For the Feeble and Weak

Paul's letter to the churches of Galatia seems ... harsh. He opens with, "I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you ..." (Gal 1:6) including an "anathema," a story about Peter and Barnabas "misbehaving" and his public rebuke (Gal 2:11-14), then ...

You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? (Gal 3:1-3)

Paul's on a roll. He calls them "foolish" and asks, "Who has bewitched you?" Not part of "How to Win Friends and Influence People." Paul is a fanatic ... for the gospel. The specific gospel he's on about is "a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus ... so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified" (Gal 2:16). Simple. Justified by faith apart from works. Any other gospel is "anathema" -- cursed. Any other behavior is "not in step with the truth of the gospel" (Gal 2:14). So Paul considers this gospel important enough to not worry about making friends here. He's more concerned with defending the gospel. Paul argues that salvation begins with the Spirit and ends with the Spirit (Gal 3:3).

Most religions in the world offer a "saved by works" scheme. We "wise" Christians see this "saved by faith" idea and grab it ... sort of. We still, like the Galatians, tend to slide back into a "works-based" arrangement. If we're really enlightened, we'll see salvation as "monergism" -- God's work alone -- but sanctification as "synergism" -- our working with God. Paul asks us, "Are you so foolish?" It's not our work or our power. It's His. We are perfected by the Spirit. It looks like we're part of it ... sure. But, in the end, if we can do nothing without Christ (John 15:5) -- we can do nothing good on our own -- then it really is His work in us. Which should encourage the feeble and weak.

The Love Motive

Jesus said, "If you love Me, you will keep My commandments" (John 14:15). What did He mean? It appears to put "love" at the root of "obey." But ... what does He mean?

Jesus made it clear what the great commandment was. "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind" (Matt 22:37). Love is the command ... specifically love for God. But the word isn't one of warm affection. It is a sacrificial love that sets self aside and concerns itself most with the loved one. It is unconditional. You know, the patient and kind love. The love that doesn't seek its own. The love that rejoices with the truth. That kind (1 Cor 13:4-8). So it's not a feeling; it's a choice. And Jesus said, "If you love Me (like that), you will keep My commandments." If we are primarily concerned with God's best interests, we will obey His commandments.

Some people get confused. They think that the proper motivation for obedience is a warm, fuzzy feeling for God. To obey correctly we should feel good toward God. "If you're just ... obeying ... that's not right." That's not the point of the text. The point is that obedience is a proper expression of the love that we are commanded to have for God. Because that's in God's best interest. Because we want to glorify Him in everything we do (1 Cor 10:31). Because we love Him.

News Weakly - 5/3/2025

Passing the Torch
After a massive heart attack while delivering a sermon at his church, T. D. Jakes is stepping down from The Potter's House ... and turning it over to his daughter and son-in-law. Jakes has been a big name and a big voice in modern Christendom, but ... not necessarily a true voice for God. He believes in modalism, a view that makes Father, Son, and Holy Spirit one being and not three persons, one serious concern regarding his non-biblical beliefs. So, when he hands his church over to his daughter in direct opposition to Scripture (1 Tim 2:12-14), it only serves as confirmation of what many have long suspected.

Trump Right Again?
The president of Harvard University apologized and promised change after a report on antisemitism and Islamophobia on campus was released. Turns out it is a problem, which Trump tried to address recently (correctly or incorrectly). Personally, I find it hard to believe that a modern school "of higher learning" could possibly be so blind to its own prejudices and problems ... or maybe I don't.

Like It Or Not
In the Cold War, America took the tactic of "peace through strength" -- threaten terrible things in order to make them back down. It worked. It seems as if Trump has borrowed a page from that time with this "trade war" thing. After threatening huge tariffs, he's easing them after getting concessions he hoped for. Like it or not, it appears to be working.

They Call It A "Strike" For A Reason
More than 55,000 Los Angeles County workers went on strike, disrupting all sorts of county services. You can't blame them. The cost of living there is horrendous. Of course, the cost of giving them raises will be horrendous. And the ones who will suffer for this strike will be the ones who have to pay for those increased wages. But, hey! "Who cares? As long as we get our money." The downside of unions.

Bad Joke
An easy lay-up for anti-Trumpers. Trump joked he wanted to be the next pope. Yeah, sure, a joke. But a president perceived as trying to be the first American emperor probably shouldn't joke about being the next worse thing. Especially when he still has supporters who are sure he's a Christian.

Reliable, Fake News
Singer Steve Taylor sang, "I know You'll give me what I need; they say I need a shopping mall." In a similar vein, the Bee did a story on God clarifying that, yes, He answers prayers, but that doesn't mean He'll give you the power of The Force. In other news, there's the story of a wife who is beginning to suspect that her husband's thoughtful, relevant responses to her texts are AI-generated. It's all about the danger of AI. Finally, California caught a break this week when Canada surpassed California as having the most liberal leadership.

Must be true; I read it on the Internet.

Don't Panic

(For those of you who know, the title of this one comes from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, where the main character is told, "Don't panic; be very, very afraid.")

Nehemiah prayed to God about ... going home from captivity (Neh 1:4-11). He ends that prayer with "O Lord, I beseech You, may Your ear be attentive to the prayer of Your servant and the prayer of Your servants who delight to fear Your name, and make Your servant successful today and grant him compassion before this man" (Neh 1:11). Did you see that? Nehemiah asked God to hear the prayer of His servants who "delight to fear Your name." "Delight to fear"?? I looked up a variety of sources. What is "the fear of the Lord"? Almost without exception, they assiduously (word of the day -- look it up) held explicitly that the fear of the Lord is not fear. Reverence, awe, respect ... sure ... but in no way "fear." But the word is translated "fear" everywhere but in these "fear of the Lord" or "fear of God" places. As if "of the Lord" as a modifier changes the meaning of the word. Because the word means fear, both in the Hebrew version and the Greek version. Yet, quoting Deuteronomy 4:24, the author of Hebrews wrote, "Our God is a consuming fire" (Heb 12:29). So ... don't fear?

I wrote about this yesterday (and on other occasions), but I fear (yes, small joke) that if we don't fear the Lord as we ought, we could be missing the mark. There is this sense in us that we shouldn't fear ... at all. A sense that fear is bad. Nehemiah delighted to fear the Lord. To stand in amazement and reverence and, yes, a little bit afraid in the presence of God. If there is no fear, I think we aren't seeing Him clearly. Using Isaiah as an example, it was when Isaiah hit his knees, undone in fear of God (Isa 6:5), that God put Him to use (Isa 6:6-8). It was when Peter fell on his face in recognition of his sinfulness that Jesus put him to work as His disciple (Luke 5:1-11). I'm not talking about abject terror or unreasonable fear. But all this "No need to fear God" thing seems to run in direct opposition to ... you know ... Scripture. Instead, let fear enhance your relationship ... like Moses, hidden from God's terrible glory, safe in the cleft of the rock (Exo 33:18-23). The fear that keeps us safe makes the glory possible to enjoy.

What Did He Say???

In Ephesians, Paul writes some controversial things about husband and wife relations. You know, "wives, submit" and "husbands, give self up." I've written about them before. I don't need to rehash them. But one I've generally skipped, and that's primarily because ... I'm not entirely sure what to do with it. At the end of the section on wives and husbands (Eph 5:22-33), Paul writes ... a summary, as it were. "Let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband" (Eph 5:33).

It's interesting here that Paul seems to parallel "wives, submit" with "wives, respect." Apparently there is a connection. But it's really the word there that gives me pause. Every translation says something like "reverence" (KJV), "respect" (ESV, NAS, etc.), or "show deference" (LITV). Okay, fine. But ... the word used is "phobeō," as in "fear, alarm, terror." Now, wait! No one translates it that way (here -- lots of them translate it that way elsewhere). So why is it "respect" rather than "fear"? And it's not just Paul. Peter says, "In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior" (1 Peter 3:1-2). See it? "Respectful behavior." Same word. Scripture uses the word elsewhere and it's not translated "fear," especially in terms of God. We're supposed to "fear God" but many use "reverence" or the like there, too. And maybe there's a clue there. We mean something in the word "fear" that may have different connotations. Other words, now migrated to new meanings, carry this sense of "fear" that isn't "abject terror." "Awe" meant (until fairly recently) "an emotion variously combining dread, veneration, and wonder that is inspired by authority or by the sacred or sublime." Did you see that "dread"? That is, "this thing is so big that it's kind of scary." In fact, "respect" has changed, too. It means "to esteem" these days, but in the past it had a sense of awe in it, too ... a sense of deference.

