Why Does God Want Our Love?

Today’s lead question is pretty simple and straightforward, and comes to us from Hector:

Why does God want our love?

I love these good, basic questions – questions that deal with things that we often take for granted, we assume we know the answer to, but we don’t think through.

So, why does God want our love?

First, let’s look at the wrong answer, or a reason that is not true. God does not want our love because He is “needy” in the way we might think of a person being needy.

1. Edwin Orr used a memorable definition of God, which was thoroughly Biblical: God is the only infinite, eternal, and unchangeable spirit, the perfect being in whom all things begin, and continue, and end.

God relies on no one and no thing – God is self-existent.

John 5:26

For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself

It’s also important to note that God is not “needy” in the sense that any desire for love is satisfied within the persons of the Trinity. Look at these words of Jesus, speaking to God the Father in His great prayer in John 17:

John 17:24

You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

This tells us that before anything was created, there was a love relationship between the Persons of the Godhead, the Trinity. Even if Jesus had not specifically told us this, we might have understood it by other Biblical truths, understanding that God is eternal (Micah 5:2) and that God is love (1 John 4:8 and 4:16). There was never a time when God did not love and was not love.

Now, for the positive reasons – why does God want our love?

1. God wants our love because it is appropriate. It’s right.

This is true for several reasons.

• God is our creator, and it is appropriate for the creator to love the Creator.
• God is a guide to all humanity, speaking to mankind through creation, conscience, and His word (the Bible).
• God is the redeemer of His people, rescuing them from sin, self, judgment, and the powers of darkness.
• God love us first, and it is right for us to return love to Him. As 1 John 4:19 says, We love Him because He first loved us.

2. God wants our love because it’s good for us. It is good for us to love Him. It puts things in the right order.

So, the great Shema statement of Israel:

Deuteronomy 6:5:

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength.

Specifically confirmed by Jesus:

Mark 12:29-30

Jesus answered him, “The first of all the commandments is: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ This is the first commandment.

This is a command that comes not from a need in God, but in what is good and appropriate, and in what is good for His creatures – in particular, those creatures that are made in God’s own image.

How can a person struggling to trust God’s (unconditional) love, love Him more in light of 1 John 4:18-19? How do we gain a perfect love which drives out fear & doubt?

1 John 4:18-19 – There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love. We love Him because He first loved us.

I’ll give you two things to think about. First, I think that we come to trust God’s love more by simply focusing on His great love for us. Read your Bible with a particular outlook. Keep your eyes open in every verse and in every chapter: how does this display the love of God? I would say that even in Bible passages which speak about the judgment of God, there is often an element of God’s love manifested. Sometimes you can see the love of God in His announcements of judgment because He is warning people so they can avoid or escape judgment. There is also the declaration of God’s love in announcements of judgment, because God demonstrates His love for what is good and what is right. Judgment upon evil is a demonstration of God’s love for that which is good. So, when you read your Bible and in your times of prayer, give great meditation and consideration to the love of God for you in every aspect.

We cannot fathom all the great aspects of God’s love for us. But we can think about it again and again and again. I would really recommend developing the biblical practice of meditation upon God’s Word. Now, this is very different from the Eastern concept of meditation. In general, the Eastern concept of meditation involves emptying the mind and trying to have a blank mind, which, in some sense, even spiritually, can lead to great danger. On the other hand, biblical meditation is to fill your mind with the truth and the beauty and the power of God’s Word. As you spend time meditating on the revelation of the love of God, I think the natural response within us will be to have a greater love for God Himself.

Continue to meditate upon and set your mind on the greatness of the love of God. Sometimes we take God’s love for granted, thinking, “God loves us, okay, great. He loves us. He loves me. He loves everybody. He has to; that’s His job. He’s God.” No, that is a very superficial understanding. I would trust that your appreciation of the love of God is already far beyond that superficial idea. I’m just here to tell you that there is much deeper ground for all of us to go to in our understanding of the love of God.

How are we meant to love God without fear, “because fear has to do with punishment,” (1 John 4:18) when the threat of eternal punishment in Hell is hanging in the balance for Christians? Are we meant to both love & fear God?

Much of the answer to your question is bound up in understanding the idea of fear. In the Bible, fear is a fairly broad idea. Sometimes fear is expressed in a negative sense, in a kind of cringing, halting, fearful expectation of great punishment or judgment upon a person. That’s the kind of fear that can be done away with in Jesus Christ.

But the idea of fear is broad enough in the Bible that it also includes the idea of a healthy respect and honoring of God. The Bible says, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Psalm 110:10, Proverbs 1:7, Proverbs 9:10), and that’s absolutely true. But these passages are not talking about a fear that God might smite us. Rather, it is an appropriate honor, awe, and reverence for God.

So, we need to make sure that we’re talking about the same thing when we talk about fear. The fear that has to do with punishment is a fear that absolutely can and should be put away for the believer in Jesus Christ. How can I say that so categorically? Because the believer in Jesus Christ should live in the awareness that all the punishment that our sin deserved – past, present and future – has been poured out on Jesus Christ and satisfied by His sacrifice at the cross. It’s a very simple equation. If Jesus Christ bore the penalty and punishment for all of our sin, then there is no more punishment awaiting us before God. There may be fatherly discipline, but not punishment in the sense of paying for sins. That idea of a fear of punishment from God can and should be put away from the heart and mind of every person who is born again by God’s Spirit. This is part of the assurance of salvation and security that we have in our Savior – not in ourselves, but in our Savior.

Considering the other definition of fear in the Bible, the believer still continues to have a proper reverence and respect towards God, and we should not be flippant or disgraceful or dishonoring to Him in any way. I do not live in fear of hell. I’m a believer, and I have trusted Christ. And even though my faith at times may be weak, it is set upon a great, perfect Savior, who has rescued me, not because I’m so wonderful, but because He’s so wonderful and has done so much for me, especially what He did at the cross and the empty tomb. So, I don’t live in fear of hellfire. That’s been satisfied by what Jesus did at the cross. I think God wants the same for every believer.

How can we respond in love and truth when people say they are led by the Spirit, but don’t read the Bible?

Well, if God gives you the opportunity to respond to a person who would say, “I’m led of the spirit, but I don’t read the Bible,” you should remind them of what the Bible says itself. Jesus said that the Spirit would guide His people into all truth. There is no greater statement of God’s truth than what we find in the Word of God itself. Anybody who wants to divorce the working of God’s Spirit from the working of God’s word is barking up the wrong tree.

