Marching To A Different Drum

"Come to terms with God and be at peace; in this way good will come to you" (Job 22:21, HCSB).
"Agree with God and be at  peace..." (Job 22:21, ESV)
"Acquaint now thyself with him and be at peace..." (Job 22:21, KJV).  
"Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace" (Eph. 4:3, NIV).
"The true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world" (John 1:9, HCSB).
"Christ is the centre of Christianity; all else is circumference." --John R. W. Stott, theologian  
"The world is relative to Christ."  --Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Lutheran theologian, and martyr of Nazism 
"God weeps with us so that someday we may laugh with him." --Jurgen Moltmann, German theologian  (This is how he sums up human history.)

NB:  THE ENTIRETY OF THE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE CAN BE SUMMED UP:  GOD WAS IN CHRIST RECONCILING THE WORLD TO HIMSELF AS THE GOD OF LOVE IN THE FLESH.      

Do you march to the beat of a different drum or don't keep pace with your companions?  Maybe you hear a different drummer, according to Henry David Thoreau.  The only way for two people to be on the same wavelength is for them to be tuned to the same pitch--harmonizing.  We ought to be able to make music together as in a choir, striking a common chord that will vibrate throughout eternity.  Appealing to the same authority.  That's fellowship in essence:  two fellows in the same ship.   Paul warns against being "unequally yoked" and "fellowship with demons" (cf. 2 Cor. 6:14-15) and "bad company corrupts good morals" (cf. 1 Cor. 15:33).  "Agree with God," (cf. Job 22:21)!  "Can two walk together unless they be agreed on a direction?" (cf. Amos 3:3).   But we can quench or even grieve the Spirit with a divisive spirit or attitude.

We are honored and privileged to be Christ's ambassadors in His name (cf. 2 Cor. 5:20) having His authority in prayer; namely, authorized to do His will (cf. John 14:14).  Sometimes even Christians don't agree on disputable or doubtful matters though (cf. Rom. 14:1; cf. Amos 3:3), and room for conscience-sake must be granted.  But remember the maxim of St. Augustine:  "In essentials, unity; in nonessentials, liberty; in all things, charity."   Some doctrines are not only nonnegotiable but worth standing up for and defending with polemics in this truth war, but we must know where to stop being dogmatic.

There comes a time in every believer's life to get off the fence and decide for good or evil, right or wrong, good or bad, and that usually determines where they stand and what they think is worth fighting for; believe me, some arguments and disputes are not worth the adrenaline and generate more heat than light!   We all must be willing though to show where we stand and not on the sidelines letting the brave believers take stands for us.  One of God's names is Jehovah Nissi, or "the LORD Is Our Banner," and we ought to take up His cause and fight for what's right before it's too late--light a candle, say a prayer, vote, spread the word, donate time or money, anything but let others do it for you--knowing He's on our side!

Jesus never feared controversy and Paul said to stay away from godless controversy, not godly, meaningful, controversy.  If there was never controversy, then how could we arrive at truth and the doctrines or dogma of the church?   Heretics and apostates must be rooted out and challenged, not tolerated in the name of love or goodwill.   John Stott wrote a book titled Christ the Controversalist to point this very fact out and show us the value of sticking to our guns and believing in something; Stott points out that it's obvious that Jesus faced a storm of controversy and didn't shy away from it, no matter the cost (come what may; let the chips fall where they may!).  He was known for upsetting the religious apple cart.

Now the contemporary problem is that so-called Christians are re-thinking, re-marketing, re-tooling, re-defining, re-imagining, or even re-imaging Jesus to suit their own whims, self-interest, or issues.  We are made in God's image, He isn't to be made in ours!  It is self-righteous to claim that the Jesus "we know" is the reality star so to speak, and not the biblical, traditional model.   Paul warned against preaching "another Jesus" (cf. 2 Cor. 11:4) and this is predominant in today's culture of moral relativism whereas people commonly make up their own values as they go along and think anything is okay as long as they can justify themselves or that their motives are right.  "O, but I meant well!" is a common reason they claim, but this is no excuse for doing evil;  morality is only defined as doing the right thing, the right way, with the right motives (and we will all give account to God per Romans 14:12).  The end, no matter how noble, doesn't justify the means!