So ... maybe everything is okay. Maybe the translations aren't "hiding something." Maybe "fear" isn't the best translation here. I'm not sure, given today's version, that "respect" gets it anymore, either. We think of "respect" as "a deep admiration." And we often misunderstand that. For instance, "You have to earn respect" isn't necessarily true. Sometimes you need to respect the office, not the person. As in, "See that she respects her husband." Not the man. Not his character. His role. His position. So this "respect" is less "deep admiration" and more "reverence" or "deference" ... with a little bit of fear or dread involved. It's not just "thinking highly of." It's recognizing the task and position God has assigned him ... as God's representative in the home. "Even if any of them are disobedient to the word" (1 Peter 3:1).

He Walks With Me

The hymn, In the Garden, is controversial to some, but adored by others. The chorus says, "And He walks with me and He talks with me ..." But ... is that true? Actually, I have had some such incidences. There have been times when He has talked to me. Not audibly, but ... obviously. I remember once I was leaving for a week-long business trip. Being the good father-husband-Christian guy, I prayed on my way to the airport, "Father, watch over my family while I'm gone." I distinctly "heard" in my head, "Who did you think was watching over them when you were there?" Ouch! Yes. Thanks, Lord. I needed that reminder. One time I was praying for someone who needed healing. I heard Him say, "Is it alright with you if I do what's best for him?" Oh ... uh ... yes, Lord. A clear reminder that He knows best, and a necessary reminder.

I got married in 1980. Within three months, my bride was pregnant, told me she hated me, and I lost my job. So I ended up working as a security guard on a midnight shift alone in a guard shack talking to God. "How did this happen, Lord? What went wrong?" I got out a tablet of paper ... you know one of those standard lined yellow tablets. I started writing. When I considered marrying this girl, I desperately wanted to do it right. I didn't want hormones or emotions or whatever to lead me astray. So I prayed. "Lord, stop me if this isn't Your will." And I proceeded to ... throw out fleeces, as it were. Like, "If I ask her dad and he says, 'No,' I'll take that as a No from God." I actually approached it on the assumption I was wrong to marry her, and expected a "No" at any time. But ... her father gave me permission. For months I tossed out fleeces ... "If this doesn't happen, I'll assume You don't want me to proceed." It happened. And in that guard shack that night, I wrote them all down. Then I counted them. Twenty-eight. Twenty-eight times I asked God to stop me and He didn't. So ... in that guard shack that night, I said thank you and moved on. Joined the military, got a career, had two boys ... all sorts of good stuff. Then, after 12 years, she told me she was leaving me for someone else. So, one Saturday, I'm packing up the house to move to a small apartment for me and the boys. I'm in the garage, moaning and groaning to God, and open up a notebook in an obscure box. "What ...?" I look inside and, on the top, is a yellow lined sheet of paper ... with 28 reasons I was supposed to marry her ... directly from God. "So," I said to Him, "You ... planned this. You knew. You expected it. And You told me to proceed." Another lesson in God's best versus mine. Another example of "you intended it for evil, but God intended it for good." And a reason to let Him do what He wanted in my life.

I since wed a wonderful woman with whom I've been happily married for more than 32 years, God's perfect match for me. Couldn't be better. And I have two wonderful sons ... God's gift to me. I recently retired from the career God began in the military because I had to get a career to support my growing family. And ... my walk with Him and trust in Him are better and stronger. Because, I believe, He actually does walk with me and talk with me, and I'm happy to be right where He wants me.

Going Home

I had a conversation with a couple of brothers in Christ the other day about heaven. I am convinced that any believer who understands the simplest truth about heaven is happy to go. It's been said, "Everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die." Seems really odd to me, but even among Bible-believing, sincere Christians, "going home" is something they'd prefer to put off for a while.

I recently heard a song about how we'll get to heaven where all pain is gone, and I wondered, "Is that what we're going for?" Do we see heaven as "the Great Escape," a place to be free from pain. Or just happy? Seems odd, since Scripture plainly teaches that we can rejoice in tribulation (e.g., Rom 5:3-5; James 1:2-4) and be "content in whatever circumstances (Php 4:11). Jesus said, "These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full" (John 15:11). If our joy can be made full in Him, what are we waiting for? If we can rejoice in tribulation ... be more than conquerors in the worst of circumstances (Rom 8:35-37) ... what are we waiting for? One popular song assures us there will be no scars in heaven. Really? Is that what we're hoping for?

It seems to me that lots of us want to go to heaven for reasons equivalent to those who think Jesus came to help poor people. We just want to feel better. I think we're missing the point. Hell is described as the absence of God. Not literally, of course, because, logically, an omnipresent being would need to be ... omnipresent. Besides, David wrote, "If I ascend to heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, You are there" (Psa 139:8). Nonetheless, Jesus tells of His declaration, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness" (Matt 7:23), so there is a sense of separation from God. Thus, heaven will be living in His eternal presence forever, in His glory unabated. We can't picture hell, and we really can't picture heaven, but "feeling good now" is not it. Completion, perfection, in His arms ... these are all part of it. Yes, we'll feel better, but that's not the aim. It's much, much better than that. Or are we too rooted in this world to want His complete presence?

Husbands

The Bible has lots to say about lots of things ... some esoteric and some extremely practical. For instance, there are some very clear, very straightforward statements about marital life. Now, we all know the hateful, misogynistic command from Paul, "Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord" (Eph 5:22). I mean, come on, Paul! Get with it. Modern feminism has blown that away. It's so thoroughly wrong, that Bible-believing Christians thumb their noses at it. Oh, sure, maybe they give it lip service, but, in practice, wives don't make a practice of submitting to their husbands as to the Lord. If they do, they're considered weak or timid or abused. Peter had the temerity to repeat that clear opposition to modern feminism. "In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives" (1 Peter 3:1). (As an aside, "In the same way"? What way? "Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps" (1 Peter 2:20-25).) There it is again. Not unclear. Not vague. And we largely protest.

It's funny, though. The commands to husbands typically go uncontested.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her ... (Eph 5:25-32)

You husbands in the same way, live with your wives in an understanding way, as with someone weaker, since she is a woman; and show her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered. (1 Peter 3:7)

Why is that? It's because we're mostly not paying attention. "Husbands, love your wives" seems perfectly reasonable ... except it is "as Christ loved the Church," which is defined as ... giving self up. Hang on! That's not even normal. We don't do that. We always have to look out for #1. I actually had a Christian counselor tell me, "That's crazy." Maybe ... but it's biblical. Another one we often miss seems to be the second. I once found a book at Barnes and Noble titled, "What Men Know About Women." Spoiler alert: the book is blank. Because men understanding women seems impossible. And we're commanded to "live with our wives in an understanding way." With a threat ... "so that your prayers will not be hindered." Do we? Do husbands make it their daily practice to understand their wives ... all the time? A regular function? I don't think so. And "wives, submit" seems to grow less offensive because the commands to husbands become ... daunting.

Daunting or not, husbands, we have commands from God. Forget about His commands to wives; those are hers to obey or not. Ours are clear. Love your wife by surrendering your self. And live with her in an understanding way. Two huge commands. If we were diligent about obeying these, I think we'd have little time to criticize wives who don't submit. We would be giving them solid reasons to submit, because it's not hard to submit to someone who makes her his highest priority and lifelong project. And, of course, they're God's commands. That should be of critical importance to us.

Proof of Concept

Paul claimed that all Scripture is God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16-17). Critics protest. Because if all Scripture is from God, then all Scripture must ... be right. And if there is anything we know, it's that Scripture isn't right. I mean, look how many times it contradicts conventional views. For a proof of concept, Paul, quoting the Psalms, wrote, "No one does good, not even one" (Rom 3:12; cp Psa 14:3; Psa 53:3). That's different than "There is none righteous, no, not one" (Rom 3:10). In the latter, it's possible to do something righteous but not be righteous, right? I mean, we get no one is fully righteous. So it's no big deal. But "No one does good"?? Really? Is that just hyperbole? Because we know that people are good. Did Paul really mean that?

Isaiah, God's mouthpiece, wrote, "We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment. We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away" (Isa 64:6). "A polluted garment." That's the ESV. King James uses "filthy rags." Another goes with "a dirty robe." All very euphemistic. The NET says our "righteous acts are like a menstrual rag in Your sight." In today's vernacular, Isaiah compared the "good" we do to a used tampon. The Hebrew word for "polluted" or "filthy" here appears only once in our Bibles, and that word means specifically to menstruation. Now, dance all you want ... trying to make that mean "but it's okay" can't be done. It made a woman unclean (Lev 15:33) until her menstruation period ended. It's bad, not good. So how is it so? In this text is the answer to the question. How is it that "all our righteous deeds" are ... polluted? Well ... because they are ... ours. We are sinners from birth (Psa 51:5). God said of natural man that "every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually" (Gen 6:5), and "the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Gen 8:21). Jesus said, "Without Me you can do nothing" (John 15:5). Paul wrote, "Those who are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom 8:8). How can we do good, then? Not of ourselves. It has to be a product of God's work in us. Without God working in us, there is no one that does good ... not ... one.

