Equipping the Called

The past 2-3 weeks of my scripture reading have been focused, in part, on the book of Exodus. For those who haven't studied it before, I'd like to inform you that it can be incredibly dull at times. I know, I know... I'm not supposed to say that! All scripture is God-breathed and profitable, so if God breathed Exodus out (which He, of course, did) then there is something about it which is profitable to me. I know this.

But honestly, I had kind of gotten in this rut of just reading through the chapters indicated on my reading plan as quickly as possible, giving those chapters no thought whatsoever, and happily moving on to the far-more-interesting New Testament. Not a great idea.

During my prayer time this morning, I was convicted of this and appropriately rebuked for it. As a result, I found myself asking God to give me some insight into this whole Exodus thing. It's not that I wanted to skim over it, but I just didn't understand why the exact proportions and materials used in the building of the tabernacle were applicable to me and my life.

Firstly, after giving it some serious prayer and mediation, I can say that a big part of the reason I've been "stuck" in these scriptures right now is because of a heart issue. I was doing the reading and I could say with confidence that I had been in God's Word daily. But really, my heart wasn't in it. I wasn't getting to know my Savior better through this kind of reading and I sure as heck wasn't submitting to Him or worshiping Him when I sat down to do this reading. And I honestly believe that part of the reason for the "dull" bits of Exodus popping up on my reading plan right now was to teach me this lesson in submission and love for my God.

Often times my husband talks about things that I consider very boring. It could be something about installing an air conditioner or something to do with music equipment. I could easily tune him out when he gets on these topics (and I'm sure he could say the same about much of the junk I babble on about to him). But I don't tune him out. Why? Because I love and respect him. And I and my marriage have been blessed by my listening to him. I've been able to grow closer to him and learn more about his day-to-day life and passions, and even some practical bits about tools and HVAC systems, by listening to him closely. So why should I treat my Jesus with so much less respect and care than I do my husband???

So. I decided that I would treat Him like that no more! I asked God to give me insight into these scriptures and I committed myself to actually sitting down and studying them instead of rushing through so I could check them off of some arbitrary list.

Amazingly, even when I am completely unfaithful, God is always faithful. Praise be to Him! During the first passage I read today, He gave me the most awesome thought about, what else? Exodus! The scripture is talking about how God wants this guy, Bezalel, to be the master craftsman on this huge tabernacle project. What struck me about this is that it doesn't really say who Bezalel was. Of course, it gives his name, his father's name and all of that. But really, who was he? What did he do? Possibly, he was already a master craftsman with many wonderful, handy abilities. But he could have just as easily been a terrible craftsman or even a farmer or a shepherd or something that doesn't deal with crafting at all. We don't know! What we do know is that he must have loved the Lord, and so God called him to do a specific task. What's more... God gave him the ability to do this work!

I imagine Bezalel was just a regular guy who loved God. So when God needed some work done, He knew He could count on Bezalel to get it done. So He filled Bezalel with His Holy Spirit, enabled him to do the work, and Bezalel was there, right on top of things. It's actually one of many examples of this in the scriptures, but it stood out to me and spoke to me today. I don't have to be nervous about anything God is calling me to. If I love the Lord and am faithful to His calling, He'll make sure the work gets done to His glory. He doesn't' call the equipped, He equips the called! It's such a comforting feeling to know that when you're called to do something that seems impossible, He'll make sure the impossible happens as long as you are faithful. What an awesome God we serve!

Additionally, in Exodus 36:3-7, it's talking about how Bezalel and his helpers were doing their work, while the other Israelites also did what they were called to. So the Israelites were gathering supplies and weaving cloth and bringing it all to Bezalel & co. so that they could build the tabernacle. The Israelites were joyfully bringing supplies and donating their best things to God's house until Moses literally had to order them to stop because they had brought too much!!

Hmmm.... never had that problem with my bank account. In fact, I've never heard of a church having that problem either. If God's people were all joyfully bringing our best to Him and giving all that we are called to give, is it possible that our churches would have too many resources?? Maybe not... but it is an interesting thought, no?

Why is it so hard for us to give to God what already belongs to Him? The Israelites were joyfully giving their best to the point of excess, and they were homeless and wandering through the desert! So what's our excuse??

And back to Bezalel, isn't it likely that if God wants us to give, He will enable us to do it and will provide all that we need to give what He's calling us to? He enables us to do all types of other work for Him, why wouldn't He provide the resources we need to be giving?

Just a few thoughts, as promised, on my scripture reading. I am truly thanking God for His faithfulness and actually am looking forward to a bit more Exodus tomorrow. I only pray (and trust) that He will enable me to go where I'm faithfully headed next.... *gulp*... Leviticus.

Starting something new

Well... this blog has become a source of major stress to me. Yes, yes, I know that I basically never write here, and how can something you never do be stressful? Just because I never write here, doesn't mean it isn't on my mind frequently. Basically, I got stuck on a bit of scripture and can't answer a question I have about it. I have asked for insight from more experienced Christians, I have looked in books, and no answer really satisfies. And I couldn't write on that passage without answering the question.

So, while I'm waiting for my scriptural discernment to catch up to my hunger, I thought I would continue blogging in a different way. In this way, I hope to alleviate the guilty feelings that I've begun associating with this blog, while still giving myself the time I need to figure out the old Romans road.

Basically I thought that I would post here any insights or thoughts I have about my daily scripture reading. I certainly won't be posting every day (I think my 3 regular readers might die of shock if I did that), and I'm sure it won't even be every week, but I will post when I come across something that strikes me as particularly poignant. And when I feel ready to move forward in Romans, I will and we'll just go from there.

For now, hopefully my musings can be enjoyed.

The donkey calls the pig "long ears"

So... I'm working on it. After this one, I will probably break these down into much smaller chunks. They're hard to take in because they're so long, for one thing, and they're ridiculously hard to write because they're so long! So.... onward and upward to Romans...