There is even a Postmodern revolt in the church that denies the fact that we can even know the truth or that we have gotten the gospel right yet.  They want to start from square one doctrinally!  And scholars today are still searching for the so-called "historical Jesus," thinking that the gospel writers may have gotten it all wrong, though they were eyewitnesses and more objective. They rely on second and third-century sources thinking they're more trustworthy than contemporaries of Jesus.  That's why many today actually have a contempt for the real Jesus who stood up against evil in His day and believe that God is love and that's the end of the story, the whole equation; but God is also just and holy and must do something about sin and evil to remain God and to maintain holiness, His attribute of attributes that regulates all the others.

We are not only to fight for the right, and I even mean social justice as well as justice in the courts, all being equal under the rule of law not the rule of men and their whims; "The only way for evil to win is for good men to do nothing," according to Edmund Burke.   We must propagate, (even preach) i.e., the real Jesus as He is, the exclusive personification of Truth with a capital T and the only way to heaven, because all religions don't say the same thing as the Baha'i faith posits;  note that A. W. Tozer said that Christ is "not one of many ways, nor the best way, but the only way!

The leaders thought they knew the real Jesus in the day but only had contempt and familiarity for this reason; they refused to believe despite the evidence (cf. John 12:37; Psalm 78:32)!  Jesus responded (cf. Mark 6:4) that a prophet has no honor in his own hometown and family--rejection was prophesied and par for the course.  As the axiom goes, familiarity breeds contempt; then, how does one explain that the disciples were all convinced of Christ's sinlessness, holiness, and deity?  Even Jesus' brothers didn't even believe in Him till after the resurrection (cf. Mark 3:21).   But you'd think the disciples would end up His arch critics of all people.  But Paul said that he preached Jesus (cf 1 Cor. 2:2) not himself.   What a real McCoy and role model!   

CAVEAT:  TODAY WE SEE GOSPEL REVISIONISTS TRYING TO REWRITE HISTORY AND PORTRAY JESUS AS JUST ANOTHER MARTYR FOR A GOOD CAUSE, A GREAT TEACHER AND MORAL LEADER, OR A MISUNDERSTOOD MAN WHO WAS LATER DEIFIED BY ZEALOUS FOLLOWERS, SOME HAVE EVEN BOUGHT INTO NIETZSCHE'S IDEA "THAT RIGHTLY UNDERSTOOD JESUS IS NOT A GATEWAY TO ANOTHER LIFE BUT A ROLE MODEL FOR THIS ONE"

EVEN THE JEWS OF HIS DAY WERE LOOKING FOR SOMEONE, BUT HE WAS NOT THE MILITARY MESSIAH OF CONVENTIONAL WISDOM TO RESTORE ISRAEL TO IS FORMER GLORY--TO THEM, JESUS SEEMED ANTIESTABLISHMENTARIAN, WHILE THE PHARISEES SAW HIM AS A THREAT TO THEIR SPHERE OF INFLUENCE.  WE MUST REJECT ANY REINTERPRETATION AND PREACH JESUS AS HE REVEALED HIMSELF TO BE--THE ONE AND ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD WHO CAME TO SAVE US AS THE LORD OF LORDS, FOR HE HAS LEFT US NO OTHER OPTION TO CONSIDER--WE CAN KNOW NO OTHER JESUS!      

In short, the essence of knowing Jesus and the good life in Him is to take up the cross to follow Him, no matter the cost, wherever it may lead. "Now that you know these things, blessed are you if you do them" (cf John 13:17).    Soli Deo Gloria! 

Social Justice In Action

Amos is known as the farmer prophet that never even went to prophet school and God called him to prophesy. He was the hero of the downtrodden and underprivileged--the down and out in their luck and/or opportunities, Social justice is a biblical concept. The righteous care about it, but Proverbs 29:7 says, "The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern.""... because they sell the righteous for silver, and the needy for pair of sandals" (Amos 2:6b, ESV). Demonstrating righteousness concerns the plight of the poor (Jer. 22:16, ESV says, "He judged the cause of the poor and needy; then it was well. Is not this to know me? declares the LORD."). At the judgment, Christ will not be interested in our piety or religiosity, as much as whether we fed the poor, clothed the naked, visited the shut-ins, and met the needy of the less fortunate--God only blesses us to be a blessing to others as His conduit. We are the only hands He has and the only feet He can use to reach them!