We like to think people are basically good. We do so in the face of plain Scripture. "Common sense" calls Paul's claim that there is no one who does good a falsehood; Scripture calls common sense, in this case, a liar. So you have to decide. Is Scripture right, or are your sense of it superior?

News Weakly - 4/26/2025

Without Comment
Pope Francis died Easter Sunday shortly after his Easter address. Now, some people suggested that the old question, "Is the pope Catholic?", was an actual question with Pope Francis, but I'll just go without comment here.

Proven Trustworthiness
Putin declares an Easter ceasefire and then Russia attacked the Ukraine. Because, as we all know, Russia is a trustworthy entity.

That Wacky SCOTUS
For reasons beyond my comprehension, the Supreme Court has ruled that illegal aliens in Texas can't be deported. Trump may be overreaching his office, but does the Supreme Court practice border control and immigration policy now? One strange thing is that the ACLU -- the American Civil Liberties Union -- has argued for American civil liberties ... for non-Americans. It just gets stranger by the minute.

Existential Threat
Thousands protested Trump again, declaring to the world that they're opposed to democracy and only want ... power. The nation once rallied around saving the world from climate change by jumping on the Tesla bandwagon, but now protest Tesla, and they cried about Trump's "existential threat to democracy" and have become their own existential threat to democracy. Ah, the liberal mind. Who can know it?

Well ... Duh!
With all this pro-Palestinian noise being actively encouraged on colleges and universities and in the media, it shouldn't come as a surprise that antisemitic incidents have hit an all-time high in America. Surprise, surprise.

The Unnecessary Commission
The Presbyterian Church (USA) (PCUSA) shuttered all missionary efforts. Instead of obeying Christ's command to go into all nations and make disciples, they're opting ... not to. Why? They're suffering from declining membership and donations. The obvious answer, then, is to ignore Christ, get rid of the manifest approach of making disciples for increased membership, and ... stop. But I don't think it should come as a surprise, since the PCUSA has long been so liberal they allowed atheists to be pastors, so ... I don't even know if it's a bad thing, really, for them to stop bothering other people.

Your Most Trusted Source for Fake News
In Health news, God has announced a "new" hydrating beverage without calories, sugar, carbs, artificial dyes, or additives. Water. He's a genius. (I was particularly amused at the reference to a "spokesangel".) In Education news, a local man discovered he spent $500k on an Ivy League education and all he knows how to do is shout, "Free Palestine!". He apparently does it very well, though. Finally, in light of recent rulings, Americans are beginning to think requiring a cognitive test for Supreme Court justices might be a good thing. Right?

Must be true; I read it on the Internet.

Expensive Will

David is begging for it, so ...

We talk about "free will" like there is an expensive version. Okay, no. We talk about it as if we do or don't have the ability to make choices. That is, do humans make choices on their own, or are they forced somehow? There is a growing number of atheists who argue that free will is a myth. All our choices are chemical reactions in the brain or something. Actually choosing freely is a lie. In the world of philosophy, there is a debate about just what "free will" is. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy lists a variety of possibilities, from "the freedom to do otherwise" to "Libertarian free will" with "theological wrinkles" throughout. Libertarian free will means our choices are free from the determination or constraints of human nature and free from any predetermination by God. They reject God's foreknowledge because if God knows in advance what we will choose, our choice isn't free, is it? Compatibilism argues that it's possible to have both "determinism" where something outside of ourselves determines the choices and "free will" where we make uncoerced choices. And there's that "determinism." That, of course, is the view that ... no ... you don't have free will. God makes all your choices for you.

There are nuances and shades and variations, but ... what does the Bible say? How do we determine which is true? Don't count on philosophy or atheism or "feels right to me" for a suitable confirmation. Do we find anything in God's Word? I think we do. We know, for instance, that "Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; and in Your book were all written the days that were ordained for me, when as yet there was not one of them" (Psa 139:16). Just one example of proof of God's omniscience, so "Libertarian free will" is out. This is the difference between "free will" and "autonomy." Autonomy requires "I have no controls, no master." It just ain't so. I mean, obviously I can't wish for wings and flap my way to the Moon. There are controls and limitations. My will is not The Ruler. Autonomy doesn't exist. There are, then, limitations to human free will and our ability to choose. Scripture, however, calls on us to make choices and holds us responsible for them. If all our choices were coerced by God, we couldn't be held responsible. Paul writes, "Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts ..." (Rom 6:12). How can that be if we have no choice in the matter? In fact, every command of Scripture implies we have a choice to make. Despite the well-meaning but totally confused hyper-Calvinists who argue that God's sovereignty precludes human free will, Scripture affirms that we can and do make choices and are held responsible for them ... even when they are "determined" (Luke 22:22). When Joseph's brothers set out to kill him, then sold him into slavery, their intent was evil and they bore the responsibility, even though God's intent was for good. God intended their evil actions that they made of their own free will to produce a good outcome (Gen 50:20).

I came up with an illustration. Imagine you wake up in a dark room. You've been kidnapped! Then you notice one ray of light ... coming from under a door. Saved! You creep over to the door, not sure if it will open or if someone is there guarding it. You push ... and it opens. You look out and see a long alley with cars at the end passing by. You step out, ready to run ... but then you think, "What if someone is down there, waiting?" You hesitate. "Do I go back in or do I run for it?" You set your jaw and run for it. And you escape. Your choice was the right one. What you didn't know was that the door closed behind you and locked. If you had decided to go back, you couldn't have. But you never knew that. So the question is, was that a free will choice, or not? I would argue it was. You were not coerced. You made your own choice. I see the reality of humans making choices without coercion as "free will" and the certainty that God knows all things, and I see them as compatible. Biblically. But, hey, that's just me.
________
For more musings on free will, see this listing from my prior entries.

Confess and Believe

A lot of us can quote this verse. We often miss the full significance.

If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved (Rom 10:9)

It's a popular verse in evangelism. For many, it's the reason for altar calls. You need to make a public profession of your faith. "Confess with your mouth." And, of course, you need to "believe in your heart." Got it. Clear as a bell. But ... what is "confess"? We're not talking about simply stating something. You can't hand someone a card that says, "Jesus is Lord," have them read it, and call it "confessing." Confession is literally "saying with." We need to be in agreement with God. That's the point. And "believe"? We have a variety of uses for "believe." There is the acknowledgment of a fact, but this "believe" is "pisteuō -- faith. This faith is a confidence that causes action. The old, "Do you trust that chair enough to sit in it?" It isn't acknowledgement. It is a life-changing confidence.

But wait. What is it that we are supposed to confess? "Jesus as Lord." And what is it we're supposed to believe in our hearts? "God raised Christ from the dead." That's interesting to me. Two factual statements. Jesus is Lord; we need to openly admit that it's true. Jesus is Lord. That's a necessary position of submission. We're supposed to agree with God that we are not the masters of our soul; He is. But the second isn't quite what we think either. We think we're "believing in Jesus," and we are, but the thing is more specific. We need to believe ... in the resurrection. The resurrection? That's the critical piece? Paul wrote to the church at Corinth,

Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. (1 Cor 15:1-5)

This is "the gospel" to Paul. It is "of first importance." What? Jesus lived, died for our sins, was buried, and raised again. All according to the Scriptures. All essential.

John MacArthur wrote a controversial book on Lordship Salvation arguing that salvation is dependent on taking Jesus as Lord. Critics complained. "Too much like 'saved by works'." But Scripture says one basic requirement is that we verbally agree with God that Jesus is Lord. Is He? Scripture says belief in the Resurrection is of utmost importance in salvation. You can't set aside that He died for our sins and expect salvation. You can't "believe in Jesus" but discount the Resurrection and expect to be saved. Without the Resurrection, "you are still in your sins" (1 Cor 15:17) and "we are of all men most to be pitied" (1 Cor 15:19). These are basics of salvation, all by faith, not by works, but not quite as simple as we might have been told.

What's So Good About It?

We all know Romans 8:28, right?

And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. (Rom 8:28)

I'm in the habit of quoting it simply with "We know that God causes all things to work together for good." And I've been called on it. "No! He works it together for good if we love God." And, they're sort of right. But ... what does that mean? How is it good "to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose"?

Note, first, that while those are two descriptions, they're linked. That is, those who love God are called according to His purpose. You can't have one or the other; they go hand in hand. So, what's so good about it? I mean, what is the good that He works for those who are called according to His purpose as demonstrated by the fact that they love Him? Or, what is His purpose that makes it good to those who love Him? The answer is in the next verses, beginning with "For." (That is, "This is why that is true.")

For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. (Rom 8:29-30)

Two ways, then, that God is working things for good. God's purpose in what He is doing is to conform us to the image of His Son, to shape us into ... family. Now, surely, you can see that those who don't love God would not consider that good. They don't want God tampering with them at all. But we do. And what better than to be shaped ... like Christ? The other good is His ultimate purpose for us ... to be glorified with Him ... which requires justification ... which is why He called us ... which is part of predestination. It's called "The Golden Chain of Salvation." It begins with His predestination, not our actions or choices. It is carried out by His calling, worked out in justification, and ending up with being glorified with Him -- His ultimate purpose for those who love Him. Now, hardships and difficulties and even successes may be perceived as good or not, but His purposes for His called ones are truly magnificent. That's what's so good about it.