Now, I believe that you can make some distinction between the work of the Spirit and the work of God’s word. They’re not entirely separate, but neither are they identical. God’s Spirit and God’s word work in concert together, they’re consistent with each other. The Spirit never contradicts the Word, and the Word will never contradict the Spirit, at least not the true working of the Holy Spirit.

In the great Upper Room Discourse in John 13-16, Jesus spoke about how the Spirit will guide the people of God into all truth. Of course, there’s no greater expression of truth than what we find in God’s word. It’s a dangerous thing for a person to say, “I’m guided by the Spirit. I’m led by the Spirit. But I don’t want to have anything to do with the Bible. I don’t want to read my Bible.” That that can lead to a lot of problems.

Is the filling of the Spirit something that happens to a believer only once or multiple times?

I lead a men’s Bible study group and I use your sermons and commentary for reference. Acts 3-4 tells about Peter being filled with the Holy Spirit on 3 different occasions. Your commentary for chapter 4 says that Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit 3 separate times, and we need to be continually filled with the Holy Spirit and I agree. I have a member in my group that disagrees with being filled with the Holy Spirit more than once. He interprets this Scripture in chapter 4 to say Peter is using the Holy Spirit he was originally filled with at the day of Pentecost. He believes you are only filled with the Holy Spirit once, kind of like “once saved, always saved.” Is the filling of the Spirit something that happens to a believer only once or multiple times? Please advise.

I am firmly within the camp that believes that the filling of the Holy Spirit is an ongoing experience. All I can tell you is what it says in the book of Acts. Three or four times in the early chapters of Acts, it says that the disciples and, in some cases, the same disciples, are filled with the Holy Spirit. Peter is one example of being filled with the Spirit multiple times. I don’t know how to disregard that. The Bible does not say they had access to the Spirit. No, it says filled. All I can say is what the Scriptures themselves say. To your friend, I might say, “Dear brother, I understand what you’re trying to get at. But it does say they were filled with the Spirit here, and again in this place, and again in this other place. I take that to mean they were filled with the Spirit repeated times.”

Additionally, Ephesians 5 says that we should be continually being filled with the Spirit. I’m not an expert in Greek grammar. I just know how to read the fellows who are experts. But from what I read, the grammar and the verb construction there speaks of a continual filling. One person has translated it, “Be constantly being filled with the Spirit.”

I understand, people are wary of Pentecostalism. People are wary of crazy charismatics. They want to emphasize that the work of the Spirit is a one-time occurrence in the life of a believer. But I don’t think that’s what the Scriptures teach. I think the Scriptures teach that we have an ongoing experience with the Spirit of God, and that the filling of the Spirit should be a continuing experience for the believer, just like it was for the disciples in the book of Acts, and just like is described in Ephesians 5, to be constantly being filled with the Spirit.

That’s how I would advise this brother, but you know what? I wouldn’t argue with him about it. Some of these things are just simply spiritually discerned by a person, maybe at the right time and the right place. The Spirit of God Himself will speak to this dear brother of yours in your Bible study group.

Can we really love God out of our own free will (we choose to love God) or is it mostly because we are commanded to do so (Mark 12:30)?

Mark 12:30 – ‘And you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ This is the first commandment.

Well, I don’t like using the phrase free will. I think a valid argument can be made that our will is not completely free, that there are at least some hindrances to the exercise of our will, whether hindrances by the world around us or hindrances from within. So, instead of saying free will, I like to say real choices. In other words, I don’t think a person has to have a completely free will, a will that is free in every regard. I don’t think they have to have that in order to make a real choice. I believe that we can choose to love God, given that He does a work in us.

God does work in His people. God does work in unbelievers to draw them to love God by loving them first. We love Him because He first loved us. This is what prompts our love for Him. I think you could probably say rightly say that we cannot love God unless He loves us first. But given that He has loved us first, we can respond to Him in love. I don’t see a contradiction between that and responding to the command of Jesus.

I think a great way for us to take this command is to simply say, “Jesus said that I must love the Lord, so I want to love the Lord my God with all my heart, with all my soul, with all my mind, with all my strength. Lord, how can I love You more? What can I do today to demonstrate my love to You, God? How can I love You with my mind? How can I love You with my soul? How can I love You with my strength? How can I love You with my entire being? I love You, Lord.”

I think that’s a very simple way to respond, to choose to do what God tells us to do. Now, I know that we can’t do anything of love or good towards God unless He empowers us to do it. But God won’t do these things for us. He may do them in us and through us, but He won’t do them for us. Somewhere in this equation, there appears to be a choice that we have to make. And we say, “Yes, Lord, I’ll do this.”

Who Or What is the Generation that Shall Not Pass Away?

I recently heard a Pastor make the assertion that Jesus himself said (no scripture quoted) that the generation that sees Israel become a nation again (in 1948) will not die out before all end time events have unfolded. Is this biblical? Thanks!

This question has to do with Matthew 24:32-35. In that chapter, Jesus gives what we call the “Olivet Discourse” – the teaching He gave His disciples on the Mount of Olives, regarding the destruction of the temple and the end of the age.

In Matthew 24, Jesus spoke of a generation that would not pass away until all the things He spoke of took place. Some people – even many people – connect that generation with the re-establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.

Here’s passage from the Olivet Discourse, Matthew 24:

Matthew 24:32-35

“Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near; at the doors! Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.”

The thinking goes like this:

• The [32] fig tree represents Israel.
• Israel’s [32] “branch” sprouted again and “put forth leaves” in 1948.
• The [32] fig tree has a regular pattern. The leaves appear, and then summer follows. When you see the leaves, you know summer is near.
• Therefore, these things are [33] near, even at the door.
• Therefore, the [33] generation that sees Israel re-founded will see all these things fulfilled.

What are the [33] all these things that will take place that will be seen by this generation?

Here’s a summary in what Jesus said in Matthew 24:1-31:

• There will arise catastrophes and persecutions, but those in themselves are not the sign of the end.
• There will arise a pivotal sign: the abomination of desolation.
• When the abomination of desolation appears, there are warnings to Israel to flee after the abomination.
• On the heels of the abomination of desolation comes great tribulation, and cosmic disturbances.
• In culmination, Jesus Christ will return in glory to the earth.

So, here’s the question: does the fig tree in Matthew 24:32 represent Israel?