Romans 2:1-11

In Romans 1:18-32, which I discussed in my last Romans blog, Paul was talking about "them". Them, over there, in the world. Those guys who forgot God and got filled with wickedness. Now, as we move into chapter 2, Paul stops talking about "them." Now, Paul is talking to "you". I think that is you, meaning me, and you, meaning you. You, the church in Rome, and you, today's collective "capital-C Church". That "you" is both general and specific, so whether I'm thinking about myself or about my church or even about the entire body of Christ, I think I can easily apply Paul's "you" to that. It sounds confusing, but in fact, it's quite simple. The "you" in Romans 2 is directed at all followers of Christ. Even so, I apologize in advance for any pronoun confusion; God's Word is simple, Heather's word is not necessarily.

I also wanted to quickly interject something that I've found from doing some more research. I really do personally feel like "them" is the unsaved and "you" is the saved; that's the way I'm going to interpret it right now for myself. But most scholars lean toward the position that "them" is the Gentiles and "you" is the Jews. That may be technically true regarding Paul's original intention, but I don't think that changes the way this passage applies to us (or at least to me, personally). We're talking about God's living word here, and what He says to me and you through it is bound to be different than what He said to the church at Rome thousands of years ago. That doesn't make either position less true or legitimate. And after having talked with some "real" people (not "scholars") I've found that they think of it the same way I do, and so I'm happy sticking with my original opinion and sorry that Oliver B. Greene made me question it! :) I am happy to give the whole story and both positions here though, so that it doesn't seem like I'm out of my mind for saying something different than the traditional interpretation. I digress...

In the last part of Romans 1, we found out that those guys out in the world were forgetting God and being given over to curses and God's wrath. In Romans 2:1, Paul is letting us know that it is not okay to be judgmental of them. We are not to judge those guys in the world! When we do, we are simply raining down judgment on ourselves. (I shudder to think what kind of judgment those God Hates Fags fruitcakes are raining down upon themselves.) But the fact is, judging "them" (and I mean "those guys in the world," not the Westboro Baptist Church) is not fair. Wouldn't you hate to be judged for the things you did before meeting Christ? I know that I would. We can love them, we can tell them the truth, we can pray that the Holy Spirit will convict them and draw them to Christ and His kingdom, but judging them will absolutely not accomplish any of those things. Once they come to Christ, His blood will cover all those things you're being judgmental of, and His Spirit will convict them and help them turn away from those things. So don't judge them. Just love them and speak the truth in love. Leave the judging to the only one who's worthy to judge. And I mean God, not Judy.

The oddest part of the whole judgment thing is that "you" are doing the same things "they" are doing! You have no right to judge! The judgment that you're raining down upon yourself will be harsh! Brutal, in fact. You're doing the same things they're doing and you know better! At least they've already exchanged the truth of God for a lie; what's your excuse?!

Okay. I get it. We're human and our nature is not pretty. It's part of our makeup to be filled with wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. God understands and that's why He made a way for our salvation. Even still... what right do we have to judge someone who doesn't even know God? Who doesn't even know salvation? If we are judging them, we deserve whatever condemnation we receive. The only difference between "them" and "you" is salvation, and "you" have done nothing to earn your salvation. It is purely through grace, and through grace alone, and it is purely undeserved - or ill-deserved, I should say - on "your" part.

The judging that is primarily being talked about here is judging someone who's doing the same things, or the same types of things, you're doing. It's hypocrisy in it's purest form, and all it does is make your own judgment from God harsher. But James 4:11-12 basically says to me that you shouldn't judge anyone. When it says "brother" it means believer and when it says "neighbor" it means non-believer. That speaks pretty clearly to the fact that judging is not kosher with God. He is the Lawgiver and the Judge... who are we to judge His laws and His people?

Just as an aside here, I'd like to say that I don't think this means that we shouldn't try and convict criminals in legal courts of law. We are to obey the laws of our land and our government, and those who don't, should be judged according to the laws of our land. I also don't think this means that we necessarily need to reconcile with someone who wrongs us (although we do always need to forgive them). What I think Paul and James were getting at here is that we shouldn't go around saying (or thinking) that Bobby is going to hell for his adultery and Sally is such a liar that she has no place in the kingdom. Those things aren't for us to say. Continue to show love and truth to Bobby and Sally and leave the judging to the real Judge. That's also not to say that we shouldn't practice biblical church discipline. I think doing it with pure motives and a loving heart is what draws the line. If you're excited to go tell someone they're doing something wrong, it's probably not something you should be addressing.

Verses 3 and 4 are really interesting. Paul highlights God's holiness and leaves me feeling about an inch tall! First he notes that God is the real judge and that when we, mere men, (I can just hear him spitting that phrase out with contempt!) pass judgment on others, we won't escape God's judgment. He then takes it a step farther and implies that in judging, we are showing contempt for God's patience. It's as though we feel like God's not acting fast enough with that lightening bolt from the Heavens, so we need to do a little judging for him. He is patient and loving with us, and that is the way we need to be with others. Kindness and love lead the lost to Christ, and once they're there, Christ does all the work. We should be Christ on earth to those people (because we're filled with the same spirit that raised Him from the dead!), so it's that kindness and love that we need to show to others.