Foundations

Jesus told of parable of two houses, one built on sand, and the other on rock. His tale was a warning. You need to have a good foundation. We often forget that. Foundations are ... by necessity ... underneath. That is, things are built on them. So while we're looking at the building, we often miss the foundation. And that's a critical error. Satan understood that. In the garden he didn't ask Eve about the garden, but about the foundation -- "Did God really say ...?"(Gen 3:1). Most of the time, though, he's playing a different game. He'll get us discussing the merits of the building, not realizing the foundation is faulty.

Biblical Christians stand on ... God's Word ... the Bible. This is problematic for ... Satan. When he asked Eve, "Did God really say ...?", he was offering a different foundation. "Don't believe God's Word. Think for yourself." That's your choice. Believe God or believe yourself. Basically you go with what God says, or you go with what feels right to you. So when we discuss, say, how to dress in church, most people end up arguing about what constitutes proper dress or how you can tell if it is. The question -- the foundation -- is why? Why do we dress as we dress for church? But we don't really want to discuss that. Or maybe the question is, "Did Christ die to save us or didn't He?" The answer depends on ... your foundation. If your foundation is God's Word, it is evident from the beginning that "without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins" (Heb 9:22). But, of course, if you're asking, "Did God really say ...?" then your foundation becomes "What sits right with me?" And the notion that there is some angry god out there demanding blood (as it were) is too unacceptable ... to "What sits right with me?"

It all seems to boil down to that ... in the end. The real question isn't this technical issue or that theory. It is "What is your foundation?" As a rule, human beings operate on a foundation of "What seems right to me." It ignores the claim that the thoughts of the natural man's heart are "only evil continually" (Gen 6:5), that "the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Gen 8:21), that "the heart is deceitful and desperately wicked" (Jer 17:9). If your foundation is you, it's a house built on the sand. We need something solid. We need God's Word (John 17:17). We need Christ (John 1:1; John 14:6; Matt 21:42).

Baptism

My son-in-law was baptized yesterday. I wrote him about it. I thought I'd share it with you.
________
Christianity has very few sacraments (unless you're including the Roman Catholics), but one that we all agree on is Baptism. (The other is the Lord's Supper.) But what is it? What is its meaning and its importance?

The word, "baptize," means simply "to dip" or "to immerse." Christianity gave it greater significance. The Jews practiced it in the Old Testament times as a purification rite, but it was John the Baptizer that brought it to prominence (Luke 3:1-22). When Jesus asked John to baptize Him, he balked. Jesus said, "Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness" (Matt 3:15). As our example, then, Christ was baptized. At the end of His ministry, He commanded, Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit " (Matt 28:19). Baptism, then, isn't merely a symbol of being cleansed. It's commanded. Peter, writing about how Noah and his family were saved through water (1 Peter 3:20), wrote, "Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you -- not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience -- through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:21). So the symbol of baptism doesn't save, but the thing it symbolizes -- an appeal to God for forgiveness through the resurrection of Christ -- does. It is, therefore, a commanded symbol exercised by the perfect Son of God and symbolizing our request by faith in Christ for forgiveness -- cleansing.

Baptism is a picture of Christ's death and resurrection. Paul wrote, "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?" (Rom 6:3). He goes on to explain, "Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life" (Rom 6:4). Baptism symbolizes our union with Christ in His death and in His resurrection. This isn't mere symbolism. It has intense significance.

For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; for he who has died is freed from sin. (Rom 6:5-7)

In baptism, then, we are "immersed" into Christ. We align ourselves with Christ, die to sin, and are freed from it. We have new life. This allows us to choose not to sin (Rom 6:11-12). That's astounding. As a symbol, it is meaningful in its cleansing significance and its identifying with Christ in His death and resurrection. Those two factors are our very salvation, so Christ commands the symbol be practiced. But when we do, remember ... we're freed from sin. We don't have to keep doing it. That's big. That's baptism.

On Easter

News Weakly - 4/19/2025

(I've been doing a series of the events of the day in Holy Week all week, but since Jesus was in the grave on Saturday, I figured I could do a News Weakly ... シ)

Power Play
It feels like President Trump is testing how far he can go before the courts stop him. Now he's threatening to rescind Harvard's tax exempt status on his own without any authority to do so. I'm not happy with some of these "higher learning" school and their new political agenda, but I wish Emperor Trump would put some clothes on. It's getting embarrassing.

What is Truth?
Maryland Resident Kilmar Garcia was deported to El Salvador without due process. The Trump officials call it an "administrative error." The Supreme Court ordered the administration to "facilitate" his return. So why has Governor Newsom sued Trump over tariffs, but kept silent on Garcia? He calls the case "the distraction of the day." Democrats are split on it, some running to help and some keeping silent. Like the Pharisees who refused to answer Jesus's question about John the Baptist because either answer would be bad for them (Luke 20:1-8), this case seems to be engendering a practical response rather than a drive for the truth ... which, I would argue, is now a largely American pastime rather than a merely Democrat playground.

Born That Way
The law of the land has long been if you're born here, you're a natural citizen. Trump would like to end that rule. The Supreme Court will hear arguments. Mind you, the 14th Amendment gives those born here natural citizenship status. It was part of the whole Emancipation thing, where we decided that slaves born here were actual citizens worthy of American civil liberties. It looks bad that the president wants to end it, I suppose primarily on his strong "anti-immigration" stance. (That's shorthand for "opposed to illegal immigration," not "no immigrants ever.") The whole "anchor baby" thing encourages illegal immigration. Still, Mr. Trump, it is the law of the land. And if you'd like to delete it, what other Amendments will be in the crosshairs?

What Did You Say?
The former New York Times editorial page editor apologized to Sarah Palin at the defamation trial. In tears. Palin argued an editorial damaged her reputation (duh). James Bennet said he "blew it." "I do apologize to Governor Palin for this mistake." And all the Palin haters take a collective gasp at the admission that Palin was right.

Your Most Trusted Source for Fake News
After all this MS-13 deportation nonsense, liberals are warning that enforcing immigration law could easily lead to enforcing other laws. We can't have that. Meanwhile, American hostages in Gaza are identifying as MS-13 gang members so Democrats will fight to bring them home, too. And Trump has had a surprise change of heart, offering to bring Garcia home if El Salvador will keep Cory Booker.

Must be true; I read it on the Internet.

Good Friday

In 1965, Truman Davis, M.D., M.S., published this article in Arizona Medicine. It's a doctor's analysis of Jesus's Crucifixion.

The physical trauma of Christ begins in Gethsemane with one of the initial aspects of His suffering the bloody sweat. It is interesting that the physician of the group, Luke, is the only one to mention this. Luke’s biblical account tells of Jesus suffering, “And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground” (Luke 22:44).

Though very rare, the phenomenon of Hematidrosis, or bloody sweat, is all documented. Under great emotional stress, tiny capillaries in the sweat glands can break, thus mixing blood with sweat. This process alone could have produced marked weakness and possible shock.

After the arrest in the middle of the night, Jesus was brought before the Sanhedrin and Caiaphas, the High Priest. One of the soldiers struck Jesus across the face for remaining silent when questioned by Caiaphas. The palace guards taunted Jesus to identify them as they each passed by, spat on Him, and struck Him in the face.

In the early morning, Jesus, battered and bruised, dehydrated, and exhausted from a sleepless night, is taken across Jerusalem to the Praetorium of the Fortress Antonia. It was there, in response to the cries of the mob, that Pilate ordered Bar-Abbas released and condemned Jesus to scourging and crucifixion.

Preparations for the scourging are carried out. Jesus is stripped of His clothing and His hands tied to a post above His head. The Roman legionnaire steps forward with the flagrum in his hand. This is a short whip consisting of several heavy, leather thongs with two small balls of lead attached near the ends of each. The heavy whip is brought down with full force across Jesus’ shoulders, back and legs thirty-nine times.

At first the heavy thongs cut through the skin only. Then, as the blows continue, they cut deeper and deeper into the subcutaneous tissues, producing first an oozing of blood from the capillaries and veins of the skin, and finally spurting arterial bleeding from vessels in the underlying muscles. The small balls of lead first produce large, deep bruises, which are broken open by subsequent blows.

Finally, the skin of the back is hanging in long ribbons and the entire area is an unrecognizable mass of torn, bleeding tissue. When it is determined by the centurion in charge that the prisoner is near death, the beating is finally stopped.

