Judging Rightly

My sermon yesterday was from Luke 6:37-45 on Jesus' teaching about judging other people's sin.  This is often one of the most mis-quoted and misunderstood verses in the Bible.  Almost everyone quotes this at one time or another.  People who don't know any other verses of Scripture except "Jesus wept" are fond of pulling this one out whenever they need some sort of vindication or justification for their personal sin.  However, is that what Jesus meant when he said "Judge not, and you will not be judged"?  Was Jesus advocating an attitude towards others that never calls into question unwise decisions, misguided living, or blatant sin?  Was Jesus advocating that each person's life is completely a personal matter and that nobody ever has a right to question another's lifestyle choices? 

Certainly not.  This is another classic example of not understanding Scripture in context and only taking one verse and building a theology off it.  Jesus also taught in the verses following in Luke 6 about fruit and judging the health of a tree by the quality of its fruit.  Our society and law requires an accurate system of investigation and judgment in order to maintain law.  How do we justify that the pedophile who destroys many lives by his actions is guilty and deserving of punishment while the guy who unwisely drinks more alcohol than he should and destroys his personal life and relationships around him does not deserve some sort of correction?  How do we say that the corporate head who leads his company in millions of dollars of unwise investments that cost taxpayers billions to bail out is worthy of condemnation while we should turn our eyes from the average Joe who cheats on his taxes?  The reality of life is that because we are all humans, we are accountable to one another for our choices and actions because we do not live in a vacuum.  All of our choices have consequences to ourselves and others.   

Jesus does not condemn judging when it consists of accurately assessing a situation and then seeking to help someone who is making choices that are harmful to himself or others physically or spiritually.  Its basic and inherent to the Christian heart that has been transformed by the gospel to want to be a conduit of grace and forgiveness to others.  As a matter of fact, I believe if you are cold and indifferent to other people's sinful choices then you probably don't understand the gospel.  What Jesus condemns is a cold, judgmentalism that seeks to justify yourself by constantly putting down other people, standing in a condemnation over them.  This was the righteousness of the Pharisees.  They were religious without grace.  They wore their religious badges proudly, but missed out on the sessions about mercy and justice.  Sadly, this is also what many in the unchurched culture see from those who attend church.  They see us as piously looking down our noses in condemnation while we forget that at one time "we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another." (Titus 3:3).  We forget the truth and power of Ephesians 2:3-4 which says:

"among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.  But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ - by grace you have been saved - and raised us up with him and seated us in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus."

Jesus illustrated the kind of judgment we should exercise with the familiar illustration of the speck and the log.  He said for us not to try and help remove the debris in other's lives until we are actively aware and removing the obvious debris in our own.   This is why we all need an constant understanding of our personal depravity and the excessive goodness of God's grace.  While God doesn't want us to dwell in self-pity because of the sinful choices we've made, he wants us to keep the reminder of what we have been forgiven of to motivate us to engage in aggressive and violent war against the sin in our members so we can have leverage by which to help others in their sin.  This is the essence of judging rightly.  People will be much more open to the reality of their sin and to the truth of the gospel when they see God's people come from a position of graciously forgiven sinners instead of pious, condescending Pharisees.  This isn't easy though.  The longer we move from our justification experience, the easier it is to forget the terror of standing before the righteous Judge.  The more we craft an image of God as a gentle, benevolent grandfather, the harder it is to remember that our continuing sins are still a terrible affront to his holiness.

How about you?  How easy do you find it to judge without being judgmental?  Do you lean too much to the judgmental Pharisee side or too much to the tolerant, non-confrontational side?  Have you learned the tender art of speaking the truth in love?

Are "Near-Death" and "Post-Death" Experiences Really Necessary?

Time to get something that's bothering me a little bit off my chest.  I was at home today for lunch and my wife was watching Pat Robertson's 700 Club.  I am not really a big fan of Robertson or his ministry. I think he sticks his foot in his mouth way too much, but I have had that said about me more than once.  700 Club does have some very inspiring stories, they pray for people, and overall I think his ministry is much more harmless than Paul Crouch, Benny Hinn, and many others.  Anyway, towards the end of the program they did their usual appeal to "become a member of the 700 Club" for a monthly donation.  As a "thank-you gift" they would send to me "this powerful video full of stories of people who have experienced near-death experiences - some to heaven and some to hell."  This really is beginning to bother me some.