God cares about provision for the poor and Israel had mandatory welfare to make sure they could glean the farmer's fields. Charity was mandated in Deut. 15:4. Psalm 82:3 (ESV) says, "Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute." Those who "oppress the poor and crush the needy" are judged by God in Amos 4:1 (ESV). "I know that the LORD will maintain the cause of the afflicted and execute justice for the needy." It is noteworthy that God said that "there should be no poor in Israel." Soli Deo Gloria!

Is The Social Gospel A Misnomer?

NB: The Bible addresses this issue directly in Amos, who decries the lack of social justice (5:24).

"Where there is no vision the people perish..." (Prov. 29:18 KJV).
NB: A church has a mission to the unchurched and a ministry to its congregation. We are all ministers and should all be on a mission. Many believers confuse works and faith not realizing that works are not a replacement of faith, but the fruit of it. Faith without works is dead according to James 2:17 and dead faith saves no one. We need people of social concern, but this is not the primary function of the church--discipleship is.

However, the faith you have is the faith you show, they say. We are not saved by works and we are not saved without works either. We are not saved by service but unto service. If we have no good works, our faith is suspect or spurious. Eph. 2:10 asserts that "we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." We don't want to be like the Cretans: "They profess to know God, but by their works they deny Him." True faith yields fruit: no fruit, no faith. John 15:16 says, "But I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide...." Again: "And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works" (Heb. 10:24). The danger is that there will be some who are converted to the program but not to Christ. To sum it up, the Reformation formula was that we are "saved by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone."

I do not believe He is even going to ask us if we are Arminian or Reformed in our interpretation of Scripture. However, He is going to say," I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was naked and you clothed me, and I was in prison and you visited me." Christianity is not a philosophy, but a relationship with a living Lord (and this has become a cliché) but, nevertheless, it is vital that our faith doesn't vanish into a religion of dos and don'ts, or a duty done out of obligation, rather than love as a high calling and not as duty (God sees our motives).

In Mal. 3:5 God is "against those who oppress the wage earner in his wages" and who "thrust aside the sojourner". God is indeed concerned about social issues (there are many social injustices that one could get concerned about privately) and it may be the calling of individual Christians to go on a crusade (e.g., against child labor or slavery), but this is not the calling of the church at large. Great Christians like William Wilberforce have influenced the end of slavery as we know it in the free world. The job of the church is to make disciples of all nations and teach them to observe all that Christ commanded (cf. Matt. 28:19-20). Soli Deo Gloria!

Is There A Social Gospel?

"When Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature, do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law" (cf. Rom. 2:15, ESV).

We have been given the Great Commission and the Great Commandment, but is there a Great Cultural Mandate? Some refer to a social gospel, but this is a misnomer. Our ultimate allegiance is to Jesus, naturally, not to the government, and Jesus did say that His kingdom is not of this world--that He was no threat to Caesar.  His kingdom is not of this world!   What kind of social calling do we conclude from Scripture? Some Christians believe this society isn't worth saving, some believe politics can't change the human condition, some believe the Bible is not relevant to civil government, and some do believe we should secure and take back society for Christ or reclaim America for Christ! Is it our calling to save America?

You can get too involved in the politics of this world that you are getting nowhere spiritually and getting your eyes off Jesus, but there are evils in society that must be rooted out and the government is instituted to overcome evil, restrain it, and contain it. Look at some of the greatest social movements in history, such as ending the gladiator fights, ending slavery, ending child labor, and giving women their rights, are the result of Christian influence--so there is a place for Christians to get involved with a divine calling.