The half-fainting Jesus is then untied and allowed to slump to the stone pavement, wet with His own blood. The Roman soldiers see a great joke in the provincial Jew claiming to be a king. They throw a robe across His shoulders and place a stick in His hand for a scepter. A small bundle of flexible branches covered with long thorns is pressed into the scalp of Jesus. Again there is copious bleeding (the scalp being one of the most vascular areas of the body). After mocking Him and striking Him across the face, the soldiers take the stick from His hand and strike Him across the head, driving the thorns deeper into His scalp.

Finally, the soldier’s tire of their sadistic sport and the robe is torn from His back. This has already become adherent in the clots of blood and serum in the wounds, and its removal just as the careless removal of surgical bandages, causes excruciating pain- almost as though He were again being whipped, and the wounds again begin to bleed. Jesus is then led off to be crucified. The heavy beams of the cross are then tied to His shoulders, and the procession of the condemned Christ, two thieves and the execution detail, begins it slow journey. The weight of the heavy wooden beam, together with the shock produced by copious blood loss, is too much. Jesus stumbles and lacerates the skin and muscles of His shoulders. Jesus tries to rise, but His human muscles have been pushed beyond their endurance. At Golgotha, the beam is placed on the ground and Jesus is quickly thrown backward with His shoulders pressed against the wood. The legionnaire feels for the depression at the front of the wrist. He then drives a heavy, wrought iron nail through the wrist and deep into the wood. Quickly, he moves to the other side and repeats the action, being careful not to pull the arms too tightly, but to allow some flexion and movement. The beam is then lifted in place at the top of the posts and the titulus reading “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews” is nailed in place.

The left foot is pressed backward against the right foot, and with both feet extended, toes down, a nail is driven through the arch of each. As Jesus pushes Himself upward to avoid the stretching torment, He places His full weight on the nail through His feet. Again there is the searing agony of the nail tearing through the nerves between the metatarsal bones of the feet.

As the arms fatigue, great waves of cramps sweep over the muscles, knotting them in a deep relentless, throbbing pain. With these cramps comes the inability to push Himself upward. Hanging by the arms the pectoral muscles are paralyzed and the intercostal muscles are unable to act. Air can be drawn into the lungs, but not exhaled. Jesus fights to raise Himself in order get one short breath. Finally, carbon dioxide builds up in the lungs and in the blood stream, and the cramps partially subside. Spasmodically, Jesus is able to push Himself upward to exhale and bring in the life-giving oxygen. Hours of this limitless pain, cycles of twisting, joint-rending cramps, intermittent partial asphyxiation, searing pain, as tissue is torn from His lacerated back as He moves up and down against the rough timber.

Then another agony begins. A deep crushing pain deep in the chest as the pericardium slowly fills with serum and begins to compress the heart. The compressed heart is struggling to pump heavy, thick, sluggish blood into the tissues- the tortured lungs are making a frantic effort to gasp small gulps of air. The markedly dehydrated tissues send their flood of stimuli to the brain. Jesus gasps, “I thirst” (John 19:28).

Jesus can feel the chill of death creeping through His tissues. With one last surge of strength, He once again presses His torn feet against the nail, He straightens His legs, takes a deeper breath, and utters His seventh and last cry, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” (Luke 23:46).

Apparently to make double sure of death, the legionnaire drove his spear through the fifth interspace between the ribs, upward through the pericardium and into the heart. Immediately there came out blood and water. We, therefore, have rather conclusive postmortem evidence that Jesus died, not the usual crucifixion death by suffocation, but of heart failure due to the shock and constriction of the heart by fluid in the pericardium.

Thus we have a glimpse of the manifestation of evil which man can exhibit toward man and toward God. This medical description of what Jesus endured on the cross is apt to leave you hopeless and depressed. How grateful you can be that, “He Did This Just For You” showing you a glimpse into what God did to win your heart.

Maundy Thursday

Maundy Thursday is primarily a Roman Catholic term. "Maundy" refers to washing the feet of poor people and distributing money to them. But that Thursday in the last week before His crucifixion, was about a lot more than washing feet. On that day, Jesus and His disciples had the Last Supper along with His "Upper Room Discourse" (John 13-17).

Jesus's last Passover celebration wasn't with family; it was with His disciples. They met in that upper room (interestingly translated "inn" elsewhere (Luke 2:7)) and shared the celebration of God's salvation based on faith and the shedding of blood. It began with Jesus washing their feet (John 13:1-17). Jesus, as servant king, clearly intended the humble act to serve as a model for the cleansing of the Suffering Servant Messiah who would die for them. The meal ended with the famous "Lord's Supper" which we commemorate today. He urged them to remember, "Take, eat; this is My body" (Matt 26:26) and "Drink of it, all of you, for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" (Matt 26:27-28). Jesus's last Passover was aimed at declaring that His broken body and shed blood was "for the forgiveness of sins." "Do this in remembrance of Me" (Luke 22:19). (Interesting side note. In his epistle to the church at Corinth, Paul quotes Jesus with those words (1 Cor 11:24-25). Of the four Gospels, only one records those words -- Luke. You know, the guy that Paul quotes as "Scripture" elsewhere (1 Tim 5:18).)

On the night before His crucifixion, Jesus made His message clear. He was laying down His life for the forgiveness of sins. He was laying down His life for His sheep (John 10:11,15). Christ's shed blood was for us. So, in Roman Catholic tradition, Maundy Thursday is premised on Jesus washing the feet of the disciples. It is significant because cleansing our souls (versus soles) was His intent all along. If He washes you, you are completely clean (John 13:10). If He does not, you have no share in Him (John 13:8). I guess "Maundy Thursday" isn't a bad name for it.

Spy Wednesday

The Wednesday of Jesus's last week before His crucifixion was fairly quiet. They rested in Bethany. But ... there was one thing, and it is the reason some refer to it as "Spy Wednesday."

In Bethany, a woman came into Simon the leper's house and anointed Jesus feet with expensive ointment. Matthew says "the disciples" were indignant, but it was primarily Judas Iscariot, the money-handler ... and thief (John 12:6). They protested, "This ointment could have been sold for more than three hundred denarii and given to the poor." Clearly, they were upset because Jesus's social justice mission was being violated ... except Judas. Jesus said, "She has done a beautiful thing to Me" (Mark 14:5-9). The Gospels record, then, Judas went to the chief priests "in order to betray Him to them" (Mar 14:10-11). "Spy Wednesday." Matthew records "they paid him thirty pieces of silver" (Matt 26:15). There is conjecture as to why. Maybe he was trying to spur Jesus to arms, so to speak. Or was just mad about the money. But we don't have to guess. John records, "The devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray Him" (John 13:2). So, it was Satan's work. Interesting, then, that Jesus said, "For the Son of Man goes as it has been determined, but woe to that man by whom He is betrayed!" (Luke 22:22). Jesus's death was "determined." So was His betrayer. Judas Iscariot, from the outset, was going to betray Christ. God knew it. So did Jesus (John 13:10-11). And it was necessary. So it's fascinating to me that Jesus recognized that fact and held Judas responsible for the choice. "But woe to that man by whom He is betrayed!"

Judas is, to this day, a byword for a traitor, a betrayer of friends. Judas was called like all the others and walked in Jesus's presence, but never entered into a saving relationship with Him. Judas was on the mission, healing and casting out demons (Luke 9:1-2). He was there for Christ's teaching ... first person. He was there when Jesus raised Lazarus. And Judas opened the door to Satan. He kissed his "Master" to betray Him. He ended up committing suicide. It's a stark warning that we who believe we are following Jesus don't find ourselves outside (Matt 7:21-23). Most important is that we know Him who called us. Proximity doesn't equate to security. We need changed hearts. Or we might betray Christ again ... just like Judas's kiss.

Tuesday

We don't know what Jesus did on the day after the Triumphal Entry, but on the next day, He taught and delivered what we call "the Olivet Discourse." On His way, Jesus used a fig tree to talk about faith (Matt 21:18-22). Back at the Temple, He took on the Pharisees. They questioned His authority (almost like "Did God say ...?") and revealed their hearts when they refused to answer Jesus's question for fear of the crowd (Matt 21:23-27). Then He really took them to task. He told parables they recognized as damning to their own position (Matt 21:28-46). He taught more parables and ridiculed the Sadducees for their anti-resurrection stance (Matt 22:23-33). He gave the famous "two-rule" thing ... love God and love your neighbor (Matt 22:34-40). "On these two commandments," He said, "depend all the Law and the Prophets" (Matt 22:40). He proved from Psalm 110 that the Messiah was not merely a man, but the Lord of all (Matt 22:41-46). And in Matthew 23, with some of the most scathing language found in Scripture, Jesus pronounced the "woes" on the scribes and Pharisees. Mind you, "woe" in their language wasn't "poor, pitiful me!" It was "God has turned His back on you!!!." "Blind guides!...For you are like whitewashed tombs—beautiful on the outside but filled on the inside with dead people's bones and all sorts of impurity. Outwardly you look like righteous people, but inwardly your hearts are filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness...Snakes! Sons of vipers! How will you escape the judgment of hell?" (Matt 23:24-33). Not the "nice guy Jesus" so many like to see. Then ... He wept ... over Jerusalem (Matt 23:37-39)

He went to the Mount of Olives next and spoke about prophecy. It's a popular passage (Matt 24:1-25). I grew up with language like "wars and rumors of wars" (Matt 24:5-8) predicting the Second Coming and "one will be taken and one left" (Matt 24:40) as a clear indication of the Pre-Trib Rapture. Maybe. Jesus was speaking of the future ... their future. And He wanted them to know what was coming. The most important parts were not the details of when and what, but things like the certainty that the elect would not be led astray (Matt 24:22), that God would guard His own (Matt 24:22), and that Jesus is coming (Matt 24:29-31). He told them, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away" (Matt 24:35). No one knows when, but "you also must be ready" (Matt 24:44) because "Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes" (Matt 24:46).