My answer is, “I don’t think so.” I don’t regard the fig tree of Matthew 24:32 as representing Israel and its restoration. I don’t think Jesus meant here, “the generation that sees the re-establishment of the State of Israel will see all these things fulfilled.”

Now I must say that recently I spoke at a conference, and one of the other speakers – a good pastor named Barry Stagner – he made the argument that the fig tree here is a picture of Israel, and the “tender branch” and “putting forth of leaves” that Jesus described in Matthew 24:32 was the re-establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. It’s a case that I have heard before (presented by some pastors I really respect) but have not agreed with. Yet I must say, Pastor Barry Stagner made a better presentation of that position and a defense of that position than I have heard before, and that interested me.

One big question I have for the “fig tree equals Israel in Matthew 24” people is, “at what year would you admit this is wrong?” It’s already been 76 years since 1948, when Israel became a nation again. For most people, 76 years is longer than a generation. What is the furthest point out for this to be true? 80 years? 90 years? 100 years? When is “this generation” over?

The fig tree was a common fruit tree in Israel. It is mentioned many times in the Old Testament, especially as a description of the abundance of the land. Sometimes figs or fig trees are also used as symbols or pictures. In passages like Jeremiah 24:1-10 and Hosea 9:10, figs or fig trees are used as a representation of Israel.

However, most Old Testament references to the fig tree use it as simply an example of agricultural blessing. It seems that Jesus’ reference here is not so much on the “figness” of the fig tree, but on the way that the fig tree follows reliable growth cycles related to the seasons. This is especially evident when this passage is compared with Luke 21:29-31: Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.

Especially taking the Luke account in consideration, when Jesus said in Matthew 24:33, So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near; at the doors! – I think all these things refers to all the things Jesus previously mentioned – not exclusively the “fig tree” restoration.

Jesus assured that when these signs appeared as He foretold, His return to the earth would follow. What were the signs?

• The abomination of desolation.
• Followed by great tribulation.
• Followed by signs in the heavens (24:29: the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken).

When a fig tree buds, there is an inevitable result – summer is near and fruit is coming. In the same way, when these signs are seen, the coming of Jesus in glory with His church to this world will inevitably follow.

Really, it was just as Daniel prophesied in Daniel 12:11. The end will come 1,290 days after the abomination of desolation. Jesus assures that the agonies of the Great Tribulation will not continue indefinitely; they will have an end.

So, I hope this explains why some people think the Matthew 24 passage says the generation that sees the re-establishment of the State of Israel (in 1948) will be the generation that sees the end.

I don’t agree with that approach, but I understand it. I think a better explanation is to say that the generation that sees the cataclysmic signs Jesus spoke of will see the very end.

But – I think God has given us many reasons to believe that Jesus is coming soon, and that we should be ready, just as Jesus told to. I do think that the re-establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 is part of that, just not for the “fig tree” reason.

1. [34] Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place: This statement of Jesus is one of the central reasons many have looked for all or most of the events of this chapter to be fulfilled in A.D. 70, approximately 40 years after Jesus spoke these words. Yet as previously argued, to assert this is to greatly stretch the most natural interpretation of the abomination of desolation, of the severity of the great tribulation, of the cosmic signs, and of the coming of the Son of Man. It is better to let those passages have their most natural meaning and to fit this promise into that framework.
2. The generation Jesus meant cannot be the generation of the disciples, because they never saw Jesus return in glory as described in Matthew 24:30. It is undoubtedly the generation that sees these signs. These events and Jesus’ return won’t be on some 1,000-year timetable, but will happen in succession.
3. It has been suggested that the word generation could also be translated “race,” and is a promise that the Jewish race would not be extinguished and would survive to the end. This would be a valuable promise, but some commentators (such as France) claim this is an embarrassingly wrong translation. Yet others – such as Adam Clarke, who strongly believed the events of this chapter were almost all fulfilled in A.D. 70 – writes, “This race; i.e. the Jews shall not cease from being a distinct people, till all the counsels of God relative to them and the Gentiles be fulfilled.”

Josephus: Wars of the Jews, Book 6, Chapter 3, Sections 14-16

There were many false prophets at the time, says Josephus, yet people had not paid attention to the genuine signs of destruction: a star resembling a sword standing over the city, a comet, a brilliant light around the altar, a vision of armed battalions in the sky, and  voices in the Temple, along with the prophecies of a peasant crying ‘Woe to Jerusalem.’ “It is impossible for men to escape their fate, even though they foresee it.”

In this section, Josephus described many signs that warned the Jews of Jerusalem that something terrible was coming. These signs – which the Jews ignored – included:

• A light that shined in the ninth hour of the night around the altar and the temple, so that it seemed to be daytime there for 30 minutes.
• A heifer that was being led by the high priest for sacrifice at the temple gave birth to a lamb.
• The very heavy eastern gate of the temple opened by itself, and was shut again only with great effort.
• As priests entered the temple for service on the night of Pentecost, there was an earthquake and they heard a voice saying, “Let us remove hence.”
• A man named Jesus the Son of Ananus began crying out through the streets of Jerusalem about coming judgment saying, “Woe to Jerusalem.” He was forced to stop, brutally beaten, and eventually was killed.

In this section, Josephus also spoke of celestial or heavenly phenomenon:

“They did not attend, nor give credit to the signs that were so evident, and did so plainly foretel their future desolation. But like men infatuated, without either eyes to see, or minds to consider, did not regard the denunciations that God made to them. Thus there was a star, resembling a sword, which stood over the city: and a comet, that continued a whole year.”

“A certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared: I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable; were it not related by those that saw it; and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals. For, before sun setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities.”

When Jesus rose on the third day, was He still man, or was He Spirit in the flesh?

Thank you for that question. When Jesus rose from the dead, He was still a man. But let me explain. Before the Incarnation, before Jesus was conceived by a miracle of God in the womb of Mary, without normal reproductive processes, humanity was added to the deity of the second person of the Trinity. The second person of the Trinity, God the Son, has always existed. He’s God. He is part of the Godhead, so He has always existed.

So, we have the second person of the Trinity, God the Son, adding humanity to His deity by a miracle of God. He lived His life through boyhood and growing up, and at the end of His three-year ministry, Jesus was crucified, died, was buried, and then resurrected from the dead. When Jesus resurrected from the dead, His humanity remained intact. He was truly God and truly man. How do we know that? The Bible tells us it’s true.