So, in addressing this, my need for transparency is coming in to play. This topic is begging me to answer the question “Do I look at other people’s sins with condemnation thinking I am not like them?" The answer is, of course I do. I'm a human with a fallen nature. I'm a woman whose opinions are based largely on emotion. How could I not be a judgmental hypocrite? It's sad, but it's true. And it's something that I struggle with. I think that, for me, my biggest area of being wrongly judgmental is with other parents. The momma bear comes out in me and I want to feel like I'm doing the best with my kids, and if others are doing something different, it's because they're wrong. It's not really a topic mentioned in Romans, but it's the one that I feel most convicted of on an almost daily basis. And the fact is, when I sit back and think about it logically, I can see that I make mistakes daily with my children. Who the heck am I to judge other mommies who are also just trying to do the best they can with what they've been given? Well... no one. I can't judge others because I'm as guilty as they are (if not more so!) of having bad mommy moments. But that doesn't seem to stop me, unfortunately. So what I'm saying here is that it is not easy to exemplify this patient, tolerant, kind persona, and I'm as guilty as anyone. And that is why we need Jesus.

Basically, when we don't show kindness and patience, we are showing contempt for the fact that God does show kindness and patience. And that contempt leads to the wrath of God. The wrath of God against those good-for-nothings that we're judging? No. The wrath of God against us! And when His righteous judgment happens (as opposed to our completely un-righteous judgment), we will not be the ones gloating. Because "God will give to each person according to what he has done." And if what we've done is show contempt for His kindness... well... scary thought, huh?

Basically, if you are persistent in doing God - in "being" Christ to the lost - you'll receive glory, honor and immortality. And if you're self-seeking - like trying to build yourself up by judging others - you'll receive wrath and anger. Just a personal opinion, but the whole wrath and anger thing doesn't sound like a lot of fun.

Persistence in doing good... that's kind of a general phrase, huh? And it almost seems like we're trying to earn our salvation if we're doing it through persistence of our own volition. But the fact is, we can't. We can't persist in that on our own. Even when filled with Christ's spirit, we can't completely do it! It's one of those things that persists in you when you receive Him. It's actually not of your own volition at all! It happens because you know Him and He lives in you. He is good, so with Him living in you, you can't help but to persist in doing good. I also love how it says "doing" good, not "being" good. God is not passive, and when He's in us, neither can we be. Simply to be is not enough for Him, we have to do in order to be in Him.

One thing that I find extremely interesting is that Paul does not, in this passage, explain exactly how to get eternal life. He says that it's given "through persistence in doing good," but there is no direction given for how to persist in that. I think the reason for this is a) he goes a bit more in depth later in the letter and b) it's a hard thing to put into words. That's where we get that Christian-language of "trusting Jesus as your savior" or "accepting the gift of eternal life" or "asking Jesus into your heart." The fact is, it's all of those things and it's none of them. It's an issue of coming to terms with the fact that you're a sinner, trusting and believing that Jesus will take care of you, and being filled with His spirit. It's both an issue of obedience and a gift that you can do nothing at all to make yourself worthy of receiving. It's the reason that there's so much discrepancy among believers about what is truth and what is pure speculation. Honestly, it's a heart issue. If you've got it, you get it; if you don't, you can't. I don't say that to make it sound elitist at all, because it's really the simplest thing in the world. Once you get Him, you'll "get" it. Got it?

And really, in my way of thinking, the people Paul was writing to were saved. Or they were Christians, at the very least. (Teehee.) Perhaps they were a lot like our American Christians. But they knew the basics nonetheless. They knew how they got saved, so he really didn't need to go into a whole lot of depth there. What he wanted to do was make sure they grew in Christ instead of shrinking away from Him.

Because the whole judging thing is a really slippery spiral downward (and any non-Christian who's spent time around Christians can probably attest to that, sadly). In v. 8 Paul summarizes these people, and he does not say anything about "those terribly righteous people who are completely justified in making judgment against their fellow man." No, actually what he says is that they are self-seeking, reject the truth, and follow evil. Yikes. Didn't see that coming, didja? And, as previously mentioned, they are destined for trouble, distress and the wrath of God unless they repent. That whole judging thing is something that God just cannot tolerate because when you judge, you're not only judging men, you're also judging and condemning God's plan and technique. And that, my friends, is not at all kosher. Paul wanted to nip that problem in the bud as quickly as possible, so that his friends in Rome weren't left saying "Hey, where am I going? And why am I in this hand-basket?"

Moral Degradation in 3 Easy Steps

Romans 1:18-32

The first 17 verses of Romans are Paul's introduction. Not all of the epistle writers gave introductions; James stands out to me as one with no introduction (he starts it out with some light-hearted comments regarding joy while facing trials). But Paul does an introduction and he does it right. There's a lot to unpack in those 17 verses (as I found out in dissecting them!) but they are just the intro. Verse 18 is where he really gets into the meat of it. This section, 1:18 - 3:20, (which I'm only touching a piece of in this blog) is generally thought of by Bible scholars as the first of seven parts (yeah, I have no idea why they don't say 8 parts and count the intro as part one. I guess they just like the Godly number 7. Whatev...). Anyway, I'm starting to officially dig into Romans Part 1 right now. In Part 1 we will learn that the world and every person on it is completely jacked up. No one is good, no one looks good in front of a holy and righteous God, and no one looks any better to Him than anyone else does. Sound uplifting? Read on...

In v. 18 Paul starts to talk about sin and the wrath of God. The wrath of God is being revealed, just as the righteousness of God is being revealed (v. 17). The same wording is used in both of those verses. God's wrath wasn't just revealed in the Old Testament; God's wrath won't just be revealed in the Revelation times (whatever that is. I hesitate to use the words "End Times" due to the risk of sounding like an Armageddon crazy.) Anyhoo, His wrath is being revealed... it was being revealed in the Old Testament, it was being revealed during Paul's time, it will be revealed during the Revelation times, and, by golly, it's being revealed right now. But how? I'm sure we've all heard about God's wrath being revealed... it was revealed on 9/11, or it's revealed by soldiers dying, or by people getting AIDS or cancer, or whatever the crazies are spewing out today about His wrath. But what does He have to say about His wrath? If He's telling us in His word that His wrath is being revealed, surely He should let us know what we should actually be looking for! As a matter of fact, He does. There are three instances in the book of Romans that give us glimpses of the evidence of God's wrath. Check it out.