This video is the latest in the line of many resources that are now beginning to proliferate the church market about people who claim to have died and what they saw and experienced right after.  The market is currently flooded with these types of books and videos - (Heaven is for Real, 90 Minutes in Heaven, 23 Minutes in Hell, The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven, My Time in Heaven, and several more).  These type resources are creating a frenzy among people who want to hear these "amazing stories" of what life is like "on the other side."  I think this is mostly due to our innate fear of dying and many people's uncertainty of whether there is something else or what it's like.  I think it's also because in our media-driven age we are drawn into fascinating stories.  I personally met and heard Don Piper share his experience of Heaven and listened with rapt attention.  I believe Piper to be a very humble, sincere, and fascinating brother-in-Christ.  As far as I can discern, his story seems very real and his accounts of Heaven didn't appear to contradict what I have studied personally from God's word. 

I will admit that I have personally never read any of these books and really don't feel the need to.  I do not know any of the other people, other than Don Piper, that have written these books or told their stories.  I am not so cynical as to think that these people had to have made these stories up and are doing so for personal gain.  I don't think they are greedy.  I also admit that in most of the cases that I have heard of there is medical evidence that these people died and later came back to life.  I don't even question that.  I am not questioning whether these "experiences" are real.  I cannot know, prove, or disprove that at all.  My question is "Are these stories and experiences necessary?"  I am not questioning the validity of these stories, just their necessity.  Are we now to assume that we are living in an age where God, because of the technology and interconnectedness of the world, has now chosen to reveal truths about heaven, hell, and the afterlife through new stories?  Are we to assume just because some of these people claim personal faith in Jesus Christ that these are experiences sent by God to tell us something?  There are other questions I think these books raise as well:

1. If God really is behind these experiences and revelations, why is he choosing to do this now and seemingly so often?  These are not the first people to have near-death experiences and talk about them.  However, is it just because we have more media that we are aware of them or is God up to something.
2. If God is not really behind these experiences, then where are they generating from and could some of them possibly have a demonic origin designed to confuse and distract Christ-followers?  Scripture says that Satan masquerades himself as an angel of light.  I am not suggesting these this is the case, just asking the question.
3. Does the Bible not provide enough sufficient explanation about Heaven and Hell?  I think one of the tragedies of these resources is that we are relying on these accounts to "understand what Heaven and Hell are like" instead of the sufficiency of what God has already said about them in the Bible.  The result of this is people propagating ideas about heaven that have no scriptural basis.  I know several good books about Heaven that have been written that are completely based on Scriptural revelation and not second-hand sources.  (Heaven by Randy Alcorn, The Glory of Heaven by John MacArthur, One Minute After You Die by Erwin Lutzer)  I would recommend reading these as a substitute or at worse as a supplement for these other books.
4. If there are things in these books that contradict or confuse what is revealed in Scripture, how do we handle that?  The problem for most people who buy these books is that they haven't carefully evaluated everything that is revealed in God's word about these subjects, so they don't know error when they read it.  
5. Can these type resources eventually become a substitute for Scripture?  I have seen people who will voraciously read these books but if you ask them about their personal time in God's word they will say that they find it hard to "make time for the Bible".  What does that say about us?
6. How do we discern "legitimate" experiences from "illegitimate" ones?  By what standard do we have to decide which stories are real and which are not?  Are we to assume all of them are real?  Are we to assume all of them are false?
7. ?  The rich man in hell pleaded with Abraham to let him or someone else go back and warn his family.   And he said, 'No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' He said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.'"  Did Jesus change his mind now from that story and now think that people rising from the dead is a legitimate way to evangelize?

I don't want in any way to stir up emotions and controversy with these thoughts and questions.  Again, in this post, I don't question whether any of these were valid experiences or not.  I don't know if I have researched the subject or these books enough to make a declaration of their validity or not.  I just question whether they are necessary for us at this time to advance the truth of the gospel or not.  Or, are they just some kind of TMZ for Christians?  


If you want to read one of these books and find them to be inspirational and informative, I am glad.  I hope they can be a true blessing and hope they verify what is revealed in Scripture.  Maybe after reading them you can help me answer the question of this post more clearly.  I would like to know if these are necessary and why.  I would simply request that you at least take time beforehand to research carefully all the richness that Scripture already reveals about this subject so that you can be better armed to see truth from error.  If you can, pick up one of the other books on the subject I recommended earlier to help.  Not everyone will agree with my thoughts and I do not mean to offend.  I am just questioning and am concerned how many more of these we will have to see before we drive ourselves back to the already sufficient revelation of God given to us in the word.