Jesus made some of His harshest and most penetrating statements on this day. He spoke of the evils of the Jewish religious leadership and both the fear and the wonder of His return. He urged, above all, that we ... be ready, be working when He comes. Don't be that virgin who was unprepared (Matt 25:1-13). Remember, the goats and the sheep look similar, but goats and sheep don't act alike (Matt 25:31-46). Our lives must reflect actively the external change that being born again causes necessarily. Jesus spent this day in His last week offering these messages that He thought essential to express before He left. We should pay heed. As long as He's not back, we should be serving diligently with a waiting heart and a passion to be like Him.

Cleansing the Temple, the Sequel

On the day of the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, Jesus made a special visit to a special place.

And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and He overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, "It is written, 'My house shall be called a house of prayer,' but you make it a den of robbers." And the blind and the lame came to Him in the temple, and He healed them. But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonderful things that He did, and the children crying out in the temple, "Hosanna to the Son of David!" they were indignant, and they said to Him, "Do you hear what these are saying?" And Jesus said to them, "Yes; have you never read, 'Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise'?" And leaving them, he went out of the city to Bethany and lodged there. (Matt 21:12-17)

It was a sequel, actually. He did it right after the wedding at Cana as well (John 2:13-17). According to that account, "His disciples remembered that it was written, 'Zeal for Your house will consume Me.'" (John 2:17). Jesus's zeal for God's house was aimed at religious corruption. The sellers and moneychangers were earning a profit on the requirements of the sacrificial system. They turned God's worship into profit by exploiting worshippers. They overcharged and underdelivered. They had to go. The repetition certainly indicates its importance. I think there may be some significance to the placement of the two events, too, coming at the beginning and end of His ministry -- God's holiness must be respected above all.

The whole action hit the religious leadership where it hurt. They questioned His authority. Jesus, the Son of God, demonstrated His authority in this act -- twice. He demonstrated the necessity of our own zeal for the sanctity of "God's house." Today, that's us. It's us as individuals and us as the Body of Christ. It isn't "opinion" or "preference." It's tied to God's holiness. We, too, should be consumed with a zeal for holiness -- our own and that of His Church.

Palm Sunday

Palm Sunday. It's the day we remember Christ's "Triumphal Entry" into Jerusalem before His crucifixion. The fact that it's in every Gospel account suggests that it's significant (Matt 21:1-11; Mark 11:1-10; Luke 19:29-40; John 12:12-19). The symbolism is in the name: the "Triumphal Entry." The palms and the donkey were classic Near East victory celebrations. The palms were typical devices for welcoming a hero. The donkey often signified peace. Where conquering warriors rode stallions, peacemaking kings rode donkeys as a sign of humility. And, of course, it was an answer to prophecy (Zech 9:9). Interestingly, the "Hosanna" they shouted means "Save, please" in Hebrew (see Psa 118:25). We have, then, a prophecy fulfilled by a "king" who is "endowed with salvation" arriving on a donkey ... specifically, a colt, the foal of a donkey (cp Zech 9:9 with Matt 21:2). He is celebrated as the king and comes in peace and humility to save.

The Messiah had two faces. One was a king, and the other a suffering servant. Palm Sunday shows us a glimpse of the soon and coming king. Good Friday gives us the suffering servant. This week is our reminder of our Servant King. I think, however, of the crowd. The text says the crowd "went out to meet Him (John 12:13). They went from "Hosanna" to "Crucify Him" in nothing flat. Perhaps that can serve as a warning for us not to turn on our Servant King when things don't go our way. True disciples will always honor Him as Lord of all.

News Weakly - 4/12/2025

Pro-Anti-Democracy
In a stunning display of resistance against the "existential threat to democracy" that is Donald Trump, democratically elected president, thousands protested across the country, forming their own existential threat to democracy. Their real concern is that some people have more money than they do. And it's clear now, of course, that democracy is not the issue. "What we want!" is, and Trump represents an existential threat to "our leftist way of life." I don't like some of the things he's doing, but overturning democracy because "I don't like it" is stupid. (Note: I'm not exaggerating. I've actually heard some anti-Trumpers say, "I'm not so sure democracy is a good thing anymore.")

"Mass" Hysteria
A "mass shooting" is typically defined as "three or more people shot or killed," so the headlines will always blare, "Mass shooting!!" when it happens. When a man in Brooklyn stabbed 4 children with a meat cleaver, it's bad, but not "mass" anything. And "meat cleaver control" is not on the docket for a vote. Strange world.

Inflated News
Inflation cooled, the headline said, and they felt they had to point out that tariffs are an issue because they didn't want anyone to think Trump did anything good. Of course, inflation went from 2.8 in February to 2.4 in March, a nearly undetectable change, but, hey, let's make a big deal about it, right? Look, when prices decrease, talk to me. Otherwise, I don't much care.

Our Fears Confirmed?
It sure looks like Trump has been retaliating against some who opposed him, like the most recent two former officials that didn't toe the line for him. From before his election in 2016, people feared his retaliatory nature. It may not be retaliation, but it doesn't look good.

Friend or Foe?
The trade war continues. China is raising duties on US goods to 125% ... for no other reason than retaliation. Someone should tell Trump that we don't like increased prices and don't consider it a sign of a "good economy." No one should have to tell him.

Fake News You Can Trust
On the Trump/Musk protests this last week, apparently protesters are demanding more government waste. "When do we want it? Now!" On the economy, Trump announces a big blow out sale on stocks while analysts clarify that Trump is only responsible for the stock market when it goes down. In other Trump news, Trump showed his support for the LGBT community by hosting the Dodgers at the White House.

Must be true; I read it on the Internet.

The Gospel that Jesus Preached

Mark wrote that Jesus came "preaching the gospel of God" (Mark 1:14). What was Jesus's gospel? Paul wrote of "my gospel," (Rom 2:16; Rom 16:25; 2 Tim 2:8) leading some to believe that his was different (especially the Pauline Dispensationalists), but Paul also called it "the gospel of Christ" (Rom 15:19; 1 Cor 9:12; 2 Cor 2:12; Gal 1:7 Php 1:27; etc.) and "the gospel of God" (Rom 1:1; Rom 15:16; 2 Cor 11:7; 1 Thess 2:2-9). Clearly Paul didn't think he was offering a different gospel. What was this gospel that Jesus preached?

In Mark's Gospel, he quotes Jesus as saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel" (Mark 1:15). Jesus's gospel begins with "repent and believe." Jesus claimed, "God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:16). That is, God's love is demonstrated in eternal life for those who believe in His Son. Jesus said, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me" (Joh 14:6). His claim was that He was the sole access to the Father. In Luke's Gospel, Jesus left the desert experience and went to Nazareth. There, He read from Isaiah.

And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to Him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He has anointed Me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent Me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor." And He rolled up the scroll and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on Him. And He began to say to them, "Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing." (Luke 4:17-21)

Well, there it is. Jesus's gospel. At least, that's what He read from Isaiah. And He said, "Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing." So, that's it. The gospel of Christ is that captives are liberated, the blind can see, the oppressed are freed, and God's really feeling good toward everyone. "Today," He said. Is that it? If it is, we have a problem. There are still poor people, still prisoners, still blind people, still oppressed people ... and Jesus declared, "Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing." Not "sometime soon." If we take it at face value, Jesus failed. Oh, He helped a few in His day, but ... He didn't, by any means, make a dent in the problem then or now. Is Jesus talking about the poor people of the world (who still exist unabated), or something else? Here's a clue. In Luke, Jesus says, "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God" (Luke 6:20). Compare that to Matthew's version (Matt 5:3). Matthew quotes Jesus speaking of "the poor in spirit." Huh. How about that? Could it be that neither Isaiah nor Jesus had people without funds ("the poor") in view, but the spiritually poor? Is it possible that "the gospel" that Jesus proclaimed was more concerned with the spiritually poor, the spiritual captives, the spiritually blind, the spiritually oppressed? Is it remotely possible that Jesus actually accomplished on the Cross the spiritual freedom for all these spiritually oppressed people?