1. Everyone dies as a result of one man's sin (Romans 5:15-18). So... at first this passage seems really uplifting. And it is! I'm definitely not wanting to diminish that part of it, because life is the real point of the passage. But think about it from another point of view. What it's also telling us is that we all die because one man (Adam) sinned. Of course, we all continue to sin without exception, but... but... he started it! And that's some pretty serious wrath.
   
2. Creation is in bondage to decay (Romans 8:20-23) Yeah, that one doesn't even sound pleasant. And that's because it's not. Basically that means that people wither away and die painful, wasting deaths, natural disasters abound, plants and animals suffer the elements and die, and I have to constantly pull thorny, nasty weeds from my garden. This is because God created a beautiful and perfect world that we (continually, as well as through one man, see #1) ruined. God reveals His wrath by causing/allowing His beautiful creation to become increasingly less beautiful and perfect. And all we can do is endure this decay and look forward the hope of salvation and eternity and the perfection of Heaven.
   
3. People and society just keep getting worse (Romans 1:28). (Actually the entire passage that I'm getting ready to delve into talks about this, but v. 28 summarizes it fairly well.) We hear this all the time from older people (and people, like me, who think and feel old): people keep getting worse, coming up with and committing new forms of the same old sins, becoming more and more accepting of all sorts of depravity, worshiping all manner of newly created gods. That's just the world we live in. And because of society not recognizing an easily recognizable God, He gave them up to it. Society can live in filth, roll around in it like pigs in mud, and you'll never see God strike anyone down with a lightening bolt (at least not right now... I think that kind of thing will eventually come, but definitely not last Saturday). He gave them/us up to depraved minds long ago, and that's how it will be until the end of it all.
   

So, we can see that this wrath is being revealed, despite the attempts of many Christians to deny that it exists in these post-New Testament times. But what exactly is His wrath? Is it some blemish on His divine character? Some might think that, but the fact is that our God is perfect in every aspect of His character. The main problem with thinking of God as angry and vengeful is that we think of those things in human terms. God is not human and so He is perfect in His wrath, just like He's perfect in His love, and so He is only ever justifiably angry. He is not spiteful or malicious; He is not petty or vindictive. He detests sin, as it is in complete discord with His perfect character, and when He displays and reveals His wrath, it is always and only just.

The more important question here, in my opinion, is "WHY has God revealed His wrath?" I mean, our lives here would certainly be easier if He just left us in the dark about it. We'd certainly find out soon enough that He's thoroughly disgusted with us, and He could reveal His wrath at that time, after we've lived out our human existences on this earth in relative pleasure. But He doesn't work that way. And I think that's another testament to His justice and mercy. He reveals His wrath so that He can reveal His love. When I'm angry with my husband and he says "What's wrong?" and I say "Nothing.", what I'm really saying is "I don't want to talk about it and fix the problem and forgive you. I'd rather stay angry, so I'm not telling." Unlike a bitter wife, God is revealing His wrath so that we can become reconciled to Him because He loves us so perfectly.

That's the only thing that makes God's wrath on ungodly and unrighteous people understandable in our human minds. It's easy to think that God is cruel or unjust for pouring out wrath on people who might never have had a chance to hear about Him, or who might have been taught incorrectly about Him, or even those who simply rejected Him for their own reasons. But the facts that He is the true embodiment of love and that He is love even in His anger, show us that He is completely kind and just. It's impossible for us, as humans, to even fathom the depths of our holy, awesome God's love or his anger, and if anything is unjust, it is us attempting to judge someone who created us and who is so complex and deep that all we can do before Him is fall on our faces in worship.

I believe that God is fiercely angry with ungodly mankind - and all of us are ungodly. Why wouldn't He be fiercely angry with people who "exchanged the glory of God" for created idols, who "exchanged the truth of God for a lie", and who "have become filled with every kind of wickedness"? If I were God, I'd be thinking "I brought you into this world, and I can take you out of it!" In modern, evangelical Christianity this tends to be a taboo topic. Who would "ask Jesus into their heart" if they thought he was an angry, wrath-filled God instead of a warm, fuzzy, feel-good God? Why do we think it's better for people to "accept" God under false pretenses than it is to tell them the truth? I'd be pretty aggravated if I accepted a job after being told by another employee of the company that my boss is "totally cool, will let you do anything you want and won't ever fire you if you just accept the job", then to find out later that my new boss is actually very fair,expects hard work and dedication, and rewards those who follow His directions. Who the boss actually is, in this scenario, is not so bad at all, but I wouldn't want to go into something expecting to be late every day, play on Facebook, take 2 hours for lunch and collect a paycheck, when in reality I have to perform a very rewarding but difficult job even when I don't feel like it. I think it's important for us to present God as He is. He created everything! He is worthy of praise, awe, and adoration; His amazing qualities speak for themselves. He does not deserve misrepresentation. (And btw, kind of off topic, but please google that phrase "ask Jesus into your heart". There were so many good articles that I couldn't choose just one to link here, but that phrase is such utter crap that it's not even funny. Okay, maybe a little funny. But not in a good way.)

The phrase "God gave them over" is repeated three times in this passage in verses 24, 26, and 28. This phrase has real significance in that this passage, through those words, is a three-point sermon on moral degradation (Paul was a master of the three-point sermon. There was actually one in the intro. that I missed writing about and may eventually come back to). When this passage is studied, it's really easy to harp on the description of immorality, and that's what these verses are generally used to discuss. But the face that "God gave them over" is the real shocker here. It's easy to over-look, but I'm going to delve into it as best as I can here.

