Scripture Meditation: Heb. 13:1-2

"Keep on loving each other as brothers and sisters. Don’t forget to show hospitality to strangers, for some who have done this have entertained angels without realizing it!" (Heb. 13:1-2, NLT) 

Here are some things we can take away from it: 

1. Keep loving each other as brothers and sisters, especially when it is hard to do so. That's when we need the love most! 

2. Be hospitable (friendly) to everyone. Why? Because we have no idea who the person may be or where they are at the moment in their life. Our hospitality could prove to be beneficial to us---as if we were to entertain an angel---or our hospitality could prove to be beneficial and life-changing to the recipient---they may come to know Jesus, they may be uplifted, they may be comforted, and so on. 

2011

Sin & Infant Salvation

It is a difficult thing to talk to parent who just lost a child. What do you say? How do you console them? Do you say anything? It’s even more difficult when they ask you how could God do this or is their child in heaven. How as a Christian can we hold to the truth of inherent sin and believe as well as assure people that their infants and small children go to heaven when they die without sounding contradictory? This question is what I will be answering in this blog article.

Without thinking, majority of Christians and non-Christians believe infants and small children are essentially innocent of sin and guiltless. And someone would say, “Aren’t they? Infants can’t sin right?” You’re absolutely right. An infant would be “innocent” of committing a sin. And yet, someone else would say, “But, wait, how can this be when the Bible teaches that everyone is born in sin?”

David said in Psalm 51:5, “For I was born a sinner—yes, from the moment my mother conceived me” (NLT).
Job speaks on this as well, “So no one can be good in the presence of God, and no one born to a woman can be pure.” (Job 25:4, NCV).

Right here is where it can get tricky if we don’t understand sound theology. Yes, an infant would be “innocent” of committing a sin, but they are not without sin. Every human born is born “in” sin because Adam’s sin has been imputed (transferred, credited) to everyone born of the seed of man (Rom. 3:9; 5:12, 16-19). This means no person, infant to adult, is “guiltless” or “innocent” (Ps. 143:2, Prov. 20:9, Eccl. 7:20).

Now this begs another question, is the atoning work of Christ somehow applied to infants without their making a volitional decision to trust in Christ for salvation?
     This question is a much more difficult to answer. If I answer this from an Arminianist soteriological perspective, I’d say I believe God has some special grace for infants and somehow accounts the atoning work of Christ to them (cf. Matthew 18:14). If I answer this from a Calvinist soteriological perspective, I’d say only those infants whom God predestined does the atoning work of Christ apply to (cf. Ephesians 1:3-11). I do not identify as either an Arminianist or a Calvinist, but if I simply use both of the scripture references and arguments given I have a pretty good case for believing that the atoning work of Christ is somehow applied to infants without them making a volitional decision. Furthermore, David’s comment in 2Samuel 12:21-23 is very suggestive that he is speaking of seeing his dead child again in eternity. So between David’s story and what Jesus states in Matthew 18:14 is enough to make a case that in God’s sovereign plan, even though sin has been imputed to an infant, He--without violating His own law--makes some special provision for infants and small children who die.
     I believe this is one of those cases of Deuteronomy 29:29, “The secret things belongs to the LORD our God” (NKJV). I’m okay with giving reasonable answers to this question rather than definitive ones in this case.

I hope this has helped us as Christians know and more certainly assure someone who’s lost an infant or small child that their infants and small children go to heaven when they die without sounding contradictory.

6/2/2012

1Tim. 2:11-12: Women Teaching & Leading in the Church

Lately, I have been in several conversations regarding women not being able to teach or lead men/mixed groups within the church. This is controversial, so I've responded as balanced and objective as I could. Yet, these conversations have made me want to revisit this topic scripturally again. I know my position, but then it's always good to know why you hold to that particular position. I remember me writing about this topic before in my systematic theology class. However, when I went and read over that paper I realized I only skimmed this passage, and not from this angle. This blog is me exploring this topic and passage concisely and objectively to see what Paul's intent was and was not.