Of course, that won't do for some. They're sure Jesus's was a social gospel. He meant well; He just didn't quite pull it off. He intended good things for the socially oppressed, but humans have blocked His efforts and we still have all these "lost sheep" in the physical world. If we could all just get on board, maybe we could make this world a better place, because that's Jesus's gospel. Or ... not. Jesus said, "I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me, even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd" (John 10:14-16). Jesus's spiritual sheep were not in question; they were assured. "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand" (John 10:27-28). The spiritual sheep -- with spiritual poverty, blindness, captivity, oppression -- had the certainty in Christ of eternal life ... because He would lay down His life for them. Jesus's gospel wasn't a social gospel. It was a gospel of redemption. And it was accomplished in Him. Like Paul and the rest of Scripture preached.

What Have You Got?

In 1949, Jim Elliot wrote, "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." Jim Elliot was killed in 1956 taking the gospel to an unreached tribe in Ecuador. He lived what he believed.

We are called to give all to Christ (Matt 22:27). We're told, "Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him" (1 John 2:15). Paul urges us to "present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship" (Rom 12:1-2). Jesus told His disciples, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me" (Matt 16:24). It's a running theme ... give up self for Him. And still ... we balk. We hold back. We waver -- vacillate. Because, doggone it, do we really have to give up everything? I mean, look at this wonderful stuff!

On our behalf, Jesus gave up ... all (Php 2:5-8). God offers a clean slate (1 John 1:9) and the very righteousness of Christ (2 Cor 5:21), kindship with Him and eternity in His presence .. if you'll just believe, take up your cross, deny yourself, follow. What do you have that's worth more? What do you keep that you can't actually keep? Where is your treasure? We used to sing, "I surrender all." Do we?

No Lesser Gospel

We're coming up on Easter, the celebration of the Resurrection. The time serves as a reminder of ... the fundamental gospel.

Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. (1 Cor 15:1-5)

Basic to the gospel ("of first importance") is the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. It is the core of what we call "the Atonement." My favorite text on this is in Romans 3.

Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin. But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (Rom 3:19-26)

(Sorry about the length. You need the full thought.) Since works don't justify, we need an alternative. The alternative God came up with was "through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe." How? We are "being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith." Through faith, Jesus's blood bought us back from sin ("redemption"). Through faith, Christ's blood serves to propitiate -- to appease an angry God -- for our justification. In that, we have peace with God (Rom 5:1) -- Atonement. In this magnificent act of grace and mercy, God became "just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus." In Christ's death on our behalf, God achieved both justice and justification.

"Is that all you got? Does that prove that Christ died on our behalf to save us?" Well, to those of us who believe Scripture as it is presented, yes, but ... it's not the only proof. Take, for instance, the entire Old Testament sacrificial system. You know, the one to which Christ is compared (e.g., John 1:29)? Hebrews assures us "without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Heb 9:22), as the entire bloody sacrificial system of the Old Testament testifies. Isaiah famously prophesies of the Christ that He bore our griefs and was pierced through for our transgressions (Isa 53:4-6). Jesus Himself said, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" (Matt 26:28). Paul, of course, is the biggest biblical proponent of this concept of Atonement (see above as well as many others), but it doesn't depend on Paul. It doesn't depend on Anselm. It doesn't depend on conservative Christian denominations. It's a fully biblical concept.

Lots of people like to argue the point. It is, however, in Scripture from Adam and Eve to the final judgment, from Genesis to Revelation. The problem is huge (Rom 3:23). The curse is real (Gal 3:10). And it is God's amazing grace of supplying a satisfaction of justice in His Son (Heb 2:17; 1 John 4:10) that saves. It's not a new idea. It's not a manufactured notion. It's the biblical position. Jesus Himself said so. And the magnitude of the biblical version of the Atonement is breathtaking when embraced at face value. As we saw yesterday, Paul argues for it and pronounces anathema on any lesser gospel.

(For a well-written examination on the subject, you might try this.)

Another Gospel

Yesterday we saw that Paul introduced himself to the Galatians as an emissary ... from God. That would be extremely arrogant if it wasn't true. But ... it was absolutely true. This emissary -- this Apostle with a capital "A" -- told them of the gospel -- that Jesus gave Himself for our sins to rescue us from evil, and that this reality was for God's glory (Gal 1:1-5).

What was God's emissary most concerned about? Why is he even writing this letter? There were Galatian believers ... who were deserting Christ (Gal 1:6). How? They were going with "a different gospel" (Gal 1:6). He explains, in fact that it "is really not another." So this "different gospel" was not a gospel at all. It was only masquerading as one. It was a distortion (Gal 1:7). It sounded "gospely" but it wasn't an actual gospel. They were buying something other than the good news that Christ gave Himself for our sins so that He might rescue us from this present evil world. Paul said that if any one, including himself or an angel from heaven, offered a different gospel, they were to be "accursed" (Gal 1:8-9). Excommunicated, banned, kicked out, anathema.

Of course, distortions of the gospel still abound. The pharisaical early church taught a "saved by Jewish law" version ... not another gospel. Going with the whole "angel from heaven thing," Joseph Smith distorted the gospel of saved by grace through faith and made it a works-based falsehood ... not another gospel. We have those who say Jesus didn't die for our sin and those who say that we didn't even need saving ... not another gospel. We have the social gospel that says we're saved to a better earthly existence ... not another gospel. "We're good enough" or "We're not that bad" or "You just have to work hard enough" or "No one has to do anything at all" are popular versions of "another gospel" which are not other gospels at all. "Other gospels" abound, and Scripture demands that they be excised, removed, eliminated. Check your "other gospel" at the door and don't pick it up when you leave.

The Galatian Intro

Paul's epistle to the churches of Galatia has an interesting beginning.

Paul, an apostle -- not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead ... (Gal 1:1)

Paul makes a big point with a simple statement. He's writing ... with authority. He's not some guy, some casual teacher, even some rabbi. He's an apostle -- a delegate, an official ambassador, if you will. Not only is he an apostle, but he's an apostle commissioned "through Jesus Christ and God the Father." He specifies "not from men nor through man." He doesn't carry with him the authority of his own or a church or a group or any human source. Paul's authority was God Himself¹.

So what does a delegate sent by God have to say? Christ "gave Himself for our sins so that He might rescue us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father" (Gal 1:4). First and foremost, Paul wants them to know ... the gospel. It's important. It's vital. It is, in fact, his mission. What gospel? Christ gave Himself for our sins to rescue us. He rescued us from "this present evil age." And He did it "according to the will of our God and Father." The gospel.

The gospel isn't very popular to a large group of people. The notion that we need rescue is an offense to some. The fact that Christ had to give Himself to do it is an offense to some. The simple fact that Paul speaks as a designated representative from God is really upsetting to many ... even though Paul claims that this gospel, this sacrifice, this rescue is to the glory of God forevermore (Gal 1:5). But don't kid yourselves. Paul is right. The gospel is amazing. We desperately need rescue, and Christ died to do it. Without that fact, we're lost.
________

¹ There are those who would challenge this claim. "Paul said it. Doesn't make it so." This, of course, would serve to nullify Paul's claim here in Galatians ... as well as 3/4 of the New Testament and, ultimately Scripture itself. (For instance, 2 Tim 3:16-17 is the primary claim that Scripture is God-breathed and Peter confirms that Paul was writing Scripture, so, if Paul lied, God Himself is at risk here because Scripture is not God-breathed and Peter was just plain wrong.) However, we do have Peter's word on that and Jesus's. Jesus told Ananias, "Go, for he is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel; for I will show him how much he must suffer for My name's sake" (Acts 9:15-16). If there is a quibble here, Scripture and Christianity itself are done.

Search me, O God

When I was young, I had a problem with ... self-image. Not self-esteem. Self-esteem is how one values oneself. We all value ourselves higher than we ought (despite our society's concern that we don't). Self-image is how one sees oneself. If it's accurate, it's good (whether or not it's favorable or unfavorable). If it's inaccurate, it's a problem. So, my parents offered their best approach to solve it. They ... made me memorize Scripture. The text they gave me to memorize was ... Psalm 139.

The psalm is a reflection on God's Omniscience and His Omnipresence. It points to the fact that each of us is uniquely and intimately created by God. It ends with the almost mandatory response:

Search me, O God, and know my heart! Try me and know my thoughts! And see if there be any grievous way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting! (Psa 139:23-24)

It's difficult to read through the psalm without coming away ... overwhelmed. He knows me (Psa 139:1). Doesn't everyone want to be known? He knows me. He's with me (Psa 139:2-12). I'm never, never, never alone. He hears me (Psa 139:4) ... before I speak! He protects me (Psa 139:5). He ... made ... me (Psa 139:13-16). Not like a factory part. He "knitted me together in my mother's womb" (Psa 139:13). He saw my unformed substance (Psa 139:16) (one of the most powerful proofs that a fetus is a human). He wrote out my every day before there was one (Psa 139:16). He thinks of me (Psa 139:17). Imagine that! The God of the universe thinks of me! He doesn't need to. He doesn't have to. But ... He does!