1 Timothy 2:5 – For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

Notice the phrasing of Paul in this verse: he says there is one man, not there was or there will be. He’s talking about the present moment. In his present moment and in our present moment, there is one mediator between God and man: the man Christ Jesus. When Jesus resurrected from the dead and ascended to heaven, He retained the humanity that He had added to His deity. Jesus did not put away His humanity when He rose from the dead and ascended to heaven. Jesus Christ, the God-Man, is enthroned in heaven right now at the right hand of God the Father.

It’s important for us to realize that although the Incarnation had a beginning point, the conception of Jesus in the womb of Mary, it does not have an ending point. As we know from the Scriptures, Jesus became truly man and truly God, and He retains that status for the rest of eternity.

Are there ways in which our will is not free?

I think the best answer to this question was given by the great German Reformer, Martin Luther. In his correspondence with a theologian of his day, Desert Erasmus, there was an ongoing discussion concerning how free the will of man is. Based on that correspondence, Luther wrote a book called, “The Bondage of the Will.” I think Martin Luther made many legitimate arguments in it, basically saying that fallen humanity does not truly have free will, that our will is constrained and bound by sin, by the world, by our own fleshly nature, by the devil and his temptations, by our habits, by our mental and emotional weaknesses. As human beings, we cannot do whatever we want to do; we are bound in our will.

If somebody thinks that there is no aspect of bondage to the will, I would challenge them to do this: just stop sinning. If you’re a totally free person, you can choose to sin or choose to never sin again. But it doesn’t exactly work like that, does it?

There is a very real sense in which our will is constrained by our sin, by the world, by the flesh, by the devil, by our own natural weaknesses and failings. I agree with all of that. However, I still believe that men and women have the capability of making real choices. By the way, when I’m speaking with people from a strongly Reformed background, I try not to use the phrase free will. There is a sense in which our will is not completely, absolutely free, but that does not mean that we as human beings don’t have real choices. Therefore, I don’t argue for the freedom of the will or free will. Instead, I would argue for real choices.

Someone may wish to disagree and argue, “No, as human beings, we don’t have real choices. We’re simply programmed to choose things in a certain way, and therefore we’re going to follow our programming, and that’s all there is to it.” To that I would ask, “If we don’t have real choices, how are we held to account by God?” I’m big on the idea that our will is not completely free, but not to the extent that we don’t have real choices.

Is it appropriate for Christians to use dating apps to find a potential spouse?

I’ll be very straightforward on this. I don’t think you can find anything, biblically speaking, that would prohibit the use of a dating app. A dating app is just a way that people meet each other. As with any other way that you meet people, there are benefits to it, and there are problems with it. It’s possible that for some people, it’s not wise to use a dating app, because the problems outweigh the benefits. But maybe for other people, it is a good way for them to meet other people. Maybe it’s not ideal, or maybe it is ideal, I don’t really know.

I praise the God and Father of my Lord Jesus Christ, that I was married to my wonderful wife Inga-Lill in the year 1983, before the internet was available, much less smartphones and dating apps and all the rest of it. My heart goes out to the rest of you who are not in that place. In my estimation, it’s a tough world out there meeting people, and I don’t know that dating apps have made it any easier. But I can’t think of anything biblically that would command against it.

Therefore, it’s a matter of Christian liberty, and it’s also a matter of Christian wisdom. Each believer has to determine whether it’s wise for them to use a dating app, and whether they have the liberty in Jesus Christ to do it. I think that’s a good way to approach it.

I am strongly against making commands where the Bible does not make a command. Remember the condemnation that Jesus gave the religious leaders of His own day. He said, “You take the traditions of man and make them into the commandments of God.” I think we need to be very careful to not take our traditions and elevate them to the status of the commandments of God. God gave us His Word. I love God’s word, and I don’t want to go beyond God’s word. When something speaks about a topic not mentioned in God’s word, I want to make it very clear that I’m going beyond God’s word, and ultimately leave it up to the liberty and the wisdom of the individual believer.

Is seed offering and Prosperity Gospel biblical?

No, the prosperity gospel is not biblical. It’s really a gross perversion of the gospel. The only way that it might be called biblical is that the Bible warns against it. Now, of course, the prosperity gospel in its current manifestation wasn’t around in the first century. But the wickedness at the heart of man which frames this movement is ancient. It’s simply called greed.

The prosperity gospel also goes by the names of the Faith Movement, or the Gospel of Health and Wealth. Sometimes it’s referred to as Positive Confession. Some modern promoters of it avoid any of those terms since they’ve been tainted by scandal and exposed by ministries like Enduring Word. Mike Winger has done a lot of work in this area as well. Like I mentioned, some popular media ministries push a prosperity message without ever coming out and admitting that’s really what they’re doing.

The roots of the modern prosperity gospel lie in post-World War Two America, when elements in the Pentecostal church adopted the metaphysical ideas of occult spiritualists. They redefined faith as a metaphysical force that could create reality. They said that faith isn’t just believing in and trusting on God, but that it’s a spiritual force that’s independent of God. They would even argue that God used it to create the universe. The gospel of prosperity doesn’t save us from sin into a restored relationship with God so much as it offers to make us godlike beings who can also create reality by harnessing the creative power of faith through positive confessions. The real gospel promises and prepares us for heaven, while the prosperity gospel claims to give the power to bring about heaven here and now. One popular prosperity preacher said, “As good as I can imagine heaven is going to be, by faith I can have that now.”

All of this flies in the face of the record of Scripture in history. Surely no one was more in tune with the gospel of Jesus than the Apostles, the very ones who in Ephesians 2:20 are said to be the foundation of the Church. History tells us that, apart from John, all of the Apostles were martyred. They were put to death for their faith. The only exception was John who eventually died of old age but was first persecuted and spent time in a brutal situation on the prison island of Patmos, where he received the visions that comprise the book of Revelation. Of those Apostles, the men who framed the very foundation of our faith and our understanding of what it means to live by faith, none of them owned a chariot, let alone a mansion or half a dozen mansions spread across prime vacation places of the Roman Empire. If they were supposed to be examples of faith as preached by modern prosperity hucksters, the Apostles failed miserably. But they were, in fact, premier examples of the faith into which Jesus called them. Here is what Jesus told His disciples about the life of those who followed Him:

Mark 10:28-31 – Then Peter began to say to Him, “See, we have left all and followed You.” So Jesus answered and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel’s, who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time–houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions–and in the age to come, eternal life. But many [who are] first will be last, and the last first.”