We also need Christian influence in the government, i.e., as elected officials and public servants influencing for the good as salt and light. Christ's kingdom is one of the hearts of men and is not visible, it will be set up visibly at His second advent and we will rule with Him in glory. But some Christians believe we should try to take over and impose our way of life on the infidel: making him behave or live in a Christian manner and standard. Christian law has been tried and failed several times in history: Calvin's Geneva; Bradford's Plymouth; Winthrop's Massachusetts' Bay Colony; Cromwell's England, among others. We frown upon Muslims saying that tomorrow belongs to Islam and when they set up Shariah law, they aren't recognizing the rights of minorities, i.e., Christians. How can we expect non-Christians to live like Christians? This is really Christian Shariah law (like blue laws, gambling restrictions, and prohibition).

The purpose of government is not to outlaw sin but basically to protect freedoms, protect property, punish crime, securing justice. We are to "render to Caesar that which is Caesar's" (cf. Matt. 22:21) for sure, and we are never told to eschew society, start a revolution, or join hands with the powers that be as partners in crime either. We don't have carte blanche to wreak havoc on the social order. If we lived in a communist nation, we are not to become involved in a subversive underground of resistance but be model citizens and fulfill our mission of being salt and light.

However, there does come a time when the government tells us to do something immoral or forbids the free exercise of our faith, then it's imperative to disobey in an act of defiance and civil disobedience. Here's the rub: "We must obey God rather than men" (cf. Acts 5:29; 4:19). This is amply demonstrated by Daniel refusing to pray to the statue and being thrown into the lion's den; he neither flaunted nor privatized his faith as a prime minister who was salt and light.

The Bible makes it clear that our primary mission is to change hearts through the gospel message, and hopefully, society will be revolutionized as a direct result. Paul didn't make it his mission to overthrow slavery, but with the spread of Christianity, its demise was certain as believers rejected it and had more influence--not forced change. We are not called to set up a theocratic government or experiment with a nation ruled by religious leaders. It was Christian influence that said we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness--rights are conferred from God and recognized by the state.

However, the conclusion of the matter is that we represent Christ to the world as His hands, feet, heart, and voice and we have the power to make a difference by being that salt and light, which preserves and shows the way in the darkness. The church shouldn't get overly obsessed with turning stones into bread or mission work unless the gospel is propagated with it, we are not to become mere do-gooders and must remember and not lose focus of the fact that we are "aliens and foreigners" and our real "citizenship is in heaven" (cf. Phil. 3:20). Christians do have a duty and responsibility to the state, though, as Edmund Burke phrased it: "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Soli Deo Gloria! 

The Welfare State

"A righteous man knows the rights of the poor; a wicked man does not understand such knowledge"  (Proverbs 29:7, ESV).
"The righteous considers the cause of the poor, But the wicked does not understand such knowledge:"  (Proverbs 29:7, NKJV).

By definition, a welfare state (or benevolent state) is one that provides its citizens with such things as health care, retirement, and other social programs including public aid to the poor and destitute.  The Romans had a welfare state to bribe the citizenry into loyalty and contentment.  God mandated a kind of welfare to Israel (Deut. 15:4 says there should be no poor in the land, etc.) like ordering farmers to leave crops in the fields for the poor to glean (i.e., they were only allowed to harvest once and leave the corners unharvested).  Likewise, a certain percentage of the tithe went to the poor as well as alms, which were customary.  Some people say that it is not charity when it is coerced by the state; however, following the biblical pattern shows us a grave concern of God for the poor and unfortunate.

Paul says in 1 Tim. 5:8 that a person who doesn't provide for his own relatives is worse than an unbeliever, but also says that those who are unwilling to work (presumably because they are too busy getting ready for the Second Advent of Christ) should not eat (2 Thess. 3:10). Many people misquote this verse and say that if you don't work, you don't eat like Captain John Smith of Jamestown fame said.  The verse should only apply to those who truly don't want to work, period.  Caveat:  "Hear this, you who trample the needy, to do away with the humble of the land" (Amos 8:4, NASB).  God reprimands those "Who oppress the poor, who crush the needy" (Amos 4:1b, NASB).

There are people who are unable to work and should be the dependent of the state, since they have bona fide or legitimate disabilities, diseases, or handicaps--and there is nothing inherently wrong with retirement as one wanes in ability and they find they can no longer compete; however, some jobs or careers are easier to do in old age.  But it is not the government's job or responsibility to provide the people with security from cradle to grave or in retirement; however, government is a social contract and can legislate a so-called "Ponzi Scheme" if it wills to keep on supporting the retirees with the wages of the working people.  But technically, people are only getting back what they put into it and are only getting the return on their personal investment throughout their working life.