1. God gave them over to sexual impurity because they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and animals. (v. 22-24) This is one of those things that seems completely inapplicable to us. I mean, we don't worship statues or place the glory of God on men or animals, thereby demoting God to the level of men and animals. Those crazy pagans did that in ancient times, but we are far too forward for that now, right? Right. Because I don't know of any parents that dote on their children to the point that they are the gods and goddesses of the household. I don't know any people that spend more money on their dogs than they do on their tithe. I don't know anyone who's raised a friend or a spouse to a level of hero-worship. Or.... do I? Because placing the glory of God on something that it doesn't belong on doesn't have to be traditional worship of a calf statue. It just means that you're putting something else in a position that should be reserved for God, and when you do that, you're inadvertently putting God in a place below that of men and animals. What happens when we do this is that God gives us over to sexual impurity. It seems kind of unconnected that someone would be given up to sexual impurity because of idol worship, but the fact is that this is the first step in moral degradation. And the first thing that's given up in this "demotion of God" is our bodies. It's not that the two are connected; it's just that this is the first step, the first thing that happens to those who reject God.
2. God gave them over to shameful lusts because they exchanged His truth for a lie. (v. 25-26) The exchanging of God's truth for lies is very easy to see in this society. In fact, it's sometimes hard to know what to believe because there are so many opinions out there. And I think all we can really do is look at God's word and decide for ourselves what He's saying to us. But there are all different types of preachers, teachers and evangelists saying all different types of things now. We hear that if we "ask Jesus into our hearts" we'll go to Heaven, we hear that if we love God we'll have mo money, no problems, we hear that Jesus was a good guy but He wasn't God. And that is what exchanging God's truth for a lie is all about. That's step number 2. "Shameful lusts" is kind of a confusing term because it seems like the same thing as "sinful desires" but I thinkwhat we're giving up here is our hearts. Our hearts that should feel affection, both emotional and physical, for natural things (ie our God-given spouse) begin to feel affection, both emotional and physical, for unnatural things (like people who are not our spouse).
3. God gave them over to a depraved mind because they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God. (v. 28-29) We are told to think on what is good, what is of God. If we refuse to retain this knowledge and think on these things, then we've taken that last step, and are minds are what, finally, go. Our minds are in constant motion, and if we choose not to think about what's good, we will inevitably think on evil things.
   

And once our bodies, hearts and minds have been given over to sin, there is not really anything left but sin. There is a massive list in v. 29-32 of what we become after taking our three steps to depravity as outlined here. Some of the things in the list are sins that we Christians would certainly name in a self-righteous manner when talking about "those sinners out there." But there are some surprising and convicting things on the list too. I think it's worthwhile to take a look at every one of those things. This list is almost like an anti-fruit of the spirit list, telling what we naturally do when given up to sin. The sad part is that I feel like I can identify with a lot more of the Romans list than I can with the Galatians list. Is there any wonder that Christians are identified as hypocrites?

In being evangelical, it is really, really important to acknowledge your own faults. When people think that we are perfect, it's us that gets the glory. When they know we're not, the glory can only be God's.

I guess at some point I need to address the big issue of this passage. I have done my best to avoid it up until now, but every commentary and study guide I've looked at has addressed it, and I wouldn't feel like I'd been true to the gospel if I didn't do the same. In v. 26-27, Paul discusses women exchanging natural relations for unnatural ones, and men abandoning natural relations with women and becoming inflamed with lust for one another. Does this really need explanation? It is totally and completely clear. If Paul was talking about what our personal "natural" inclination was, he wouldn't talk about men abandoning natural relations with women and turning to one another. He's making it very clear that "natural" means men with women. I know this is so controversial, but I really, really don't understand why. It is perfectly clear in every passage that addresses it. And don't even tell me that Jesus never mentioned it. That's true. We have no record of Jesus mentioning it. That's because Jesus was a good Jewish boy, and the Jews KNEW that it was unnatural. It was mentioned way back in Leviticus and so Jesus had no need of addressing it. I'm sorry to have to come to that conclusion because I know that it's hard to hear (although, perhaps my 3 readers will agree with me and I won't be throwing myself to the lions. Who knows...). At any rate, that's what the word says, and that's all I have to go by. I will add, though, that other sins mentioned in the passage of Romans I'm currently studying are envy, deceit, gossip, boasting, disobeying parents.... What I take that to mean is that, yes, homosexuality is a sin. And that's something I don't struggle with personally. But so are some things that I do struggle with. So I have no room to boast or be proud. We all have our own struggles, and we all need to work to overcome them, and with the power of Jesus Christ, we CAN overcome them. Praise be to God!

In closing, I want to come back to Romans 1:18 briefly. This is considered to be "Romans' Key Verse" and so I felt that it deserved a little more time spent on it. It took me a lot of time and research to come up with the logic on this. It doesn't seem like a key verse, unless, by "key verse", you mean "most depressing verse". But after a lot of looking, I found some notes from the wonderful John Piper. So, let it be known that I am paraphrasing him now. Earlier I discussed three examples in the book of Romans that show God's wrath being revealed. There are three counter-points to those, that make Romans 1:18 far more "key" in my mind.

1. Death is a gateway into paradise. Oh, death, where is your sting? Death, for believers, is not the wrath of God. It is "the last gasp of a defeated enemy who unwittingly opens a door to Paradise." (John Piper).
2. Suffering and decay are pathways to holiness. The suffering of a believer is never without purpose. In Him, all things work together for good. Through suffering and decay we are punished, purified, and disciplined, but we are never far from the loving hand of our Savior.
3. We don't keep getting worse, we start getting better. We are being remade in His image, in His likeness. He does not give us over to a depraved mind, He gives us the gift of the Holy Spirit to convict, correct, and guide us so that we can always be striving to be more like Him.

Take heart! God is not only revealing His wrath with Romans 1:18; He is also revealing His righteousness where there is no condemnation for us any more.