Please allow me to share this disclaimer, THIS IS NOT AN EXHAUSTIVE writing. I will not answer every question regarding this topic. I will not answer every objection regarding this topic. I will not be attacking any one side or the other. I am simply exploring this passage in a concise, objective approach; following the evidence like the First 48 TV show. (I would have said forensic investigators, but that would equal me going exhaustive).

Let's begin shall we.

Context, Context, Context
A key rule in hermeneutics (biblical interpretation) is "context determines meaning". It goes from immediate context, to surrounding context, to context of the whole scope of Scripture. While the passage of focus is 1Timothy 2:11-12, for context we'll start at verse 9 and go to verse 15, and then broaden out to the whole letter itself, and then to the New Testament.

In short, this passage (vv. 9-15) is mainly addressing women's internal and external godliness expressed in the local church. For it starts with outward modesty (v. 9) from inward godliness (10), to godly submission unto God's headship structure (vv. 11-15). The questions that follow are: What made Paul write this? Were there any issues in the church Timothy was pastoring? Is Paul addressing women teaching and leading in all areas in the church? Does that mean a woman can't teach any man in anything in regards to the local church, or be in any authority over any man in regards to the local church? Is this "teach" speaking of teaching in general or teaching doctrine or a different specificity of teaching? Was this meant to be a timeless theological principle or an instruction for the church culture of that time? And trust me more questions could be presented.

Some Historical Context
Some of the things the church in Ephesus were battling, in regards to women, was fertility cults, idol worship of the goddess Diana (Artemis) (Acts 19:24-41), promiscuity, attention-seeking, women possibly exploiting their new liberties in Christ, among other things. This helps bring into light the reason for the call to outward modesty from inward godliness (vv. 9-10). Paul is challenging the women not to dress nor act like the unsaved women of Ephesus. It further helps by providing some backdrop for why Paul is telling them to learn in a non-disruptive manner and why they are not to teach or have authority (vv. 11-12). In other words, don't take your freedom to learn and speak too far. Scholars say this instruction to learn was a big deal then, because women up until that time were not allowed to even learn from a man (rabbi/teacher) except for their husband. Jesus broke that mold, and Paul is following suit. But some of the women were probably taking it too far.

Exploring the Text...Contextually
In verse 11, "learn in silence" does not mean in context "learn but never speak", but rather it means "learn in a quiet, non-disruptive manner" (cf. same Greek word for "silence" with 2Thess. 3:11-12, but different from the "silent" in 1Cor. 14:34). Here Paul is saying a woman learning is okay to do, just learn in a non-disruptive manner under the leadership of the church (i.e. "with all submission"). Verse 12 is saying, in context with the surrounding texts in this letter (vv. 8, 13-14; 1:3-7, 18-20; 3:1-7; 5:17), that a woman is not to teach from the place of elder/pastor nor to try to usurp the eldership/overseer/pastorate authority given to the man (or usurp even the headship authority given to the husband, vv. 13-15 cf. 1Cor. 11:3, Eph. 5:23), but rather be non-disruptive (i.e. "but be in silence").

Exploring the N.T...Contextually
So how do we know Paul (or shall we say the Holy Spirit inspiring Paul) is not saying or implying that women cannot teach "a man" or be in leadership over "a man"? Here's how:

• We see in Acts 18:24-26 that Priscilla and Aquila both taught (Gr., expositorally) Apollos "the way of God more accurately". Priscilla was a leader alongside her husband in their house church (Rom. 16:3). Thus, there was teaching and leading by a woman, and not only over other women or simply kids, and under the headship authority of her husband and leadership authority of Apostle Paul.
• Phoebe was a deaconess ("servant of the church" implies a position compared to a servant in the church which implies just someone helping out) (Rom. 16:1). What's more, Paul even instructed others believers (with no distinction between men or women) to receive her and to "help her in whatever manner she may have need of you" (Rom. 16:2). This implies some authority (probably temporarily and only on occasions, but nonetheless it's still authority) over those who are to assist her as "she may have need".
• Who knows if some of the other sisters Paul mentions in Romans 16 were leaders as well. Paul speaks of these women using the same terms as his male leader counterparts. "The verb "worked very hard" (16:6, 12) is used of ministerial service" (*3, p. 1283).
• Timothy's mother and grandmother taught him the Scriptures (2Tim. 1:5; 3:14-15).
• Apostle John writes a letter to a fellow sister who is leading and teaching both male and female believers in her home (2John). In the Greek the term children used in 2John is gender neutral and the Greek term is unclear if it means her literal children (whether grown or young is unconfirmed too) or children in the faith. John goes as far as instructing this sister to watch themselves from falsehood (2Jn. 8-9), and what to do when traveling false teachers come to her house (2Jn. 10-11). That would be her exercising leadership in discerning falsehood, and exercising authority over a man by restricting him entrance to teach if she discerned he was a false teacher. All the while she's under the authority of the Apostle and Elder John.
• We know women are disciples and called to make more disciples, with no distinction between discipling men or women nor any distinction with it being during a worship service or not (Matt. 28:18-20).
• Every believer is a priest (1Pet. 2:4-10).
• Scripture does not indicate that the Holy Spirit is limited to only giving men the spiritual gift of teaching or leadership, nor does Scripture indicate that these gifts are gender specific while they're being administered (1Cor. 12:4-7, 11, 27-28).

Thus, Paul would not be saying or implying something contrary to women teaching and leading in these modes. Paul is instructing Timothy that women are not to teach or have authority from the office of elder/pastor, not restricting them from teaching or leading mixed groups of men and women in the church in general or even during worship services (for there are no Scriptures that definitively state elders/pastors are the only ones who must teach during worship services).

But what about Paul's admonishment in 1Cor. 14:34-35? How does that fit into the not teaching or no authority over a man? In context, Paul was addressing disruptive and unruly married women who were using their gifts in a disorderly manner (1Cor. 14:26-33, 40). Therefore, Paul's admonishment was for order among some disorderly married women (v. 35), not a mandate for all women to not speak. Disorderly women are to stay silent (Gr., hold their peace/tongue). Disorderly women are not permitted to speak (Gr., be talkative, babbling) in the assembly but to submit to leadership, and if they want to speak they are to ask their own husbands at home. Why? Because it is a disgrace to them to be disruptively talkative in the church (i.e. during the service); it's shameful for them to be seen as disruptive and disorderly. Paul's admonishment here comes with concern for them as well as the church. This passage, in context, can fit into the overall point in 1Timothy 2:9-15, that is, the internal and external godliness expressed in the local church; however, it does not fit into the underlying point of teaching and leading in 1Tim. 2:11-12.

Conclusion
To quote The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood,

“Many complementarians continue to disagree concerning the extent of the prohibition in 1 Tim 2:12. While there is agreement that pastors/elders should be qualified males, there is disagreement concerning what the Bible says about women teaching mixed adult audiences. Some complementarian churches do not allow women to teach mixed adult audiences, while other complementari­an churches do allow it. On this particu­lar point, there is agreement in principle (observing headship), but disagreement in practice (teaching mixed audiences).” (http://bit.ly/HZBt9b) (emphasis added)

I believe that's where this concern and difference boils down to, we agree in principle (observing headship) but disagree on what it looks like in practice (teaching mixed audiences), and this is not worth the time spent arguing or dividing over. No one's salvation or discipleship is at stake over this.

What about churches/denominations who use these verses to not allow women to teach from the pulpit or to not teach mixed groups of men and women in the church or to not be in leadership over mixed groups of men and women? That is that church's preference. There are no scriptures that clearly state or instruct women to teach men/mixed groups or lead over men/mixed groups. Thus, it's not a matter of Scripture, but a matter of preference. Those who use these passages for this reason don't need to. Each church has its own right to implement their own governing principles and rules. And as a member of that church you should be sure to know what your church's governing principles, rules, and beliefs are, and if you agree then uphold them, so long as they aren't contrary to Scripture or treating them as a component of your salvation. If you do not agree, but you have no desire to depart for that reason, then respectfully uphold the governing principles, rules, and beliefs---so long as they aren't contrary to Scripture or treating them as a component of your salvation. If you have questions, pray and ask, and then research their answers. If you have concerns, pray and ask, and then research their answers. Repeat this process as much as needed. But this issue is not worth being divided over or causing an uproar in the Church. Again, it's not a matter of Scripture, but a matter of preference.