Most of us suffer at times from a feeling of inadequacy, of being ... less than perfect. Psalm 139 says "I praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are Your works; my soul knows it very well" (Psa 139:14). When we question our design, our build, our looks, our abilities, we question God's character. And that's a bad thing. Perhaps we need this reminder that we aren't junk, we aren't useless, we aren't an accident. We are known, accompanied by, made, seen, designed, and thought of by God. I hope that's enough for you. When it's not, we need to ask God to search us and correct our hearts (Psa 139:23-24).

News Weakly - 4/5/2025

The Double Standard is Strong With This One
A Cornell student who engaged in "creating a hostile environment for Jewish students" and "disruptive protests" -- urging the annihilation of Israel -- is afraid of "being abducted" in the streets (by, apparently, law enforcement), so he's leaving the U.S. by choice. Well, his visa was revoked and all, so that's a factor, but he's going. Because he's dedicated to an unsafe world for the Jews in Israel just as much as he is to his own safety.

Matters of State
Finally!! Trump has really made a big impact on our national well-being. He signed an executive order targeting scalpers who resell concert tickets at a huge profit. Man! It's about time. Expect your own pocketbook to bulge with this critical issue resolved. We've all been itching to have this nightmare addressed. (Was that too much sarcasm for one entry?)

When Does It Stop?
Tariffs have their purpose, and they're not all bad, but at some point ... Trump has unveiled "global reciprocal tariffs." Never mind that the Executive Branch doesn't have the job of assigning tariffs. Never mind that the idea of putting tariffs on countries we are helping to subsidize to stay afloat is counterproductive. Never mind that we will all pay the price. (Especially since you know there will be retaliation.) It just seems ... petty at some point. He says, "We are finally putting America first." Maybe, but not the America I would hope it could be. Not the America that cares globally. It is the self-centered "American Way" today, I suppose. (Oh, and "trade war" is certainly the correct term at this point.)

Your Best Source for Fake News
From the Bee, the funniest one this week was the simple headline, "BREAKING: Economy." "The headline says it all." Other ramifications are showing up as the Dodgers declare bankruptcy after Trump places a 25% tariff on Japanese players. And, just for fun, heaven has unveiled a special VIP lounge for people who went to Wednesday night prayer meetings. (I know. Most of you will have to look that one up.)

Must be true; I read it on the Internet.

Joy, Joy, Joy, Joy

When I was young our youth group leaders liked to lead us in singing. They particularly liked rounds. You know, polyphonic method of singing where two or more voices sing the same phrase at different times to create harmonic layers. Or ... in English ... two or more voices singing the same melody in a way that overlaps and creates harmony. One of the popular ones was Rejoice in the Lord Always. You know, the ever-popular, complicated lyrics,

Rejoice in the Lord always and again I say, rejoice
Rejoice in the Lord always and again I say, rejoice
Rejoice, rejoice, again I say rejoice.
Rejoice, rejoice, again I say rejoice.
Rejoice in the Lord always and again I say, rejoice.

Yeah, quite the complicated song. (To be fair, it's straight from Scripture (Php 4:4), so I'm not complaining.) The interesting thing about rounds is that they're ... endless. I mean, there's no obvious end point. You just keep singing until someone says, "That's enough." So, in theory, this song could just ... go ... on ... forever.

And ... in this one instance, I'm not sure that's not a good thing. I mean, the command is to "Rejoice in the Lord always" (Php 3:1). Paul repeated the command ... three times. It appears to bear repetition, with it's "always" aspect. Biblically, repetition can be significant. The angels cry "Holy, holy, holy" over God ... twice (Isa 6:3; Rev 4:8). Jesus said "Truly, truly" on multiple occasions. Repetition is often emphasis in Scripture. So it seems as if the command to "Rejoice in the Lord always" is significant simply because it says "always," but additionally because it's repeated (Psa 35:9; Isa 41:16; Zec 10:7; Php 3:1; Php 4:4). If the joy of the Lord is my strength (Neh 8:10) and we're to "Count it all joy when we encounter various trials" (James 1:2), are we ... rejoicing always? Or ... do we have a ways to go to become the joyful people we are commanded to be?

How's Your Day?

The psalmist wrote, "Give thanks to YHWH, for He is good; for His lovingkindness is everlasting" (Psa 118:1). So true. He went on to write, "This is the day which YHWH has made; Let us rejoice and be glad in it" (Psa 118:24). To be fair, we've happily snatched that verse out of its context and thrown it up as a happy little song. "The day" he was writing about wasn't just any day. In the prior verses, he writes,

I shall give thanks to You, for You have answered me, and You have become my salvation. The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief corner stone. This is YHWH's doing; it is marvelous in our eyes." (Psa 118:21-23)

Thus, "the day" to which he refers is specifically when Christ came, died, rose again, and conquered all. That's the day YHWH made. That's the day we rejoice and be glad for. But ... that's now. He reigns now. So this is that "day" in an ongoing sense, and we can and should rejoice and be glad in the stone that became the chief corner stone.

The truth is, today is the day the Lord has made. How is yours? I mean, are you satisfied with it -- are you rejoicing in it -- or do you have some suggestions for improvement? The truth is, we are living in the era spoken of when Christ became the corner stone. Are you glad? Are you rejoicing in it? We should really give thanks, because He is good, and His lovingkindness is everlasting. Perhaps that can make your day better.

Where to Stand

In 1868, Elizabeth Clephane wrote the hymn, Beneath the Cross of Jesus. It was published three years after her death. Clephane was born in Scotland. She was considered a frail girl, but was known for her philanthropic causes. Her parents died when she was young and her brother died in a fall from a horse. She died at 38, a weak, frail, short-lived life ... full of good works. What was her secret?

Elizabeth was known as "one of those cheerful people who brighten every corner." Her friends called her "Sunbeam." Because Clephane lived "beneath the cross of Jesus." In what sense? Elizabeth wrote,

Beneath the cross of Jesus
I fain would take my stand,
The shadow of a mighty Rock
Within a weary land;
A home within the wilderness,
A rest upon the way,
From the burning of the noontide heat,
And the burden of the day.

It's a bold statement. Bold because Scripture says "For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor 1:18). She boldly declares to those who consider it "foolishness," "This is where I gladly reside." And bold because the cross is a place of suffering. You actually want to stand there?

In subsequent verses, Clephane calls the cross a "safe and happy shelter," a "trysting place where heaven's love and heaven’s justice meet." I love that phrase. She confesses that she can see Him on that cross at times. "And from my smitten heart, with tears, two wonders I confess -- the wonders of His glorious love, and my own worthlessness." That's where she longed to stand.

The last verse says,

I take, O cross, thy shadow
For my abiding place;
I ask no other sunshine than
The sunshine of His face;
Content to let the world go by,
To know no gain nor loss,
My sinful self my only shame,
My glory all the cross.

In that verse we find her secret to happiness in an existence that we would consider painful, even unbearable. Beneath His cross, she was looking to Jesus. Nowhere else. Like Paul with his thorn in the flesh, "Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me" (2 Cor 12:9). At the cross we can find contentment beyond the world's understanding. I would gladly ("fain") take my stand there.

No April Fool

We laugh about April Fool's Day, but Scripture talks about foolishness quite a bit. Biblical foolishness resides in the arena of sin. It's not merely ignorance or even a lack of understanding. It begins with the suppression of truth (Rom 1:18) which produces the exchange of God for alternatives (Rom 1:22-23). Paul wrote, "They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen" (Rom 1:25). The phrase, "a lie," is most correctly translated "the lie." What lie is that? Worshiping and serving the creature rather than the Creator. And that is foolishness. David wrote, "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds; There is no one who does good" (Psa 14:1). And you see the correlation between "no God" and the judgment of good and bad -- "There is no one who does good."

Proverbs has a lot on foolishness. Some of my favorites are "The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man is he who listens to counsel" (Pro 12:15), "A wise man is cautious and turns away from evil, but a fool is arrogant and careless" (Pro 14:16), and "A fool does not delight in understanding, but only in revealing his own mind" (Pro 18:2). A fool has a temper (Pro 14:17), perverse speech (Pro 19:1), and produces sin (Pro 24:9). And on ... and on.

Wisdom, the counter to foolishness, begins with the fear of the Lord (Pro 9:10). It would bring about a proper grasp of God as opposed to a suppression of the truth about Him. It would produce a right understanding of our sin nature and the need for a Savior. It would lead to repentance and faith, and the grace and mercy that accompany repentance and faith. Our "April Fool" is a joke day, and that's fine, but let's be year-round wise, pursuing God and His truth, rather than daily fools.