The spiritual danger of claiming the name of Jesus, who you don't know, is made physically obvious. The evil spirit knew exactly who Jesus was, and knew exactly who Paul was. But they didn’t know who the seven sons of Sceva were; they had no spiritual authority. A “reverse exorcism” occurred, with the demon driving out the exorcists. The man in whom the evil spirit was jumped on all seven of them, and beat them naked. Because the seven sons of Sceva had no real relationship with Jesus, they had no spiritual power, and posed no threat, and had little defense from the evil spirit. They left the encounter naked and wounded, insult to injury, their nudity enhanced their humiliation. It was dangerous for them to take the reality of spiritual warfare lightly. It is equally dangerous for us to take it lightly.

Repentance from Evil (17-19)

The incident with the sons of Sceva impressed the people with the reality of the demonic realm. Ephesus was a stronghold of Satan, where many evil things both superstitious and satanic were practiced. Apparently, before the sons of Sceva incident, many believers did not know they were involved in the occultic. They saw their actions in a far more innocent light, until they knew the reality of the demonic. It made them fear the Lord and the demonic: both in healthy ways. Spurgeon said, “You will have enough temptation in your own mind without going after these things. Is there any habit, any practice, that you have got that defiles your soul? If Christ loves you, and you come and trust in him, you will make short work of it. Have done with it, and have done with it forever.”

Many who had believed came confessing and telling their deeds. It is significant that these practitioners of magic came confessing and telling their deeds; it was thought that the power of these magic spells resided in their secrecy, which was renounced in the telling. They renounced the demonic by confessing and by burning their magic books. The Greco-Roman world put great stock in magical incantations and spells, often collecting them into books that sold for large sums. Converts in Ephesus bought these relics of their pagan past, disregarding whatever value they might have. The estimated total was 50,000 drachma (drachma = about a day’s wage; @ $10 an hour = $4,000,000 today). That is a lot of Harry Potter movies! Judas only got a week's wage.

What about us? Are we mindlessly engaged in the occult? Should we be removing books, movies, statues, charms, games, or whatever else might have connection with demonic spirits? It is a matter of conscience on one level; I cannot tell you for sure what you should and shouldn't have. It is a matter of wisdom on another level; what fellowship has the temple with idols? Why risk the danger of playing with the devil?

The Gospel Prevails (20)

We have seen over and over again, Luke uses this phrase as a summary statement of how the power of the gospel prevails over every obstacle and persecution. He again emphasizes the inherent power of the word of the Lord, showing that the gospel triumphs over all demonic powers. In these summary statements, Luke continues to give glory to God and his word rather than to any human skill, knowledge, or effort. At the end of the day, the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation. What are you trusting in? Do you take seriously the reality of the Spiritual realm? Are you being entertained by the darkness of the occult? What risk are you taking? What value does it have?

1http://www.albertmohler.com/2007/10/31/christianity-and-the-dark-side-what-about-halloween/

Reformation Day: 5 Days Away

Reformation Day: 6 Days Away

Reformation Day: 7 Days Away

Kingdom Identity

1 Peter 2:4-12                 Online Audio         
Before I was converted, as a Sophomore in college, the closet thing I had to a mentor was an agnostic history/philosophy professor Dr. David Bowen. He was the first person to clearly articulate and intentionally seek to answer for me the three basic questions of life; Who am I? How did I come to be? Why am I here? These are basic philosophical questions that have been asked since the beginning of recorded time. As human beings, we find the most basic answers to these question in Genesis. As believers, we find specific answers in Acts. However, perhaps nowhere do we find, as Piper says, "such resoundingly clear answers to all three questions in such a small space," as we do in this passage.

I. Jesus is the object:

"As you come to him," indicates a personal relationship with Christ, a drawing near, beginning at but not limited to the time of conversion. Spiritual exiles have been called to faith in Christ, and therefore, ought to live as People of God. Our identity is that of a kingdom people, it is a Kingdom Identity.

In creation, we were made in the image of God, and ours was a garden identity; the consequence was to be fruitful and multiply. In the fall, we fell under the likeness of Adam, and ours was a slave identity;

the consequence was the bondage of the will and slavery to sin. In redemption, we were raised up into the likeness of Christ, and ours is a kingdom identity.

Jesus is the object of the passage. This is important, as we will talk about our Kingdom Identity, we must start with the foundation and absolute truth that our kingdom identity is in Jesus Christ. While we come into the kingdom individually, our Kingdom Identity really has very little to do with us individually.
We are all created in the image of God, and fallen in the likeness of Adam. That is our human identity. Our kingdom identity comes from dying to self and being given the life of Christ. That spiritually dead self, and all of its allegiance to the ruler and power of this world, was put to death on the cross, and by grace, through faith in Christ, we have been raised with Christ to newness of life. All we have is Christ.