Rob Bell Reveals His True Colors

If you have been connected to social networks like Facebook or Twitter or watch trendy news programs like "Good Morning America", you have probably heard a brouhaha that has arisen in the evangelical world over the release of Rob Bell's new book "Love Wins".  (I would link to it, but I don't want to encourage anyone right now to actually read it."  A few weeks ago the buzz started on Twitter as several popular pastors and bloggers like John Piper, Justin Taylor, and Denny Burk began to react to the release statement and video that Bell shared about his new book.  In the video, Bell hinted at questions that suggest that he doesn't believe in the existence of a literal hell where God's wrath of sin will be poured out for eternity and that he rejects the idea that the vast majority of humanity will spend eternity there for rejecting God.  While I don't have time or space in this post to share some of my reactions (I hope to do so later), I did want to help those who follow me to know a little about it.  Let me be clear and fair, I have not read Bell's book yet.  I cannot post a critical review of it here and do not intend to.  However, I value men like Kevin DeYoung and Denny Burk and their reviews give me a good idea of the content of the book. 

Up until last month, most church members in the traditional evangelical world had probably never heard of Rob Bell.  I bet there were less than 10 members of my small church that have heard of him.  Rob is a gifted and passionate communicator who leads a church called Mars Hill Bible Church near Grand Rapids, MI.  From the beginning, Rob's primary associations were with leaders of the Emerging Church (like Brian McClaren and Tony Jones) and he became one of their rising stars.  He has in recent years tried to distance himself from that moniker.  However, it is apparent that he is closely identified with the liberal, neo-orthodox steam of that movement.  I first saw Rob at a Catalyst Conference years ago.  He spoke very eloquently on the Jews and prayer and intimacy.  It was obvious that he was a creative communicator.  It was also obvious that he was more interested in the mystical elements of the faith and not too concerned with exegetical accuracy.  One of the tenents of the emerging church is a rejection of foundationalism and the authority of Scripture.  They reject the idea of preaching and prefer to talk about "conversation".  Rob's style fits this very well.  He loves to preach from the standpoint of "questions" and painting in theological abstracts.  This is classic post-modernism. 

Rob's youth, artistic eye, and passion helped him secure a video deal with Zondervan to produce a series of videos called "Nooma" which are short films where Rob tries to deal with theological streams and abstract Christian ideas.  The acting, music, and camera work in the videos appeal to older teenagers and young adults.  Their lack of theological certainties are very appealing to a generation of 20-somethings whose nature is to reject heritage and try to forge their own paths.  I saw Rob preach again at Catalyst 2 years ago and was disappointed in his message.  His recent revelation about his views on hell and salvation are really not a surprise to those of us in the evangelical world who have watched him for the last 4 years.  I think Rob has a good deal of narcissism and enjoys the controversy because it sells books and attracts people who want little theological certainty to his church.  He's in an area of the country that has long lacked in strong evangelical churches.  Rob is building his movement on the backs of people that want benefits of heaven without the personal accountability for their sin. 

I have longs said that just because you can amass a crowd doesn't mean that you have a church.  Bell is the latest person to validate that belief.  I really do like Bell and his personality.  I think as a communicator I can learn a lot from Bell's ability to connect with an audience.  I admire his compassion for people.  He has a very attractive sense of humor and uses wit and sarcasm very effectively.  However, his theological beliefs scare me.  They scare me because he has gathered an audience because of his trendy books so far (Velvet Elvis, Sex God, and Jesus Wants to Save Christians).  I give "kudos" to Zondervan for dropping him as a publisher.  However, there will always be publishers that are far more concerned with book sales than theological accuracy.  He rebounded to find Harper Collins quickly and found someone who values currency more than heresy. 