The verse in 2 Thess. 3:10 is also not referring to those who are willing to work but just can't find any--there is nothing inherently wrong with a society set up a safety net for those who are between jobs, laid off, or can't find work that fits their qualifications.  In all fairness, I also believe people should be given adequate opportunity to find work that becomes their abilities, skills, and education, etc.  This is only showing mercy and grace to those in need as if you were in need yourself.    Soli Deo Gloria!

Is There A Social Gospel? Or Is This A Misnomer?

N.B. the Bible addresses this issue directly in Amos, who decries the lack of social justice (5:24).

"Where there is no vision the people perish..." (Prov. 29:18 KJV).

N.B. a church has a mission to the un-churched and a ministry to its congregation. We are all ministers and should all be on a mission. Many believers confuse works and faith not realizing that works are not a replacement of faith, but the fruit of it. Faith without works is dead according to James 2:17 and dead faith saves no one. We need people of social concern, but this is not the primary function of the church--discipleship is.

However, the faith you have is the faith you show, they say. We are not saved by works and we are not saved without works either. We are not saved by service but unto service. If we have no good works, our faith is suspect or spurious. Eph. 2:10 asserts that "we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." We don't want to be like the Cretans: "They profess to know God, but by their works they deny Him." True faith yields fruit: no fruit, no faith. John 15:16 says, "But I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide...." Again: "And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works" (Heb. 10:24). The danger is that there will be some who are converted to the program but not to Christ. To sum it up, the Reformation formula was that we are "saved by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone."

This terminology became popular in the era of social change in the 20th century from so-called fundamentalists. There really is no "social gospel," but one gospel message: the preaching of Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection on our behalf. Papists (Romanists) are very earnest and sincere in doing good deeds for the less fortunate, like opening soup kitchens, hospitals, schools, and orphanages, et al. However, they are misguided as to the plan of salvation. Evangelicals are very good at preaching the gospel, but of neglecting the application and further responsibilities of the church (like caring for the widow and orphan which are commanded).

We are all light and salt; the church is the vehicle or instrument of grace in the world. We are to keep the main thing the main thing, and not major on the minors (the Great Commission is where it's at and is to be our focus).

God isn't looking for a church of do-gooders or works-oriented believers. But we need to be people on a mission to be sure. We need not be remiss in our duty to our fellow man and offer a cup of water in the name of the Lord, as it were, with our gospel message. Taking care of the needs of the poor is an open door to preach and gives us the opportunity to spread the Word (our goal). It is not the mandate of Christ to convert us to one philosophy or political persuasion or viewpoint: God loves us despite this. Jesus is not going to inquire of our political aspirations or beliefs at the Bema ( the Judgment Seat of Christ). "He pled the cause of the afflicted and needy; Then it was well, Is not that what it means to know Me? says the LORD" (Jer. 22:16). Do we indeed know Him, whom to know is eternal life (cf. John 17:3)?

I do not believe He is even going to ask us if we are Arminian or Reformed in our interpretation of Scripture. However, He is going to say," I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was naked and you clothed me, and I was in prison and you visited me." Christianity is not a philosophy, but a relationship with a living Lord (and this has become a cliché) but, nevertheless, it is vital that our faith doesn't vanish into a religion of do's and don'ts, or a duty done out of obligation, rather than love as a high calling and not as duty (God sees our motives).

In Mal. 3:5 God is "against those who oppress the wage earner in his wages" and who "thrust aside the sojourner". God is indeed concerned about social issues (there are many social injustices that one could get concerned about privately) and it may be the calling of individual Christians to go on a crusade (e.g., against child labor or slavery), but this is not the calling of the church at large.

Great Christians like William Wilberforce have influenced the end of slavery as we know it in the free world. The job of the church is to make disciples of all nations and teach them to observe all that Christ commanded (cf. Matt. 28:19-20).  n sum, there is a social commission, not a social gospel,  that has not been rescinded but we are to keep the main thing the main thing and not get sidetracked by turning loaves into bread.  Soli Deo Gloria!