1. So, just as Jesus was rejected by men; His followers suffer persecution.

2. But, just as Jesus is God’s elect (chosen) one, the firstborn of all the elect; His followers are God's elect, chosen and given as a gift to Christ before the foundation of the world.

3. Therefore, just as Christ, risen from the dead and hence, is the living stone, the foundation of God’s

new temple, the exalted Lord, honored above all as King of kings and Lord of lords; His followers are living stones in God’s new temple, and as believers continue in fellowship with Christ they “are being built up as a spiritual house.”

II. Worship is the analogy:

This is the analogy of 1 Peter 2, Jesus is the Chief Cornerstone, and those who have faith in Christ are being made into His temple. We get our identity from God, and it is, in fact, our relation to God in Christ. Since the components that make up the house are “living,” the house itself is also growing. You yourselves … are being built up.

Peter’s picture here is that God is building a spiritual temple using living stones, those who have come to the ultimate Living Stone (Jesus). God does the work of building. A stone can not make itself alive, and even a living stone cannot build itself up into a temple. It requires a builder, and it requires the unity of many stones being fit together into a structure. What God does in us together is important; He is constructing and instrument of His glory out of us.
Peter sees clearly that the Old Testament temple anticipated the new temple (His people) where God dwells and is worshiped, and both the old and new are but pictures of the real temple of God; the throne-room of heaven. As much as the nation of Israel was chosen by God, so the Church is called from among every tribe and tongue and nation. As much as Israel had a physical temple, Christians are themselves a spiritual temple. As much as Israel had a priesthood, so Christians are a holy priesthood. And as much as they had sacrifices, so Christians offer up spiritual sacrifices. As we get closer to the reality of the kingdom of God, the clearer the pictures become.

To support this idea that Jesus is the cornerstone of God’s temple, Peter cites Isaiah 28:16. Starting in verse 6, For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone,
 a cornerstone chosen and precious,
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.” So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe, “The stone that the builders rejected
 has become the cornerstone,” and “A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense.” They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.

Those who trust in Christ will be rejected by men, as He was, but ultimately, they will not be put to shame, but will be eternally vindicated in the resurrection of Christ. However, those who reject the living stone (a cornerstone chosen and precious), for those who do not believe, that cornerstone has become;
A stone of stumbling - Those who reject Him, refusing to build on Him, instead stumble over Him.

It is no wonder that it is the truth of Jesus Christ that reveals the unbelief of the fleshly heart.

And a rock of offense - Instead of being their salvation, Jesus becomes to them a rock of offense.

We must be careful that, when proclaiming Christ to the world, we do not become the cause of their stumbling, or the source of their offense. We must get out of the way, so that they might either believe or find offense in the rock of stumbling. We are to become as nothing, all things to all men, not only because Jesus is the cornerstone of Psalm 118 and the foundation stone of Isaiah 28, but He is also the stumbling stone of Isaiah 8.

Jesus quoted this passage from Psalm 118 in regard to Himself in Matthew 21:42-44. Talking to the Jews regarding the kingdom of God, Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’? Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits." When Jesus spoke of Himself as the stone of Psalm 118, He spoke of what those who rejected Him are appointed to: And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder. (44)

Peter does not deny human responsibility; their stumbling is their own fault. They stumble because they trip over the righteousness of Christ, and disobey God. Those who have rejected, stumble because all sin and fall short of the glory of God, and even though God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned. They stumble because, whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.

Apart from Christ, we are dead and dying, and destined eternally to death. However, we see already that in Christ, we are a chosen temple for Christ; chosen by God in Christ, for Christ; elect to be a house of worship; made both alive and precious by the grace of God, for the glory of God, in the face of Christ. But believers are not only God’s temple, but are also a holy priesthood; which offers spiritual sacrifices; not the animal sacrifices of the OT, but living sacrifices of whole lives lived in praise to God;

that are made acceptable through Christ; not having any priestly authority in ourselves, but only through Christ is our offering made acceptable.

As you come to him, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to make making spiritual sacrifices.
III. The Identity of God's People:
Peter expounds and explains the realities that are brought forward by this picture of a chosen temple and holy priesthood in the first part of verse 9, But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession. Collectively, the individual living stones are built together (the chosen race) into a house and a priesthood, a holy nation and a particular people.

The Church is a chosen race.

God’s grace, rather than human choice, is the ultimate explanation for why some people come to faith and others do not. We are a chosen race; therefore there is no distinction of race in the kingdom of God.

