Thought I would post for you an article that Dr. Dwight Smith and I wrote about the gospel.  It's long, so I won't be mad at you if this is not something that fits your appetite.  Here you go:

Toward a more Holistic Understanding of The Gospel

Jerry Gillis and Dwight Smith

The Purpose

Any attempt to fully articulate the idea of the “gospel” will undoubtedly be found wanting, and this brief document will be no different.  Our posture is that the whole of Scripture must be considered in the construction of the idea of the gospel because the Scripture reveals to us the original purposes and design of God for His world.  Our primary concentration is to explore the implications of the gospel relative to the recreative purposes of God in and through Jesus.  Our hope is that this may aid in the process of thinking and dialogue for those charged with leading in the Church, and that their understanding of the gospel would be more fully orbed and give clear intention to facilitate the implications of the gospel for the world in which we are engaged in mission.

The Problem

The tendency in contemporary Western culture to reduce the idea of “the gospel” to a quartet of propositional truths, seemingly divorced from the grand sweep of the entirety of the revelation of God in Scripture, is one that needs to be reevaluated and reformed.  

While conceding that these propositional truths can be affirmed, these truths need to be tethered to the grand story of the purposes of God in Jesus and given fuller exposition so that the beauty and weight of the implications of the gospel can be seen and felt by the people of God.

Familiarities with the term “gospel”, and colloquial ways of expressing that term, have helped to form a reductionist version of “gospel” and the fullness it represents.  In Western culture, we have gospel choirs, gospel music (categorized by flavor – southern, black, contemporary), and gospel churches.  From one perspective, the idea that these monikers represent something that is centered on Jesus is accurate and acceptable.

But, even somewhat innocently, these types of expressions cause the holistic intent of the gospel to be compromised – particularly in a culture that demonstrates an alarming illiteracy to the whole of the revelation of God and His purposes in Scripture.

The Term “Gospel”

The idea of “gospel”, or good news, has roots in both Hebraic and Roman contexts prior to the birth and life of Jesus.  In the Hebrew Scripture (Old Testament), the idea of good news is frequently used, notably by the prophet Isaiah: “How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of those who bring good news, who proclaim peace, who bring good tidings, who proclaim salvation, who say to Zion, ‘Your God reigns!’” (Isaiah 52:7).  The good news for Israel is that God has not forgotten His covenant promise to Abraham (Genesis 12) that “all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.”  That is why Paul articulates this reminder in Romans, as well as in Galatians 3:8-9, which states: “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘All nations will be blessed through you.’  So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.”  

As well, in the Roman culture, the term “gospel” was employed to announce the birth of a new Caesar or his accession to the throne.  This was not a term that was new with the birth of Jesus; instead, it is a term that was infused with new meaning and virtue when describing the perfect King and our resurrected Lord.  It is with these backdrops that the gospel Paul articulates, weaved through most of his New Testament writings, is made clear.  For Paul, it seems, the gospel meant that Jesus was the long awaited promise of Israel’s Messiah (foreshadowed from Genesis to the prophets, like Isaiah 40 and 52), as well as that He was the ruler of every empire (contra Caesar and the Roman Empire).  

Instead of Caesar being Lord, Paul argues that his good news is that Jesus is Lord.

Central to the understanding of good news is a question – “Good news about what, exactly?”  Well, in summary, the good news is less about “what” than about “who.”

The restoration of humanity to its intended purpose and design can only be accomplished through Jesus.  The immeasurable impact of sin has caused a divide so great between humanity and God that only God Himself can bring the two together in an act of sacrificial grace that preserves and honors God’s love, holiness, justice, wrath, and faithfulness.  And it is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus that sufficiently accomplishes this incredible feat whereby the consequences of sin in humanity generated through the first Adam are gloriously and sufficiently undone through the work of the second Adam, Jesus.  As Paul writes in his letter to the Romans, “Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.  For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous” (Romans 5:18-19).

Fundamentally, then, the good news is specifically about Jesus, and more broadly about the full restorative purpose of God for creation and all its inhabitants in and through the work of Jesus.  The gospel is unapologetically Jesus-centric, while remaining firmly entrenched in a Trinitarian understanding of God.  Paul brilliantly pulls these two facets together when he writes specific things in his letters about Jesus that were only understood to be about God in the Hebrew Scriptures.  Note the comparisons:

​“Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other.  By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked: Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear” (Isaiah 45:22-23).  

​And then Paul writing to the Church at Philippi: “Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:9-11).  