Matthew 10:34-39 – “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his [own] household.’ He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.”

Someone might ask, “Didn’t Jesus say in that passage that those who give for the sake of the gospel will receive a bunch of stuff in this lifetime?” Yes, He said that. He said that they would receive a hundredfold. So please don’t miss that. Prosperity preachers love to quote this verse and then say something like, “Give to me and to this ministry, because by doing so, you unlock the promise and the principle of faith that brings prosperity.” They always define prosperity as monetary wealth, which can then be used to buy stuff. But if that’s what Jesus meant, what do we do with His reference to the reward of a hundredfold? If you give a house, do you get a tract of houses back? If you give ten acres of land, do you get a thousand in return? And how do you give brothers, sisters, parents, and children, which He speaks about in the second passage?

As far as I know, while well-known prosperity preachers do have multiple houses, and prime real estate, none have 100 of them. Such a crass, materialistic promise was not at all what Jesus had in mind. As the mention of people there makes clear, Jesus meant that following Him may involve losing earthly relationships, as it has for millions of Christians over the centuries. That word house in Mark 10 refers to the place where a family lives and lands refer to inheritance. It’s good to be careful to interpret Mark 10 in light of what it meant to those to whom Jesus spoke it. For many people, and especially the Jews, following Jesus has meant being banished from their families. Some families even hold a funeral service for a relative who becomes a Christian. It’s forbidden to even use their name, and they are written out of the will; they have no inheritance. In a time when the family home and lands were passed from one generation to another, in unbroken line of succession, this was a fate worse than death. It was a kind of living death to be written out of one’s family. That’s what Jesus was speaking of there.

The hundredfold return that Jesus spoke of in Mark 10 refers to all that one gains in terms of the kingdom of God. So, yes, following Jesus may mean losing our earthly family and our identity, but we are ushered into the family of God, and we become a brother or sister in Christ, with literally thousands of spiritual relatives.

The prosperity gospel is a religious cloak for the greed of false teachers who prey on the gullible and the uninformed.

1 Timothy 6:5 – …useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a [means of] gain. From such withdraw yourself.

They wrap their con act in the guise of religion, and they bilk [cheat or defraud] people.

Titus 1:11 – …whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole households, teaching things which they ought not, for the sake of dishonest gain.

2 Peter 2:3a – By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words.

Being covetous themselves, they appeal to it in others. They try to sanctify their greed by saying that it’s actually a manifestation of faith. This is an age-old problem in the history of not just the Christian church, but quite frankly, in religion in general. People look for a way to detach guilt from their sin. And it’s easiest to do that by relabeling sin as a form of righteousness. “It’s not greed, it’s faith. It’s not the idol of materialism, the love of things; oh, no, it’s the proof of my great faith.” Jude refers to false teachers in his short letter:

Jude 1:4 – For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Jude 1:16-19 – These are grumblers, complainers, walking according to their own lusts; and they mouth great swelling [words], flattering people to gain advantage. But you, beloved, remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ: how they told you that there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lusts. These are sensual persons, who cause divisions, not having the Spirit.

Paul warns about false teachers in other passages as well:

Philippians 3:17-18 – Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern. For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, [that they are] the enemies of the cross of Christ.

Romans 16:18 – For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple.

Susan also asked whether the so-called “seed offering” was biblical. I suspect her question was prompted by a favorite passage of the prosperity preachers, 2 Corinthians 9:6-14, where the Apostle Paul gives instructions on how to give. It’s clear from the passage that he’s speaking about giving finances. As Paul planted churches around the Gentile world, he spoke about the desperate situation of Jewish Christians back in Israel. In response, the churches collected funds for their relief. The Corinthians had promised that when Paul came back, they would also give a donation for the relief of their brothers and sisters in Jerusalem. Well, Paul was about to come to Corinth, so he sent a letter on ahead to remind them of their promise. He added a little lesson on how to give, concerning what kind of attitude that we should use as we give.

2 Corinthians 9:6-14 – But this [I say]: He who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. [So let] each one [give] as he purposes in his heart, not grudgingly or of necessity; for God loves a cheerful giver. And God [is] able to make all grace abound toward you, that you, always having all sufficiency in all [things], may have an abundance for every good work. As it is written: “He has dispersed abroad, He has given to the poor; His righteousness endures forever.” Now may He who supplies seed to the sower, and bread for food, supply and multiply the seed you have [sown] and increase the fruits of your righteousness, while [you are] enriched in everything for all liberality, which causes thanksgiving through us to God. For the administration of this service not only supplies the needs of the saints, but also is abounding through many thanksgivings to God, while, through the proof of this ministry, they glorify God for the obedience of your confession to the gospel of Christ, and for [your] liberal sharing with them and all [men], and by their prayer for you, who long for you because of the exceeding grace of God in you.

A major difference between what Paul says here and the way that it’s used by modern prosperity preachers is who the gift ultimately benefits. Paul asked for gifts for the relief of needy Christians. On the other hand, prosperity preachers are explicit in their call that you plant your seed gift in their ministry, and some go so far as to imply that their specific ministry ensures a return, because they have an inside line with God. They show pictures of some of the works that they do here and there, like an orphanage or some kind of a literacy program in the third world. What they don’t show are their half dozen 15,000-square-foot mansions, their stable of luxury cars, their horses, and their personal jet. Someone is prospering, all right, but it’s the prosperity preachers, not the so-called “seed sowers.”

Paul never intended what he wrote in 2 Corinthians 9 to be a formula for prosperity. We do not give to get. This is not some kind of spiritual investment scheme. Paul simply means that when and as we give, we do so as an act of faith which marks our dependence on God. God loves it when we do that, because it gives Him the opportunity to prove how faithful He is. He will take care of us. He will meet our needs. The key word there is needs, not wants. God is not going to become the means to someone’s end of getting rich. All those prosperity preachers are destined to the harshest judgement, as Jude makes abundantly clear in his letter.

What are your thoughts on pragmatism in the church?

Great question. Let’s define pragmatism first. I once heard someone say, “Pragmatism is a good ol’ American philosophy.” It’s the idea that as long as something works, it’s true or it’s good. In this case, good is not defined by some kind of ethical standard that arises from the character of God, but rather simply if it works. The means justify the ends. As long as it works, it’s true. As long as it works, it’s good.