"For you (whoever you are!), who believe, death becomes a gateway to paradise; suffering becomes a pathway to holiness; and sin becomes a dethroned enemy that we fight by the power of God's Spirit." ~John Piper

I'm gonna preach at you, fool!

Romans 1:7-17

Paul was writing this letter to a church that he had planted in Rome (verse 7). From what I can gather, we know three things about the people he was addressing. (I assume it was either written to the entire church or that there was some sort of "you know who you are" thing going on.) Either way, first of all he was writing to people in Rome. Pretty clear there. Secondly, he was writing to those who were "loved by God" (KJV says "beloved of God"). This goes hand in hand with the third thing mentioned about the people he was addressing which is that they were "called to be his holy people" ("called to be saints" in the KJV). These seem like odd statements to make because it implies that not everyone is loved by God or called to be a saint, because otherwise, why even bring it up? Well, that kind of brings up the doctrine of predestination, which is a widely debated thing among church people. If you're interested in finding out more on the topic, click the "predestination" link and let Pastor Mark tell you all about it, because he's a good, informed Calvinist. Anyway, I will not be going deeper into that subject anymore in this blog, because it will come up later in Romans and I plan to get a lot deeper then. And I'm a chicken. And a procrastinator. I will say, though, do the research and decide for yourself; I'm leaning toward the Reformed (Calvinist) side of things, but the whole thing is a bit too technical for me to go into right now. For now, I'll suffice to say Romans 1:7 is either pointing at the doctrine of predestination, or, if you side with Arminius, it is saying simply that Paul was writing to the Christians in Rome and not to the non-Christians.

One thing that stands out to me about Paul's feelings toward the Roman Christians is that he notes their big faith (v. 8). They have a faith that's being reported all over the world! The Roman church definitely had a lot of problems, but lack of faith was not one of them. They truly believed in the gospel that Paul was preaching. It seems that the Roman church was not filled with the Holy Spirit, or at the very least they didn't have enough knowledge to properly use their spiritual gifts (v. 11) and Paul was hoping that he could come to them to help correct this problem. And along with that, he was hoping that he could come spend time with this faith-filled people (v. 12) so that they could be mutually encouraged by each others' faith.

This seems like a very strong statement to me. When I think about Paul, I can completely imagine being encouraged by his faith; to spend time with him would have been very beneficial for one's relationship with God because of his knowledge and his faith. But to imagine him being encouraged by my faith? Either the Roman church really had a BIG faith (which is what I'm thinking) or Paul was just trying to lessen the blow of the other things he had to say. Paul was not generally one to pull punches, so I'm thinking that the Roman church was truly faith-filled. This can be a great encouragement to all of us, because it means that no matter how messed up we are (and the Roman church really was) we can still have a big faith. I think it was because of that faith that the Roman church was even worth bothering with. If they hadn't had a lot of faith in Jesus Christ, the many problems that they had wouldn't have been fixable and they really wouldn't have been worth fixing anyway.

So Paul wants to visit the Roman church. He wants to visit them for a variety of reasons. Firstly, he wanted to see them because they were predestined to God's kingdom (or because they chose to be Christians, depending on which way you swing), which made them family. He had been praying for them for some time, and hoped that he would get to meet this faith-filled group of Christians. He was also hoping that he could help kick-start their church. They were full of faith, but lacking in the spiritual gifts department, so he wanted to help them, as he had helped other Gentile churches. And lastly, he wanted to visit them because he felt spiritually obligated to them.

Paul was obligated to the Greeks and non-Greeks, to the wise and the foolish. But where did he get this sense of obligation from? Ironically, he got that obligation from the Jews. Okay, actually it came from the Lord, but a little bit from the Jews too. Basically, Paul went to preach to the Jews and they rejected him, contradicted him, insulted him and abused him. And once that happened, Paul was able to freely pursue his true calling. He had to preach to the Jewish people first, because they were God's "chosen people". But what God really chose for Paul was a mission to the Gentiles. Once the Jews had rejected Jesus, Paul kicked the dust off his sandals and moved on. And so he truly and literally was obligated by God to the Gentiles, whether they were wise or foolish. (Back to the big P...It could be said that this is an argument against Calvinism, since Paul felt called to preach to anyone and everyone. However, a good Calvinist would tell you that TULIP is the very reason for witnessing to anyone and everyone; there are some who feel the pull of Irresistible Grace - the I - and once witnessed to, they will receive God's free gift of salvation. Foiled again, Arminius!)

When I initially read this verse (v.14), I got the impression that Paul felt a bit of superiority toward the Roman Christians. He says that he is obligated to "both the wise and the foolish" And that is why he was so eager to preach the gospel to those in Rome. Doesn't it seem like he's calling them foolish? I mean, really... there's no reason to mention the foolish unless he thinks of them that way. And honestly, why wouldn't he feel that way? They were completely jacked up as a church. Even so, that didn't lessen his obligation, and after giving it some thought, I believe there's a real lesson within those couple of verses. I think it's possible that he said that to let them know that even though a lot of their problems were foolish, he was still obligated to do what he could do help them grow spiritually. And that is what can really can speak to us here. Often times, (and I'll just speak for myself) someone screws up so many times that I'm tempted to just write them off. That's not the way God wants us to behave; we are obligated to the wise and the foolish, just like Paul. We are especially to care for and minister to those whose actions are completely foolish, because God's awesome power is made perfect in the many weaknesses of his people. (And really, aren't we all pretty foolish?) So I think that Paul really mentioned that, not to call them fools, but to reassure them that both he and God care for them despite their foolish behavior. I would say that he didn't necessarily feel superior to them, but that he cared for them in a fatherly sort of way.

