Not a matter of rules.

I started thinking about rules and freedom today.  Lately, I've been feeling a freedom with and in the Lord that I'm not sure I've ever known before.  It feels like the Lord is showing me things for the first time...or it is the first time that they are actually making sense.  Thinking about freedom had me ponder bondage of rules.  And how, when I was placed under a bunch of rules, I loathed them and wanted to fight against them.  

As I'm thinking through these things today, I happened to read Romans 14 and was struck by verse 17:

For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

Let's go back to when I first met Jesus.  I was in high school and those years were filled with amazing mentors and learning about God and what it meant to be a believer.  Then I went to college; as I look back on my college years in regard to the Lord, the thing that stands out to me most is RULES.

1. I, by nature, like rules.  (Even when I choose to break them.)
2. The majority of Christians I was around in college loved rules.

This meant that often times God felt like a rule book.  You are good and holy if you abide by our rules...you are the best kind of Christian if you attend church, attend our weekly meeting, our discipled by our people, disciple our people yourself, spend time with and share the gospel with non-believers, study the Bible for an hour a day, spend as much time in prayer as you can, hang out with us over Christmas break and the summers, etc.  Other people knew the knew the Lord, but the people abiding by these rules...they were ones that really, REALLY knew the Lord and loved God.

Before I continue, I'd like to say a few things:

1. This may only be my perception of college and the ministry I was involved with.  I don't think that's (fully) the case, but it is a possibility.
2. The issue isn't whether or not these things are good because all of those things are good.  

BUT those things are food and drink.  They are rules.  And God cares about much more than the rules...He cares about righteousness, peace, and joy...in the Holy Spirit.

For me, post college time has been about sorting through the rules -- which ones are legit and which ones cause more harm in me than good because I am more wrapped up in the rule than the glorifying the Lord?  This past year or so, I've met the Holy Spirit and the thing I've most learned from Him is that there are no rules.  He does anything but fit into a box.  He blows me away with His ways and abilities!

When we pursue righteousness, peace, and joy.  And when we pursue those things through the Holy Spirit, we get to know the Lord on such a deep and intimate level.  Personally, I find when I'm seeking the Lord, rather than obeying rules, I am much more likely to serve others, to tell others about Jesus, to pray for people, to praise the Lord, etc.  There is a joy that can only come from God, a true peace that surpasses all understanding, and before you even have time to think about it, you are more righteous than you once were.  

It shouldn't surprise me, but it still does: that the Lord already has all of this figured out!  And His ways are always best!

Switching Gears

At this point, my emails back and forth with Todd are a bit tricky to post -- they are starting to look like a five year old's coloring book.  If anyone is interested in reading more of them, leave a comment with your email address and I'll send them on.


Otherwise, I think I'm going to be moving on...though don't be surprised if they come back up.

A Reminder

As I was about to spend some time in the word, I was reminded that God is who he is (Ex. 3:14).  God doesn’t make any apologies for that.  Why, then, do I/we make apologies for Him?

The words in the Bible aren't nice pleasantries.  God is really doing these things.  He isn’t nice.  He isn’t safe (Aslan).  But He is good.  This is always the case, even when I don’t like what He does. 

I’ve been listening to some of the Passion 2012 conference, and Francis Chan touched on this using a few examples.  The one I loved the most: Noah and the ark have been reduced to nursery décor.  But, where are the pictures of all the people drowning?

More to think about

(Todd to me): This is the study note from Malachi from my ESV translation...