The problem with pragmatism is that it tends to evaluate good only in terms of the immediate reaction or response or result. As we know from long experience in history, what seems good today might not appear as good tomorrow. In fact, a temporary fix today might be setting up a later disaster. Here’s a classic example. We’ve seen videos of bridges that blow up because they’re engineered improperly, and they start bouncing and eventually explode. Let’s say there’s a river and people need to cross it, so they decide to build a bridge, but they build it as quickly and as cheaply as they can. Once the bridge is opened, people can cross from one side to the other and save a lot of time and a lot of fuel. But in their process of going about it, in what seemed like the pragmatic manner, they end up making a bridge that ends up blowing up, because it was done with pragmatism: simply the desire of a quick fix to get a quick result.

So, what about the use of pragmatism in the church? As we go about ministry, in the life and functioning of the church on a day-to-day, week-by-week, month-by-month, year-by-year, decade-by-decade basis, we need to make sure that we are doing ministry the way that the Bible shows us it needs to be done. That isn’t always seemingly the most efficient way. It doesn’t always seem to align with current values. But God’s word taps into an eternal truth that doesn’t change, as opposed to the culture, which is constantly shifting.

Here’s an example. Some years ago in the evangelical church, there was something called the “seeker sensitive” method of ministry. The idea was that the church needs to be aware and sensitive to the needs of seekers and the unchurched. In that light, they decided to stop using biblical phrases and biblical terminology, and to start using more contemporary terms that unchurched people might know and understand. They brought in cultural forms, music, and movies that they’re used to, in order to use them as bridges to communicate to those people. Now, certainly, we want to be able to speak to our culture, and we want to make the truth relevant to them, but we must do it in a manner that remains faithful to God’s timeless, eternal Word and truth.

When we start approaching ministry in a purely pragmatic way, considering only what is going to fix a problem immediately, we don’t consider the larger context of God’s eternal plan. We end up applying fixes and getting engaged in ministries and activities that are in fact hindering the cause of the Gospel. In many ways, this has been the history of the church, not just in modern America and the evangelical church. This has really been the case of the European church during the Middle Ages. In those days, there was a thriving Christian community in Syria known as the Church of the East. Meanwhile, the church in Europe was really struggling, but the church in Syria was growing. They were incredibly missions-minded, and they continued to reach further and further east into Asia. And they eventually made all the way to the Pacific Ocean to China. There’s even some evidence they had gone to Japan early on by the seventh century. The problem is, they took their culture with them. They didn’t understand the process of contextualization. They were so wedded to their own culture and expression of Christianity that they didn’t understand the cultures where they went. We spend time digging into the word to see how God became Man to communicate to mankind the eternal truths of God.

Ultimately, they ended up not being as effective as they could have been. The cultures to whom they brought the Gospel later saw Christianity as not being for them. It was thought of as Syrian and foreign. And they ended up kicking it out. That’s what happened in China and Japan. The Christianity that originally formed there was not Chinese, it was not Japanese; it was Syrian. And it ended up getting kicked out. It was very pragmatic on the part of those Syrian missionaries to do what they were doing, but it wasn’t biblical. They weren’t contextualized and they weren’t incarnating of the message, as God incarnated the message to us in the person of Christ.

So, pragmatism is a problem. If you’re attending a church, it’s good to look at its systems and its ministries and to ask, “Why are we doing this? What is the fruit? Does it align with Scripture?”

​​Should churches provide annual financial accounts for the congregation to view?

Great question. Yes, I personally believe that churches should make their financial budgets and their year-end statements available to their congregation. Transparency is always good, especially when it comes to finances. You know the old phrase, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” In our world, money is power. It’s the mechanism by which we transfer power from one place to another. Money is power. In order to keep that power from corrupting, I think that it is good for churches to be transparent in their finances and their accounting.

At our church, we have an annual business meeting. It’s required in our bylaws to do that. Everybody is welcome to come. We go over the finances of the year: how much money came in, how much money was spent, where it was spent, how we spent it. That gives the Body an opportunity to see what’s going on. We make the financial reports available a week ahead of time so that people can view it before they come to the meeting. Then at the meeting, they’re able to ask questions. We as the leadership know that we’re going to be facing people, they’re going to be looking at the numbers, and that we’re going to be answering questions. It’s a good check. It makes us be very careful and cautious about how we spend, and what we spend on and what we spend it for. So, I think it’s a good idea. I would encourage any church to do that. If you attend a church that doesn’t make those available, you might simply ask why. I think that would be a good step. It’s a good practice to do.

Where should a Christian tithe if they aren’t members of a church? Is it only a tithe if it’s financial, or can you tithe your time?

I have a question about obedience on tithing. Where should a Christian tithe if they aren’t members of a home church? And can a tithe be your time, or does it have to be financial? For instance, in the biblical days it was your first fruits – food, harvests. Not necessarily monetary.

Let’s talk about that last part first. In the ancient world, at the period of time where they are told to bring their first fruits, there wasn’t a lot of coinage in use. There was a barter system. One person raised sheep while another raised vegetables, and there was an understanding of how many bushels of vegetables equaled one sheep. That was the system. Everybody knew that. Just like today, we know $1 equals $1. We see a product listed at $15 on the price tag. I have the sense of what the value of $15 is, and I decide if I want to take my value of $15 and give it to the store in exchange for that item. So we go through that same evaluation. We look at something which is too expensive, and decide, “I’m not going to pay that price for that.”

In that light, coinage and currency is kind of a shorthand version of the barter system. In the ancient world, they didn’t really have currency, so they used barter. Everybody would evaluate questions like, “Am I going to take four bushels of vegetables for four sheep? Is that a good deal? No, I want five,” for example. That’s how things were done then. Later, people found that it was actually more convenient and more transportable to convert products into currency and coinage. Instead of bringing a sheep, they could bring the coins acquired from the sale of the sheep and use them anywhere they wanted.

When the Bible originally talks about the first fruits of a harvest, it’s because they didn’t use coin coinage much at that point in time. But later, as societies evolved and coinage became more common, people would do that very thing. They would go to the market in their village, sell their produce, take the coins go to the temple, and tithe with their coins. That’s why in the gospels we read about people bringing coins to the temple and placing them in the box. Remember the story of Jesus and the disciples watching as the widow brings her mite and leaves it there.

So really, tithing is the idea of giving from what God has blessed us. In our culture and setting, we get paid a salary or a wage. The income we earn is the fruit of our labor. So that’s the way that we should tithe. The word tithe means a tenth. It’s interesting that you don’t ask the question, “Should we tithe?” There’s kind of an assumption there that we’re already tithing and that it means a tenth. The idea is that God gets the first part of what we earn.