Paul also mentioned in that passage that he was obligated to "both the Greeks and the non-Greeks" (or "barbarians" depending on your translation). It appears that this was kind of a cultural thing. Greek culture was totally happening at the time, and Greeks referred to anyone who was unaffected by their culture and didn't speak their language as a "barbarian". So Paul was basically saying there that he was obligated to the cool kids and the losers.

Paul was not (v. 16) ashamed of the gospel! But why on earth wasn't he? He had plenty of people hating on him and wanting him dead because of the gospel. It seems like an easy thing to be ashamed of, or at least like a thing you might want to keep slightly hidden. But Paul didn't feel that way. He was happy to shout it from the mountain tops (praise God!). The biggest reason, and the reason that Paul gives, for not being ashamed is because the gospel is the power of God to bring salvation! That's kind of a big deal. And Paul had seen it first-hand. The gospel came to Paul in his depravity and changed his world (for the better btw). Paul had seen where his life was headed and Jesus fixed it all. Sure, he was a marked man in this life, but he had his eyes on the prize; on bigger and better things for eternity. And I think a lot of times we forget about all of that.

Christians in our culture are often marked as hypocrites, crazies, fanatics, closed-minded, or holier-than-thou, but we're not often marked for death. And yet we're often ashamed of the gospel and Paul wasn't. Why is that? To put it in perspective, it is difficult in the culture to be branded as different or weird, or even worse closed-minded or unaccepting. And that's what Christians are considered. But are you really a Christian if you're ashamed of the gospel? Are you really a Christian if you don't share what God has done for you? That's a tough question and a touchy subject. But I'm kind of leaning toward no. I think the best way to deal with this is to "Be the change you wish to see in the world" as Gandhi so eloquently put it. Christians should not be crazy hypocrites and they shouldn't be culturally irrelevant. Being ashamed of Jesus Christ certainly doesn't help anyone's opinion of Christians, but being a different kind of Christian might. I'm certainly not saying we should just go around affirming people for Jesus, because that's not what we're called to do at all (and I'll certainly get to that later in Romans), but we could try being kind, being true witnesses for Christ, going to people where they are instead of peeking out from behind stained glass windows at them. Just a thought.

To get back on topic, Paul was not (and we should not be) ashamed of the Gospel because it is the "power of God...". The word used here is dynamis and means "power residing in a thing by virtue of it's nature" (and is also, to my understanding, the root of our word "dynamite"). For some reason, knowing the literal meaning of the word here speaks mountains to me. The Gospel, the Bible I have opened next to me, the knowledge we hold in our hearts, is the literal power of God. The power of God to redeem us, the power of God to stop Satan in his tracks, is the Gospel. And this power of God brings salvation to everyone who believes. And note that it says the power of God to bring salvation; not to bring religion to everyone who believes. That is salvation from sin and salvation to a relationship with the living God. Jesus, the Bible and specifically (for my purposes here), the book of Romans, demand a lot from us as Christians. These things are not asked of us for our salvation, however, they are asked of because of our salvation. I think it's important to get that out of the way right now. The gospel is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes. Period. Anything that's asked of us after that point is our response to that salvation, not our way of earning said salvation.

Paul then notes that this salvation is available to everyone who believes. I know I've bantered away about predestination a good bit while writing this. And I will talk about it again (specifically in Romans 8 and 9, just so you know when to expect it). But the basic point here is that, for our purposes, salvation is available to everyone who believes. And that's really all that we need to know. We don't need to have a full understanding of doctrine to know that we're saved or to know that we can and should share our stories with others who aren't saved. When we let go of our religious-ness (not a word, but I just made it one), we can easily see that the only reason a Christian is different from a non-Christian, is because Jesus stepped out and turned us around while we were dancing our way to Hell. It was not through any merit of our own. So the absolute right response to this is to tell people - anyone and everyone - so they can hopefully get some of that good grace too.

Not only is the gospel the power of God to bring salvation, but it is also the righteousness of God revealed. So what does that even mean? Generally, we think of righteousness, or at least the righteousness of men, as being conformed to a moral standard. But God has no standards other than His own self, so how does He conform to said standard? I believe what that means is literally that His actions are consistent with His own holy character. "God is always consistently Godly", to quote A.W. Tozer. God shows us His righteousness by revealing His will and word (the Gospel) to us and then acting in accordance with it, thus upholding His own standards.

Paul also mentions righteous men in this passage, and the only characteristic that he gives for righteous men is that they live by faith. That wasn't something he just thought of either, it actually came from Habakkuk 2:4. What that means to me is that a man (or woman) is made righteous by their faith in Jesus Christ. No one is good. Not even one. The only way that we can hope to be made righteous (ie conforming to His moral standard) is through Jesus Christ. We are all sinners, but He's got that covered.

[Yes. It took me way longer to crank this one out than I thought it would. Six days longer to be exact. I have definitely started brushing up on my Calvinism through this passage and hope to have it pretty refined by the time I get to chapter 8, because I will seriously need it at that point. Another week or two and I might actually make it through Romans 1. (Although I am considering revisiting Romans 1:14-16 next week, because Paul had a major case of the "I Am"s there and I think it might be worth addressing.)]

"The trouble ain't that there's too many fools, but that the lightening ain't distributed right." ~Mark Twain

Hi! I'm Paul!

Romans 1:1-6

Paul is the author of Romans. His name is pretty much the first word of the book of Romans, so there's no question there.