What about the churches/denominations who have women as pastors/elders? This is different than the above question. This is not a matter of preference, but a matter of interpretation. Some argue that the passages in 1Timothy 3 & 5 and Titus 1 are overruled by Galatians 3:28 and similar verses. Others may use different verses to minimize or eradicate the male headship authority in the church (and maybe even in the home). While others say Paul's use of masculine nouns when describing elders/pastors/overseers was more cultural than theological. Personally, for me, this is a harder thing to overlook than those who prefer to not allow women to teach or lead as stated in the first question. Those who hold to the view of women as pastors/elders open up the whole counsel of God to be interpreted and modified to fit one's personal view and not the author's original intent. However, like I said above, each church has its own right to implement their own governing principles, rules, and beliefs. As a member of that church you should be sure to know what your church's governing principles, rules, and beliefs are, and if you agree then uphold them, so long as they aren't contrary to Scripture or treating them as a component of your salvation. If you do not agree, but you have no desire to depart for that reason, then respectfully uphold the governing principles, rules, and beliefs---so long as they aren't contrary to Scripture or treating them as a component of your salvation. If you have questions, pray and ask, and then research their answers. If you have concerns, pray and ask, and then research their answers. Repeat this process as much as needed. This issue is not an essential of salvation. Yet for some it is a non-negotiable. Thus, you have to decide what this issue is worth to you and means for you. Personally, I choose to uphold the Scripture as it states in it's original intent and context in this area.

Last Words

I hope this blog has helped you the reader in someway. If not, then forgive me for wasting your time. It started out as a simple refresher and turned into this. I told my wife I wasn't writing a blog, and here I am, blogging away. We as believers should be able to discuss and explore controversial topics and passages without devouring each other. And we can graciously challenge one another to hold tight to what Scripture says and not what we prefer or what we think it means. But let our resolve be to continue to fellowship in what we do agree on (the essentials), and not spend so much time focused on what we disagree on (the non-essentials and non-negotiables). A lost and dying world is watching us, and especially how we handle controversial issues.

Jesus said, "I am praying not only for these disciples but also for all who will ever believe in me through their message. I pray that they will all be one, just as you and I are one—as you are in me, Father, and I am in you. And may they be in us so that the world will believe you sent me." (John 17:20-21, NLT)

"Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen. (1Tim. 1:17, NASB)

______
References:
1. BibleLexicon.org
2. Discovery Series: "What does the Bible say about Women in Ministry" (RBC Ministries)
*3. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Baker Book House)
4. Find It Quick: Handy Bible Encyclopedia (Ron Rhodes)
5. InterlinearBible.org
6. MacArthur's Whole Bible Commentary (Thomas Nelson)
7. NASB Life Application Study Bible (Zondervan)
8. The New Testament and Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Moody)
9. The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible (Moody Press)

Originally posted 5/8/12
Updated 11/20/13

The Danger of Hidden Confidence

While I was in praying this morning, I came to a notion that I had some hidden confidence in a project of mine. Now, is there anything wrong with having confidence? No, absolutely not. However, when we as believers begin to trust more in our confidence--however that may manifest itself, e.g. things, people, accomplishments, money, status, etc--and not being confident in God and His plan, that's when it becomes a problem. Maybe some of you are wondering what I mean by "hidden confidence". What I mean by "hidden confidence" is self-confidence (i.e. the confidence I just spoke of above that is wrong) that masquerades itself as godly confidence (i.e. confidence in God or confidence that's pleasing unto God). It was this "hidden confidence" that I was sensing creeping around in my heart. 