People wonder if they should tithe on the net or the gross income, whether God should get His share before Uncle Sam gets his tax dollars. Well, tithing transcends the Law. Abraham tithed to Melchizedek long before the Law was given to Israel. This principle was understood by people: when they give to God, you give this amount. But I believe that it’s not a law; rather, it’s a principle.

Many, many people who have adopted the principle of tithing will give the testimony that it opened a new dimension in their relationship with God and observing His faithfulness. Tithing is a way to say, “God, You own it all. You’ve just given it to me to be a good steward of, so I’m going to give you the first tenth, as a reminder to myself that all of it belongs to You. And then I’m ultimately dependent on You for provision.”

Should the tithe be given to a church? Generally, I think that believers need to find a home church and be plugged into that church. We need a spiritual community, a family with which we connect. More and more recently, I’ve seen questions from people saying they’re having a hard time finding a healthy church. We’ve had a number of people move away over the last four years from our church here in Southern California. I think we’ve lost around 30-40% of our congregation. Some have moved away because of job transfers, but quite frankly, most have moved away but just because they’re so disheartened over the political direction that California has taken. So, they moved to Idaho and Tennessee and Texas and Montana and Arizona and Florida and other places. They’ll send us emails, and they continue to watch our live stream. They continue to consider our church as their home church. We urge and encourage them to find a church, but often they say, “I’m having a really hard time finding a faithful, Bible-teaching church.” A few of them continue to send their tithe to us because we continue to be their church, even though at a distance, via the live stream.

If possible, I would encourage you to keep looking for a church. If you simply cannot find a place to connect, you might want to consider tithing to ministries that you find helpful and supportive. Another option would be to put it in savings, with the intention that it’s not your money, it’s God’s money, and you’re waiting on Him to show you where to give it. I have known some people who have done that when they’ve moved. They’ve sensed that they need to tithe to their church, but they haven’t found their church yet. So, they have put their money in savings, or they’ve zeroed it out in their bank account, and they’re keeping a record of how much it is. They’ve set those funds aside, not as their own anymore, but belonging to the Lord. They’re simply setting those funds aside until they find a church, and they are continuing to look for that place. When they do find a home church, then they’re going to give that lump sum, because it has already been given to the Lord. So, that’s an option too. There’s a lot that you can do.

How can I explain “the body, soul, and spirit” to a non-believing friend?

Can you help me with a wording on how to explain to a non-believing friend “the body, soul, and spirit,” and how they relate to each other?

That’s a great question. And quite frankly, it’s not an easy one to answer. There is some debate in evangelical Christianity about how many parts make up the human. The general consensus is either two parts or three parts. If we’re thinking of two parts, there is the material and the immaterial, which would be the soul and the body. They would consider the soul and spirit as effectively the same, or synonyms for the same part of the immaterial part of man, while the body is the physical part.

The other idea is that we’re three parts: body (physical), soul (immaterial), and spirit (also immaterial). I would agree with the second group. I believe that we’re three-part beings. Here’s why.

In one of Paul’s letters, he writes that his readers would be sanctified in their body, soul, and spirit. Paul seems to be identifying three aspects or dimensions of sanctification. If he intended there to be just two parts, I don’t think he would have differentiated between the soul and the spirit.

Looking back to the very beginning of Genesis, and the creation of man, we read that God took the dust of the ground and formed a body. And then He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. The word breath and breathe there is the Hebrew word Ruach, translated and in Greek as pneuma, which means breath, or wind, or spirit. Breath and wind we can kind of understand but how does that relate to spirit? It refers to the idea of unseen life and movement. God makes a physical body of the dust of the ground, and He breathes the breath of life or the spirit of life into the nostrils of this body. Then it says, “And man became a living soul.”

Our connection to the physical universe is our bodies. Our connection to God is the spirit. Note that Genesis never says about His creation of the animals that He breathed into them the breath of life. Man is the only creation that receives this special endowment from God called His breath, His ruach, His Spirit. So, now we have the Spirit of God, bearing His image in man, in his body, and it says, “And he became.” The idea there is that when the breath entered the body, man became a living soul. This word for soul was explained by one Bible teacher the following way: The soul seems to act as kind of the transmission between the spirit and the body. The body is like the vehicle of the car, the Spirit is like the engine. And we all know how the engine connects to make the body go: it’s the transmission. The transmission is where the engine and the body of the vehicle connect. We are made up of our physical body, and the spirit, this special thing that we get from God that makes us different from the animals. The result is that we become a human being with a soul, a soul being comprised of the mind, the emotions, and the will. When you put those three things together and you have the soul, the personality, that unique thing that each of us have which is different in every single person. We also have similarities to other people, but the soul is unique to each individual, and it makes us unique human beings. The mind is not just the brain; it’s the whole process of our thoughts, our emotions, and how we have those inner feelings and inclinations which move us. Then there is the will, which is a separate faculty we possess that allows us to be able to make decisions. In his book, Mere Christianity, CS Lewis identifies the difference between the will and the mind. We can all relate to this. Note how you when you’re thinking, you have varying thoughts and you kind of go back and forth. “Should I do this, or shouldn’t I do this? Should I go for tacos, or should I go for burgers?” Typically, you go to one or the other when you have two thoughts. But there’s another voice that comes in. If all we had were those voices, they would just argue, and we wouldn’t do anything. There’s a third voice that comes in and decides which one of these I’m going to go with. That’s the will. That’s part of the soul, the critical decision-making faculty that we all have. I think that’s a good way to describe how you would go about explaining the difference between the body, the soul, and the spirit.

Why Do Some Believers Turn to Jewish Customs?

From Sherry via email –

Dear Brother David, 

I just want to tell you how incredibly thankful for this ministry! God is using you to help us with HIS Word! Enduring Word has become an integral part of my daily Bible Study through the commentary, podcasts, and videos! I am wondering if you have any information or opinion regarding the Hebrew Roots Ministry (or others like it). My son has married into a family that is steeped in it, and while I’ve done much research on it myself, I would rather like to hear what you have to say, and of course, what the scriptures say to back it up.

Why is it that some Christians turn to the Old Covenant and customs?

I do not believe this way, as I am not a Jew, but I know that there is freedom in Christ… could it be a false path, or even wrong for non-Jewish Christians to do these things? Or am I wrong to oppose it?