In a classic text, which Paul quotes in Rom. 9:13, Malachi appeals to God’s elective and unconditional love of Jacob and corresponding hatred of Esau. In this context loved refers to choice rather than affection, and hated refers to rejection rather than animosity (which was explicitly prohibited against Edomites, Esau’s descendants, in Deut. 23:7). For a similar use of these terms, see Prov. 29:24; Luke 14:26; 16:13. Although Jacob and Esau were brothers, Jacob experienced God’s sovereign favor by which he was granted a privileged role in redemptive history as a bearer of the messianic promise, while Esau experienced God’s rejection in terms of this same role. Malachi’s concern, however, is primarily with the nations of Israel and Edom, of which Jacob and Esau were the representatives and progenitors. To Malachi’s contemporaries, it must have seemed that the prophet had committed a terrible blunder by citing the contrasting national fates of Israel and Edom as proof of Israel’s favored status. If God had chosen Jacob/Israel over Esau/Edom, why did he allow his people to suffer the total devastation of their country in 586 b.c. by Nebuchadnezzar and 70 years of Babylonian captivity, while Edom remained intact and seemed only to benefit from Israel’s loss? Malachi makes his point, however, by alluding to Jer. 9:11. Two centuries earlier Jeremiah announced the Lord’s impending judgment against Judah: “I will make Jerusalem a heap of ruins, a lair of jackals, and I will make the cities of Judah a desolation, without inhabitant.” By applying this same threat to Edom, Malachi makes clear that, like Judah, Edom would not escape God’s judgment. It is likely that this judgment came through the agency of Nabatean Arabs, who gradually forced the Edomites from their homeland between 550 and 400 b.c., causing them to resettle in an area later called Idumea. Being semi-nomadic, the Nabateans allowed the cities of Edom to go to ruin while their herds overgrazed and destroyed previously arable land. Whereas Judah was graciously restored after her punishment, reflecting the Lord’s love for his people, Edom’s judgment was to be permanent and irreversible (Mal. 1:4). There would continue to be individual Edomites (implied by 1:4; cf. Mark 3:8), but they had forfeited their national identity.

In lieu of our conversation about whether we’re willing to accept God for the reality of who He is or whether we sugarcoat things to make them a bit more tasty, how much do we accept the author’s take on love = choice and hatred = rejection. I like that because it fits my perspective...but is that the reality?

The pursuit of Truth continues

As I respond with the following to my friend:

(Me to Todd) It seems as though we Westerners are far too guilty of making God and the gospel into what we want, rather than what God says.  Even in believing that God doesn't save all, we (myself included) still find ways to sugar coat it as best we can.  I've been listening to David Platt's radical sermon series (1/2 way through) and a resounding theme is: do we count the cost of following Christ?  Do we really believe the Bible?  Because if we do, we have to actually live it out.  (Which is quite convicting!)

Regarding Paul's words on Jacob and Esau: 

(As you found) Mal. 1:2-3

 ^2 (A)“I have loved you,” says the LORD. ^(B)But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau ^(C)Jacob's brother?” declares the LORD. “Yet ^(D)I have loved Jacob ³ but Esau I have hated.^(E)I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert.”

Gen. 25:23

And the LORD said to her,

   ^(AB)“Two nations are in your womb,
   and two peoples from within you^[c] shall be divided;
^(AC)the one shall be stronger than the other,
   ^(AD)the older shall serve the younger.”

God isn't directly saying he'll love Jacob and hate Esau, but from the beginning it was clear that the two brothers would be at odds.  And it seems natural that God would take one side over the other.  

It is cool/challenging to look at the world through the lens of favoritism.  To the unfavored, retaliation seems so right, so normal.  We see it in your examples below, throughout the world, and even within myself.  I can think of a few examples where I felt like my brother was favored over me and so I retaliated against him.  

Genesis 4:¹ Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, “I have gotten^[a] a man with the help of the LORD.” ² And again, she bore his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, and Cain a worker of the ground. ³ In the course of time Cain brought to the LORD an offering of ^(A)the fruit of the ground, ⁴ and Abel also brought of ^(B)the firstborn of his flock and of their fat portions. And the LORD ^(C)had regard for Abel and his offering, ⁵ but ^(D)for Cain and his offering he had no regard. So Cain was very angry, and his face fell. ⁶ The LORD said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? ^7 (E)If you do well, will you not be accepted?^[b]And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. ^(F)Its desire is for^[c] you, but you must rule over it.”

{As I read this passage, I thought back to Jacob and Esau.  Cain was the elder brother and yet the younger was favored.  Also reminds me of of Adam and Jesus, with Jesus being the "second Adam."  And the first serving the second.  And then I'm reminded that God chooses the lowly and discarded. 

1 Cor.1

²⁷ But ^(AO)God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; ^(AP)God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; ²⁸ God chose what is low and despised in the world, even ^(AQ)things that are not, to ^(AR)bring to nothing things that are, ²⁹ so ^(AS)that no human being^[d] might boast in the presence of God. ³⁰ And because of him^[e] you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us^(AT)wisdom from God, ^(AU)righteousness and ^(AV)sanctification and ^(AW)redemption, ³¹ so that, as it is written, ^(AX)“Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

So, I think we see a constant theme throughout the Bible of the Lord choosing the underdogs.  One of the best sermons I've heard and that stuck with me was at City Church by your counterpart -- on David being chosen and his father overlooking him.  He was considered the weak one by his family, yet look what the Lord did through him!  Which, ultimately gives us a great sense of hope and excitement -- think what the Lord could do through us, though we are but weak and messy ones!  This concludes my tangent.}

My first thought: Abel gave the Lord the firstborn -- so rather than what he gave, it was the meaning/heart behind it.  The Lord cares more about our hearts than the actual action.