Right as I detected this hidden confidence, the Spirit brought to my mind the story of David taking a census of the people. We find this story in 2Samuel 24 and 1Chronicles 21. This census David took came on the heels of his last words (2Sam. 23:1-7) and the story of his mighty men (2Sam. 23:8-23). Is there anything wrong with taking a census of the people? No, not necessarily. We see Moses did it in Exodus 30:12 and Numbers chapter 1, 4, 26, and 31:48-49. So then what was wrong with David's census? David's census came from his hidden confidence, not by the direction of God as with Moses. Here we see David resting his confidence not in God and what God's done, but in the number of people under his own rule. David had gone against the objection of his army commander and the captains of the army (2Sam. 24:3-4, 1Chron. 21:3-4) and had the people numbered anyway. Afterwards, he realized his sin (2Sam. 24:10, 1Chron. 21:8). David worded it as a great sin and scripture records it as evil in the eyes of God, so much so that there was a serious consequence (2Sam. 24:11-15, 1Chron. 21:9-12).

Before I read this story, I was talking out in prayer why and where I believe there was some hidden confidence in this particular project of mine. After I read this story is how I was able to see my hidden confidence as a problem. I was beginning to put more trust in a portion of my planning for this project and not being fully confident in God and His plan for my project. Praise God for prayer, the Holy Spirit, and His Word! All three of these helped warn me and keep me from a potentially great sin. I could have easily succumb to this hidden confidence, rejected the prompting of the Holy Spirit, disregarded the Word, and continued building this project believing I was truly confident in God but secretly holding on to my own confidence. But God is faithful! I love that He knows me better than I know me, and He won't let me stay the same me. I love that He loves me so much that His desire and plan is to conform me into the image of His Beloved! 

Believers, be warned about this hidden confidence and not taking it seriously, but also be encouraged that the Spirit will bring it to your attention!

"God judges not of sin as we do. What appears to us harmless, or, at least, but a small offence, may be a great sin in the eye of God, who discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart. Even ungodly men can discern evil tempers and wrong conduct in believers, of which they themselves often remain unconscious. But God seldom allows those whom he loves the pleasures they sinfully covet." Matthew Henry

4/10/2012

From Chance to Choice

We've heard the sayings,

“She get it from her momma.”
“He’s just like his daddy.”
“The apple doesn't fall to far from the tree”?

Is there any truth to these sayings? Does our gene pool determine who we will become in life or is there a bigger picture? I believe there is truth in these statements. And the Bible agrees. There is a bigger picture, and if we have a proper perspective the truth we can learn from these sayings can help us in seeing our utter need for Jesus, in seeing our need for deeper soul transformation, and in releasing us from the bondage of our past.

Our Gene Pool

Our gene pool (which is a complete set of genes called a genome) is all within our cells. In each cell is a complete set of instructions or pre-stored information. This information completely describes a human being. So, biologically speaking on a molecular level, your gene pool does predetermine some things about you as a person pre-birth (e.g. hair color, eye color, skin color, sex [our sexual orientation is determined pre-birth according to what sex we are born as; same-sex/homosexuality is a sexual preference/choice not an orientation/determined], height, our nose, our ears, etc). So we can see from our gene pool that you do get some things from your momma and you are in ways just like your daddy. But it goes deeper than your parents. Your biology is not by chance, but by God (Ps. 139:13-15).

Is It All Because of Our Genes?

Is who we are all because of our genes? No. Our genes do not predetermine who we the person will become in life (e.g. promiscuous, homosexual, hateful, racist, prejudice, conceited, or reserved, kind, helpful, hard-working, analytical, romantic, etc). Our genes do not predetermine this. Who we become in life is a combination of 

(1)our own choices (decisions that we make––the good, the bad, the ugly), 
(2)our family of origin (i.e. how we were raised, our family environment growing up, and the family examples we saw growing up), 
(3)the environment we lived around growing up (neighborhood, school, friends, etc), 
(4)sin (both ours and others), and last but not least 
(5)God (Ps. 139:16).

It is these five things that play the largest part in who a person becomes, whether in the negative sense or the positive.