I am praying that my son steps up as the spiritual priesthood of his family and doesn’t allow this to creep into their little family, but he has already abstained from certain foods in order to please his wife. I’m unsure how to approach this. Again, thank you for any information or insights you have! Prayers and Continued Blessings on the Enduring Word ministry!

Sherry really is asking two questions. Why do some Christians turn to the old covenant, and why do some Christians turn to Jewish customs.

There is nothing in the old covenant for the believer in Jesus Christ, except for what we learn by principle and example. In no sense in the believer “under” the old covenant. In Jesus Christ, we are under the new covenant. Chapter after chapter in Hebrews explains this.

For believers under the new covenant, there is nothing wrong in following Jewish customs and traditions, as long as three dangers are avoided:

• They recognize this is not the basis of their standing or status with God, their righteousness. In Jesus, they are not under the old covenant, but the new. Following Jewish customs or traditions does not make them one bit more right with God.
• They do not judge, or think themselves superior to, other believers who do not follow Jewish customs or traditions.
• Jesus, especially in His work on the cross and in His resurrection, isn’t obscured by attention to Jewish customs and traditions – rather, Jesus is highlighted and exalted.

Colossians 2:16-17

So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.

So let no one judge you: The opening “so” is important. It connects this thought with the previous thought. Because Jesus won such a glorious victory on the cross, we are to let no one judge you in food or in drink or in other matters related to legalism. A life that is centered on Jesus and what He did on the cross has no place for legalism.

Food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come: The Old Testament law had certain provisions that are done away with as laws in Jesus, regarding such things as food and sabbaths. It isn’t that those laws were bad, simply that they were [17] a shadow of things to come. Once the substance – Jesus Christ – has come, we don’t need to shadow any more.

The point is clear: days and foods, as observed under the Mosaic Law, are not binding on new covenant people. The shadow has passed, the reality has come. So for the Christian, all foods are pure (1 Timothy 4:4-5) and all days belong to God.

1. Christians are therefore free to keep a kosher diet or to observe the sabbath if they please. There is nothing wrong with those things. However, they cannot think that eating kosher or sabbath observance makes them any closer to God, and they cannot [16] judge another brother or sister who does not observe such laws.

Romans 14:5-6

One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks.

One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike: By bringing in the aspect of observing certain days, Paul lets us know that he is talking more about principles than specific issues. What he says has application to more than just eating meat.

[5] Let each be fully convinced in his own mind: In such issues, Paul is willing to leave it up to the conscience of the individual. But whatever we do, we must be able to do it [6] to the Lord, not using “conscience” as an excuse for obviously sinful behavior.

Romans 14:10

But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? Probably, the use of both judge and show contempt is meant to have application to both those who would celebrate Jewish customs and traditions, and those who do not. Neither should think of themselves as better because of what they do or don’t do. In either case, the attitude is wrong because we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

The Christian who celebrated some Jewish customs and traditions found it easy to judge his brother, writing him off as someone who was unenlightened, ignorant of the Jewish background to the Christian faith.

The free Christian who did not celebrate some Jewish customs and traditions found it easy to show contempt against his brother, regarding him as a uptight-legalistic-goody-good. Essentially, Paul’s answer is “Stop worrying about your brother. You have enough to answer for before Jesus.”

The judgment seat of Christ is where the life and motives of the believer will be judged. This isn’t a judgment of salvation, but relevant to reward.

Sherry, you are right to oppose the direction your son is going if:

• He thinks any of the Jewish customs or traditions makes him more righteous.
• He thinks himself superior to other Christians who don’t observe Jewish customs and traditions.
• He seems to, in some way, “lose” Jesus in the focus on Jewish customs and traditions.

These are the dangers of “Hebrew Roots” movements and must be avoided.

Is God’s Hand Behind Every Death?

From Pam via email….

I have a question. A friend of mine who was a missionary in Africa for years recently died of cancer.

Another friend says that God killed her based on Deuteronomy 32:39 where He says “I kill and I make alive.” This person says when someone dies then God killed him.

I think it is a misinterpretation of this scripture, taken out of context.

Can you help me?

Pam, I’m sorry to hear about your friend’s death. I pray her family will be comforted and that God will continue to bring fruit from her missionary service.

I’m also sorry to hear what your other friend said, because I don’t think it is helpful or true.

God is behind death in at least three ways:

• By what He allows because God can do all things. It is within God’s power to stop any death.
• By the world He has created, a world of cause and effect. If a person jumps off of a tall bridge and dies from the impact, we wouldn’t normally say “God killed them.” We would say, “gravity killed them.” Yet, God created the world with gravity and cause and effect – and cancer.
• By specific acts of judgment, which God may do (directly or indirectly) in His righteousness.

Yet, there is an important difference between what God actually performs and what He allows. I think it would be completely wrong to say “God killed your missionary friend in Africa” simply because they died of cancer.

It is absolutely true that God has the right to take human life, and sometimes does according to His judgments. The problem is that we can be far too quick to assume we know what is a judgment of God and what isn’t. Remember what it says: who has known the mind of the Lord? (Romans 11:34, 1 Corinthians 2:16)

Now, as for the verse your friend referred to – let’s take a look at that.

Deuteronomy 32:39

‘Now see that I, even I, am He,
And there is no God besides Me;
I kill and I make alive;
I wound and I heal;
Nor is there any who can deliver from My hand.

Don’t stop there – take a look at the context. Just read the two verses following:

[40] For I raise My hand to heaven,
And say, “As I live forever,

[41] If I whet My glittering sword,
And My hand takes hold on judgment,
I will render vengeance to My enemies,
And repay those who hate Me.

Clearly, when God says in verse 39, I kill and I make alive, it is in the context of His work of judgment. It’s not speaking of God’s direct work in each and every death that happens.

Yet please be careful here. We aren’t trying to say, “God had nothing to do with your friend’s death by cancer.” Not at all! As I said before, God clearly allowed it, and God created a world where it is possible for people to die by cancer.

What is more – and I can say this confidently because your friend was a missionary, a believer – God’s promise holds true:

Romans 8:28

And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.

I would not say that God killed your friend. Yet He allowed it, and created a world where people die from disease, and God has promised to work all these things together for good. It didn’t catch God by surprise, and God isn’t wishing He could have prevented it. God’s hand is at work, even through this.

One more thing: everyone dies.