Last night, I saw a post to this interview that MSNBC's Martin Bashir did with Bell.  I think even though Bashir is a secular journalist, he does a great job pressing Bell on his theological ideology.  As you watch the video, notice how Bell seems to squirm when pressed and never really gives clear answers to the questions.  This is classic Emerging Church uncertainty.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Here are some thoughts:
1.  Bell never really answers the question about the Japanese earthquake and tsunami.  His theological foundation doesn't allow him to choose between whether God is "all-powerful" or "all-loving" - which he is both.
2.  "When we shed a tear, God sheds a tear." - Is Bell suggesting that God's compassion is ruled by our human emotions?  Can he reconcile this God with Jesus lament over Jerusalem's unrepentance when they didn't seem to shed any tears over their condition?
3.  Is salvation and "the dominant story of the Bible" really wrapped up in that God "is going to fix this place"? 
4.  I absolutely love how Bashir exposes Bell's ultimate theological flaw about the relevance of choosing Christ in this life.  While Bell may want to espouse the pollyanna belief that talking about God's love will win over people, he doesn't seem to grasp that the foundational problem of humanity is "idolatry" and the rejection of God's love in favor of the loves of 1000 lesser lovers.  The problem with Adam and Eve wasn't that they didn't experience God's love.  They experienced to a level that nobody on earth since has.  Their problem was that in their hearts, they exchanged God's love for the fruit that would make them "like God."
5.  I love Bashir's comment that "you are asking for it both ways."  He also has a great comment when Bell says he doesn't want to speculate about what happens after death by showing that Bell's whole book is founded on that premise.  He says "you're the one who is speculating about the afterlife."
6.  Bell says he believes our decision to trust Jesus in this life has "tremendous bearing", but never explains it and then tries to shift to question to a woman's inability to trust Jesus because she was abused by a pastor.  If he really knew theology, he would be able to point that woman to the fact that no matter how strong the love of God, there are people (including pastors) who choose to follow sin and flesh that end up causing tremendous pain for others.  God has to pour wrath on that sin in order to be just.  The question is: who bears God's wrath - you or Jesus?

I hope to one day read the book.  I think that Bell's book will not open up a new door to Universalism.  It will actually force many of us pastors who are more concerned with preaching shallow sermons in order to keep the numbers up to have to pull out the Bible and deal with some difficult texts. 

Rahab: Grace turns a harlot into a hero

eYesterday I preached on the story of Rahab in Joshua.  It was subtitled "The Transforming Power of Grace."  Rahab's story is a often overlooked one in the Bible.  She was a woman born in the wrong place and had the wrong lifestyle but crossed paths with the glory of the God of Israel and decided to place faith in a God who can part the seas instead of the gods of her people.  Rahab found herself at a crossroad of life.  Surely "prostitute" wasn't what she wrote in the ten-year plan of her senior memories book.  She probably opened up an inn hoping to start a reputable business but found out that she had to make compromises in order to make ends meet.  In the process, she became the town slut.  She was nothing more than a commodity to the people of Ninevah - a means to an end.  However, through the stories of the men who frequented her house she heard about a God who delivered a nation of slaves from the most powerful country on the planet, who sent plagues of frogs and locusts, and who parted the Red Sea to let them cross before drowning Pharoah's army.

These stories were nothing new.  However, while most people in Ninevah heard the stories and began to make contingency plans on how to encounter this nation in the wilderness, Rahab began to believe that if there was a God that powerful then he was the one, true God.  One wonders how the encounter began with the two spies that night.  Was there something noticeably different about them when they came in?  Did she offer her usual services only to be surprised when they said all they wanted was a bed?  Did she notice that their dress or skin tone showed them to be foreigners?  What is certain is that she decided her fear of their God was greater than her fear of her king.  So she lied to the king in order to save their lives.  She is never condemned nor commended for her lie.  Her faith in this God was infantile and not yet established enough to believe that if she had given up the spies that they would still be spared.  There had been no Shadrach, Mesach, and Abednego yet.  There was no Daniel in the lion's den yet.  However, her testimony "for the Lord your God, he is God in the heavens above and on the earth beneath" and her actions to save the spies revealed the repentance of her heart.  Consequently, she and her family were all saved.

In the end, Rahab and her family integrate into the nation of Israel.  She meets a man named Salmon and bears a son named Boaz who becomes the kinsman redeemer for Ruth.  From her line come Jesse and eventually King David.  From David comes the Messiah.  Only God's grace can take a prostitute and from her body bring forth the lineage that would usher in the Messiah.  That is grace.

Like Rahab, we all have baggage.  We may not have stooped to selling our bodies, but we have all exchanged our love for God for 1000 other lovers much less glorious.  But God's grace is sufficient to redeem and restore.  Good news that we all need.

Mark Driscoll on the theology of Joel Osteen

Here is a great clip from a sermon by Mark Driscoll on some of the theological flaws in the ministry of Joel Osteen. Definitely worth a look. It is my solid conviction that the culturized church in America today has long lost the art of biblical discernment that has allowed profiteers like Osteen to make millions of dollars with their Christian, humanistic, self-help mush.