Paul describes himself in v. 1 as a slave (or servant or bondservant) of Jesus Christ. This is pretty common throughout the New Testament: Peter did it, James did it, Jude did it. But why would they say that? I don't generally think of "slave" as something I'd like to call myself. I mean, I do serve my husband and family in a lot of ways, but I'd never call someone up and say "Hey, it's Eric's slave. How's it going?" "Slave" is not a terribly desirable title to hold. But after a bit more research and thought, it does make sense that the apostles referred to themselves in this way. While, even in Paul's day, being a slave wasn't something that was desirable, there was a certain je ne sais quoi applied to the title of slave. It wasn't about the slaves' rights, of course - they didn't have any - but about their duties. They were indebted to their master and were, in an ideal situation, honored to be good stewards of their master's property. It's more like being an indentured servant than a slave, I think, but the word slave has a lot more power behind it, so I'm going with that translation. And I can see, in that light, why the apostles would call themselves Jesus' slaves, and why we should desire to be Jesus' slaves too. We are all deeply indebted to him. It's a debt we can never pay off, no matter how hard we work. But because of that debt, we should willingly, humbly, gratefully do everything we can - even to the death - to take care of our Master's property: His flock and His creation. We should be honored, as Paul and the other apostles were, to hold that title.

Paul also has a rather hairy background, considering that his former hobby was killing Christians. But Jesus came to Paul (or Saul... same guy) while he was on his way to lock up some Christians in Damascus. Jesus blinded him, preached at him, and essentially converted him to Christianity. From that moment forward, Paul had a new hobby. Paul became an apostle, which is basically just a fancy way of saying he was sent forth to preach the gospel. Specifically, Paul preached to the Gentiles and made Christians out of them; that's the special job he was given when Jesus confronted him on the road to Damascus.

The story of Paul/Saul's conversion really makes verse 1 much clearer. Jesus literally came to Paul and broke his heart. He learned in those precious moments with Jesus how much he had done wrong, and that Jesus died a brutal death to pay for it. He would have felt extremely honored to be a "slave" to this wonderful God, who would still offer him - an undeserving sinner - the chance to be a saint. Paul had to suffer greatly for the name of Jesus, but he was glad to be called to that. Jesus had great plans for Paul, and although he really messed it up in the beginning, what with all the killing of Christians and such, he was still "set apart for the Gospel of God". I can only imagine how indebted and honored he felt. Paul elaborates on those feelings in verse 5 when he mentions that he has received "grace and apostleship". He is so glad to have received those things from God that he can't help proclaiming it. He, murderer of Christians, was pardoned by a holy and awesome God, and then sent out into the world to tell people about it!

In verses 2-4, Paul gives a brief explanation of the "gospel of God" mentioned in verse 1. It's almost like a checklist of points that ends in the exclamation: Jesus Christ our Lord! He rocks! (Okay, I might have embellished a bit, but that's how I read it, okay?) The gospel of God was, first of all, "promised beforehand". God wasn't born as a human baby by chance. It was all part of God's plan for us; he knew we were cursed, and he knew that if we were ever to be reconciled to him, he'd have to save us. And he wanted to save us. So he promised all through the Old Testament ("Holy Scriptures" in verse 2) that he would send a Messiah to do just that. He made these promises "through his prophets". There are actually quite a lot of these prophecies, and the fact that they were fulfilled by one man is miraculous! Of course, God has always been in the miracle business.

Paul does mention one of those prophecies specifically, in saying that Jesus was, in "his earthly life, a descendant of David". The biggest question that I have about that particular prophesy is this: how could Jesus be a descendant of David when the genealogy given is of his earthly father, Joseph, instead of his biological father, God. (Okay, yeah, that sounds weird too, but you get what I mean.) So, apparently the genealogy given here is through Mary, who was obviously Jesus' mother, but it doesn't actually say that from what I'm seeing. And Matthew, which was a book written to Jewish people who would have known the prophecies far better than a Gentile like me, gives only Joseph's lineage (which also goes back to David), so that's what would have been important to them. From what I can gather, the reason for that is that Joseph was accepted as Jesus' earthly and legal father, which would have been more important in their society. Furthermore, a genealogy given of a woman, namely Mary, wouldn't have had the same impact, so it was more important in a Jewish sense that his adoptive father be of David's line than his birth mother. Also, I think that it is an issue that holds a bit of mystery, as Jesus himself continues to confound me regarding it. I'll leave it at that.

Paul also says in verses 2-4 that Jesus was appointed Son of God through the Spirit of Holiness. That literally happened in front of a lot of witnesses at Jesus' baptism. All three parts of the Trinity are present there, acknowledging one another in front of men. I think that is, in my opinion, the absolute coolest thing recorded in scripture. Imagine the Son of God coming up out of the water, the Spirit of God falling on him, and the Voice of God recognizing him. Absolutely amazing! How could someone have doubt after seeing that?! Paul also mentions in those verses that Jesus' power was shown by his resurrection from the dead. Okay, if there were doubters among those who say all three parts of the Trinity at Jesus' baptism, I suppose there were still doubters who saw the man they killed three days ago walking around. However, I cannot possibly imagine how you could doubt such an awesome God. And that's why Paul brings these things up. He wants to represent, to the Romans (and to us), how awesome God is and how there's no denying that Jesus is the Messiah the Jews have been looking for.

Another point of interest that I'll just mention briefly is that in verse 3, Paul uses the word "son" in talking about Jesus the man ("as to his earthly nature") while in verse 4 he uses the word "son" again in referring to Jesus as God. Jesus was the God-Man, and that's just a really cool reference to His deity and His humanity as one.

I'm just going to mention something to wrap this up here. I honestly planned on going through v. 17 in this blog, but I found that I needed more... something. Time? Space? Mental Energy? All of the above. I have this much finished currently (and it took a good week), and thought I may as well post it and take the next week to work on as much as I can of the rest of this passage. I ended up getting into the doctrine of predestination and all sorts of things, so it got kind of hairy, as you can imagine. You have that to look forward to, though. Unfortunately, because of that delay, I have no good way to wrap this up. So I guess I'll just kick it Apostle Paul style: Jesus Christ our Lord! He rocks!

Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and I have founded empires. But on what did we rest the creations of our genius? Upon force. Jesus Christ founded his empire upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for him. ~Napoleon Bonaparte