So we can see that there is no chance in who you are. You are who you are by bio-molecular choice, yours and others choices, and God's choice. And each of these choices has an ultimate destination in God's sovereign plan.

The Bigger Picture

"And He {God} made from one [common origin, one source, one blood] {i.e. Adam/one biological and spiritual gene pool} all nations {Gr. ethnos--peoples} of men to settle on the face of the earth, having definitely determined [their] allotted periods of time and the fixed boundaries of their habitation (their settlements, lands, and abodes), so that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel after Him and find Him, although He is not far from each one of us." (Acts 17:26-27, AMP, with my added emphasis)

We've all gone through what we've gone through, both good and bad, to detour us to Jesus. And who we are in the grand scheme of things is either a child of Adam or a child of God. We don't have to do anything to become a child of Adam. We are already Adam's offspring, born from his seed (biological and spiritual gene pool), and thus his sin and it's penalty is imputed (legally and rightfully charged/billed) onto us (Rom. 5:12). This is who we are without Christ. However, if we follow God's detour in our life and come to Jesus and become born-again, we're then born of Jesus's seed (spiritual gene pool) and His righteousness is imputed onto us. In Adam we are not free to become anything other than a child of Adam, or as Paul says in Ephesians 2:3, a child of God's wrath. Regardless to how great, horrible, or somewhere in-between of an upbringing you've had, life you've lived, choices you've made, and so on, in Adam there is no freedom. You are pre-set as a sinner and accounted for sin's penalty. That is your lot in life. But in Christ we are free (Gal. 4:21-31) to become something new (2Cor. 5:17), healed and whole, and something so much greater than we can imagine (Eph. 3:20-21)! 

"Whatever God has promised gets stamped with the Yes of Jesus. In him, this is what we preach and pray, the great Amen, God's Yes and our Yes together, gloriously evident. God affirms us, making us a sure thing in Christ, putting his Yes within us. By his Spirit he has stamped us with his eternal pledge—a sure beginning of what he is destined to complete." (2Cor. 1:20-22, Msg) 

This becoming something new is called regeneration, and this becoming something so much greater than we can imagine is called sanctification. In Christ we do not have to remain the same! We can become so much more! Life is not about what we can obtain or achieve or how much pleasure we can experience or becoming famous, rich, or someone of significance. Life is about either being sin's puppet and paying sin's penalty, or becoming like the God who left His throne and came to earth and put on this fragile flesh and gave His life to redeem us from sin and its penalty. Life is about either fostering and nurturing characteristics and values to no avail. Or, life is about fostering and nurturing characteristics and values towards us being a demonstration of Jesus in a lost and hurting world so He can heal, restore, and transform our lives first and then through us more lives like ours, and also receiving an eternal reward––the reward being our God saying to us "Well done, thy good and faithful servant". This is what life is about becoming or else you have missed out on true life, and true life more abundantly.

Your Choice

Who you become in life is not by chance but who you choose to become, and who you become in life will reflect to whom you belong to, sin or Jesus, bondage or promise.

"When he [Jesus] died, he died once to break the power of sin. But now that he lives, he lives for the glory of God. So you also should consider yourselves to be dead to the power of sin and alive to God through Christ Jesus. Do not let sin control the way you live; do not give in to sinful desires. Do not let any part of your body become an instrument of evil to serve sin. Instead, give yourselves completely to God, for you were dead, but now you have new life. So use your whole body as an instrument to do what is right for the glory of God. Sin is no longer your master, for you no longer live under the requirements of the law. Instead, you live under the freedom of God’s grace. Well then, since God’s grace has set us free from the law, does that mean we can go on sinning? Of course not! Don’t you realize that you become the slave of whatever you choose to obey? You can be a slave to sin, which leads to death, or you can choose to obey God, which leads to righteous living. Thank God! Once you were slaves of sin, but now you wholeheartedly obey this teaching we have given you. Now you are free from your slavery to sin, and you have become slaves to righteous living." (Rom. 6:10-18, NLT)

1/3/12