There is both a corporate and individual implication because the chosen race is not racial, but is a new people from among all peoples. God has chosen some to be adopted as His people; as a result, our identity is relational, not ethnic; "chosenness," not color or culture. Piper concludes, "you are part of the chosen race because the race is made up of individuals who were chosen - from all the races." Therefore no one can boast of being included!

Peter views the church as a new Israel, (or being made part of the people of God) for he picks up what is said of Israel in Exodus 19:5&6 and applies it to the Church. The things that once exclusively belonged to Israel; their election, priesthood, and calling, are now no longer the property of Israel alone. Those who are in Christ have been grafted in, and possess them in a greater, more full spiritual sense. So that Paul can say in Ephesians 1:3-6, Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.

The Church is a royal priesthood.

The offices of royalty and priesthood were jealously separated in Israel, but Jesus, who is our King and Priest, has brought them together for His people. Our priesthood is one not only of worship, but dominion.
Priesthood relates access to God. Those who trust in Christ are as priest before God; not needing any mediator except Christ, our great High Priest. As we have seen in Hebrews 7, this is one way that the new covenant is better than Judaism, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God. 

Priesthood relates an active role before God. We are ministers before God, offering up our lives as a spiritual service of worship. The is no christian or secular activity for the believer, all of life is priestly service. As Romans 12:1 makes clear, I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.

The Church is a holy nation.

You are set apart by God, for God. Since he is holy, we have been made holy. We share in His character both as the one who set us apart, and who is our King. It is hypocrisy (a lie) to act out of this holy character, saying with your actions that you are something you are not; treasonous to be a citizen, and act like you are not. The implication is that we are not made part of a holy nation, we are not holy because the nation is holy; we are a holy nation, the nation is holy because we are made holy. Both as the one who set us apart and rules over us, He makes us holy and commands us to be holy; even as He himself is holy.

The Church is a people for His own possession.

A museum may be filled with quite ordinary things: hats, canes, shoes, and so forth; but they are significant because they once belonged to someone famous. God takes ordinary people, and because He has taken them, they are special. Our identity is so tied to this idea of possession, that it is repeated in verse 10, Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people. Peter alludes to texts in Hosea 1 and 2 that refer to Israel and again sees them fulfilled in the Church. This is at the heart of the Gospel; this is reconciliation and adoption.
We once were without these privileges, and were not even a people before God. We had not seen the mercy of God, but now have obtained mercy. In our culture, with its Christian foundations, we don’t understand the tremendous sense of privilege and relief that came to Gentiles as they were able to share in the New Covenant with the God of Israel. Peter’s message is nonetheless wonderful: “You didn’t used to belong, but now you belong to God and among God’s people.” You are a chosen race, You are a royal priesthood, You are a holy nation, You are a people for His own possession; that you may proclaim the excellencies of Christ.

IV. Consequence of this Kingdom Identity:

The First consequence of this identity in Christ is that we to be proclaimers of Christ; (vs. 9b) But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession; that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. As God’s chosen ones, Christians are to proclaim the excellencies of the one who summoned them from darkness and ushered them into his marvelous light.

The Second consequence of this identity in Christ is that we are to live as citizens of a spiritual kingdom; (vs. 10) now you are God's people; now you have received mercy. Having received mercy, and being reconciled to God, we are citizens of His Kingdom. The purpose for these high privileges is not so we can grow proud, but so that we can bear witness to the excellencies of Christ; the chief cornerstone, our great High Priest, our King who called us out of darkness into his marvelous light.

Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people. Once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. Therefore, in verse 11, we are identified, in this world, as sojourners and exiles:

Sojourner; a stranger, one who lives in a place without the right of citizenship, in this world.

Exile; a pilgrim, one who comes from a foreign country into a city or land to reside there by the side of the natives; in but not of this world.

As sojourners and exiles, we should live as though this is not our home. As a result, we are to live as kingdom citizens, according to our Kingdom Identity.

1) As citizens of the kingdom of God we should abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against our soul. The primary spiritual battle we fight is against the sin of our flesh. This battle is waged in our minds, and sin uses the members of our body against us to destroy our soul. We are a holy people, citizens of a holy nation, who serve a holy King, who intercedes to make us holy.

As sojourners in an unholy land, we must fight to not marry ourselves to the pagan tribes, For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said,

“I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them,
 and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.
 Therefore go out from their midst,
and be separate from them, says the Lord,
and touch no unclean thing;
 then I will welcome you,
 and I will be a father to you,
and you shall be sons and daughters to me,
 says the Lord Almighty.” (2 Corinthians 6:14-18)

2) As citizens of the kingdom of God we should Keep our conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against us as evildoers, they may see our good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation. Peter refers to unbelievers as Gentiles, which is in keeping with his understanding of believers being a people of God and unbelievers being not a people. We are to live godly lives, so that when we are reviled by unbelievers, persecuted for Christ, called evil because of our faith (which is quickly becoming more of a reality in our culture), the outworking of Christ righteousness in us, our sanctification, will be an instrument for God's glory.