Psalm 51:

^16 (AD)For you will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it; 
   you will not be pleased with a burnt offering. 
¹⁷ The sacrifices of God are ^(AE)a broken spirit; 
   a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.

The Beattitudes

Jesus 21:

 ^1 (A)Jesus^[a] looked up and saw the rich ^(B)putting their gifts into ^(C)the offering box, ² and he saw a poor widow put in two^(D)small copper coins.^[b] 3 And he said, “Truly, I tell you, ^(E)this poor widow has put in more than all of them. ⁴ For they all contributed out of their abundance, but she out of her^(F)poverty put in all ^(G)she had to live on.”

Which is not to say that our actions don't matter; they do.  However, they're not the basis of our salvation.  Abel wasn't saved because of his offering; however, because he was favored, perhaps his offering was greater.  You could get yourself into a chicken and egg conundrum here -- is one saved because of their actions OR are one's actions a result of their salvation (or lack there of).  Being the good Calvinist I am, I go with the latter.  

If God's not partial (a big theme of Romans) then He predestines whom He predestines.  So I don't think He choose (meaning salvation) Abel over Cain because of his sacrifice.  Yet, perhaps the Lord was more pleased with Abel over Cain because Abel gave the Lord something meaningful and important...assuming that was an overflow of how he felt for the Lord.  And, as you know better than I, the Law dictates that we give our first fruits, our best, to the Lord.  

I think we can relate to this in our own lives: I believe the Lord has chosen/predestined me.  Yet, do I always please Him?  No.  Which, in a way, brings us back to the original question of love.  If God has chosen me, then He always loves me, unconditionally.  Though being in a relationship, there are times when He is more or less pleased with me than other times.  Subsequently, there are times when I am not pleased with Him -- at least for a time because I don't like what He's doing, but that doesn't change the definition of our relationship: Him being my God.  

Another challenging response

(Todd to me) You are starting to poke at some really important (and somewhat dangerous) aspects of where Christian theology doesn't match up with much of what we’re taught about God in the West.


I’ve been spending A LOT of time in Genesis and I’ve been struck by how it’s essentially the same story over and over...

Abel favored over Cain (Cain retaliates).
Jacob favored over Esau (Esau retaliates)
Joseph favored over his brothers (brothers retaliate)

Here’s one you’ll lose sleep over. Why did God favor Abel over Cain? Be careful...if you say it’s because he brought him the better offering (meat over vegetables), then are you saying that God’s favor/elect is ascribed by God for those who DO certain things?

Does that mean we can earn God’s love?

I think one of the best places we can be in (in terms of growing in the Lord) is when we’re forced to believe something theologically that we don’t want to believe. Sometimes we can create a God we want (I think that’s called ‘idolatry’)...so the process you’re going through is true repentance. As in, “think again.”

My Response: we don't always like what we find

(Me to Todd) Conversations I've had, sermons I've listened to, and scripture I've read over the past few weeks have pointed to the vast differences between believers and not.  Though I know and believe it to be true, at times it is such a large pill to swallow.

As I read through Romans 8 just now, I made two columns: those with Christ & those without Christ.  It is abundantly clear that there are immense privileges to knowing the Lord. As I read Romans 8, I was reminded of Romans 9.  My favorite passage to grasp double predestination, summed up in v 13, "As it is written, " Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."  So, God hates.  And you cannot hate and love something -- so much of what I think the Lord's been teaching me -- you are either all in or all out.  For me, it is in the context of loving the Lord.  Yet, I think it must work for how He loves as well.  Otherwise, His love would be lukewarm and we know He's not a fan of that.

I almost don't like my conclusion...not the first time I've disliked what I believe to be true.  But I think I was mistaken before in thinking that God's love is always unconditional.  Yes, it is absolutely unconditional for those He loves...  But there are those that He doesn't love.  I tried to find a way around that -- in thinking God could love someone unconditionally, yet still send them to hell (in agreement in my belief of predestination and God's just character).  But I don't think it works like that.  I still think God is just, which is why He's still GOOD and GRACIOUS, even in sending some to hell.  Because we ALL deserve hell and so saving even one would be gracious.

So, my beef with all of this is people telling others, "God loves you."  Mainly done in the course of evangelism.  I know I've done it.  And I've heard it said countless times...