As pilgrims living among a lost people, Peter clearly points us to Matthew 5:13-16 here, You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people's feet. You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.

Some unbelievers will repent and believe and thus glorify God, as a result (as God uses means) of our testimony. However, on the day of judgment, every knee will bow and every tongue confess, as God brings all things together in unity and submission under the feet of Christ, for the praise of the glory of His grace.

Therefore, I urge you (unbeliever) to fall on the mercies of God; crying out to the Great High Priest for salvation; that his intercession on the cross might be for you (taking on your sin, and putting in you His righteousness); that in Christ, you might be adopted into the family of God and made a child of His own possession.
God has given us our identity in order that the excellency of His identity as the one who choses and reigns, intercedes and makes holy, and possesses us might be proclaimed thorough us.
Therefore, I urge you (Morningview) as sojourners, as exiles; to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul; to keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation.

http://www.morningview.org/2012/10/22/sermon-kingdom-identity/

When We Have to Do Hard Things

I had to come in and do some hard things today. When I am faced with difficult task, I am reminded of something my good friend Randy Stinson always says, “real men do the hard thing first.” I am encouraged by this and want to share with you an exerpt of an article where he talks about this in the context of cultivating manhood. After establishing that, “biblical manhood is modeled after the Lord Jesus,” he says the following.

One should not overlook the fact that the characteristics of biblical masculinity can and should be cultivated. It is easy to recall at this point David’s own life experiences. When standing before Saul in 1 Samuel 17:34-36 trying to convince him that he should be allowed to go out and fight Goliath, David brings up past experiences that have impacted his ability to take on this current fight. He has already killed a lion and a bear, and Goliath will be like them. Note also, this is not a self-reliant vision of masculinity, since he clearly understands (vs. 37) that ultimately God delivered him from the mouth of the lion and the bear.

God gives all of us opportunities each day to resist passivity and develop biblically masculine characteristics. Each of the challenges men face should be viewed as instruments in God’s hands that will help shape us as biblical men. These opportunities should be viewed with the same understanding exhibited by David. We must acknowledge that it is God who delivers and protects and cultivates. With that in mind, here are some ways men can, on a daily basis, cultivate masculine characteristics under the lordship of Christ:

Do the hardest task first: Attacking your hardest task of the day without delay will build your resistance to passivity. Waiting until the end of the day only reinforces your sinful tendencies toward passivity.

Make the hard phone call first: While this is similar to the first suggestion, it deals more with passivity within interpersonal relationships. Some men are willing to do the hard task first, but avoid difficult situations involving other people.

Run to the battle: One only needs to consider the life of the Apostle Paul to see that conflict is a regular feature of the Christian life. Men who think all conflict should be avoided, or who refuse to engage with those who would harm the body of Christ or their family, not only model passivity but fail in the area of protection.

Do your work now as opposed to later: From term papers to tax filing, the man who is cultivating biblical masculinity will not allow these things to rule him. He will exercise dominion over them by doing them in a timely manner.

Keep your domain in order: While most of us on occasion have a messy desk or car trunk, a life that is characterized by disorder is evidence of passivity. Your home, dorm room, garage, office and car should bear the mark of your masculinity as you subdue it and keep it in order.

Kill a bear or a lion: In other words, do something that is a challenge for you. It may actually be to kill a bear or a lion, but it may be a health challenge like running a triathlon or a marathon. It may be something as basic as riding a roller coaster or as edgy as snorkeling with sharks. It may involve debating the atheist at work or starting a Bible study at home. It may mean you need to finally share the gospel with your lost friend or deal with a family conflict that you have allowed to go on for too long.

Mind you, these activities do not constitute manhood. But, as you consider your own challenges and interests, they can help to cultivate a sense of willingness to reject passivity and embrace the characteristics of biblical manhood to lead, provide and protect. Don’t wait for some endorsement from the world and don’t embrace the feminized version of manhood espoused by our culture. Hear the words of a father to a son and “show yourself a man.”

I pray this is encouraging to you all in some way, much as it has been many times for me. 

Randy L. Stinson became Dean of the SBTS School of Church Ministries in August 2006.
He is also assistant professor of leadership, and vice president for academic innovation.
Dr. Stinson also serves as Senior Fellow with The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Southern Seminary Magazine | Winter 2005. Vol. 73, No. 3. Copyright © 2005 The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY.  publicrelations@sbts.edu.