With these, Paul is wedding the ultimate restorative purposes of the Trinitarian God in and through the specific person of Jesus.

So, while we understand God as Trinity (Father, Son, and Spirit) working to secure the restoration of humanity to its original design and purpose, as it relates to the gospel we must understand the centrality of the work of Jesus.  Broadly, it could be said that “Jesus is the good news.”  Clearly, there is simplicity and profundity in that statement. Simplicity in that the focus is on the person and work of Jesus (though not detached from the overall role of God in three persons accomplishing His purpose in the cosmos). Profundity in that the implications of the person and work of Jesus in God’s restorative purpose are inexhaustively rich and inescapably life transforming.  It is to those realities that we now turn our attention.

Who is Jesus?

In chapter eight of the Gospel according to John, the apostle records an intriguing dialogue between Jesus and Israel's religious leaders. Then they asked him, “Where is your father?” “You do not know me or my Father,” Jesus replied. “If you knew me, you would know my Father also” (John 8:19). They were lost as to the strident words from Jesus about coming from a different place, and having a different Father, one who they claimed to know because they were children of Abraham and followers of the words of Moses. But, the words and actions of Jesus were offensive, and even dangerous, to them. If He was right, then they were wrong. Moreover, He threatened their positions within the Jewish religious structure as well their position with the Romans.

Most of chapter eight is a give and take between Jesus, with a view of life rooted in eternity, and these men, rooted only in time, especially Jewish time. In verse 23, Jesus continues, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.  I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am [the one I claim to be], you will indeed die in your sins.” Whether from cynicism or genuine wonder, in verse 25 they ask Jesus the central question to all human engagement of God, “Who are you?"

The answer to that question reveals the historical and theological nature of the Gospel. It is central to understanding what it means to be His follower and to hold to His teaching about Himself and the Father.  Embracing that truth sets us free.  The ongoing dialogue between Jesus and the religious leaders, even though the religious leaders did not realize it, is set upon truth that starts in the beginning.

The Implications of the Gospel

The Bible is one story running from Genesis to Revelation. It is in the beginning that we see most clearly the divine design. And, from that design, all of the other issues that we read in the Bible must be answered.  From one point of view they are explanatory, preparatory, and corroborating sub-plots of the primary story. In order to fully appreciate what God has done, and is doing, one must constantly move back and forth - or better said, up and down - between the story and its many sub-plots. It is with eternal significance that the story opens with creation.  

Genesis 1 is the starting point of the story, and Revelation 22 the end of the story. In between is the story, traced across human history, of how God Himself is accomplishing His purpose. Nothing in the universe bears the uniqueness of the human creation - not the animals, not the natural, not even the angels. Unlike everything else in the universe, God creates Adam and Eve, and by extension their offspring, for two bold purposes. The first is that humanity is created to live in relationship to God. And the second purpose is that humanity is created to represent God. This is the calling of the Bible, to be reconciled to God and His purposes in creating us.

Of the first, Eric Sauer, in the Dawn of World Redemption, says: “But the essence of such spiritual life, and the essence of all true morality in general, is not only an outward, objective carrying out of law and a merely legal freedom from sin and guilt, but a personal, organic participation in the moral life of the Deity itself. For God, as the supreme lawgiver, has appointed the moral ordering of the world according to His nature, and He is love, the most perfect love (I John 4: 16). Therefore the moral appointment of free creatures must also be an appointment to love, and the supreme final purpose of world creation must consist in the self-unfolding and self-displaying of God as the Perfect, Holy, and Loving One, in the establishment of a fellowship of life and love between the Creator and the creature. But this means that God has called the world into existence so as to be able to love it, and that it should love Him in return. His goal evermore is to lead it to an eternal share in the enjoyment of His holiness and love, and thereby to blessedness and glory” (From the online edition of Dawn of World Redemption, chapter two)

Of the second – to play out the reality of our true humanity by representing God - Sauer says: “Thus the extending of man's rule on the earth, provided he remained subject to God, signified a drawing of all things earthly into the sphere of the moral world-purposes, an increasing resumption of the earth for God and therewith a progressive leading forward of the creation to redemption and perfection. Paradise was thus the fixed point from which the uplifting of Nature into the sphere of the spirit should take its beginning. It was appointed by God to that purpose, "so that from here the whole earth should develop into a Paradise. The garden is the Holy of holies, Eden the holy place, the whole surrounding earth the vestibule and court. The climax is, that the whole shall be transformed into the glorified likeness of that Holiest." In this regard Adam himself counted not only as an individual, but at the same time as the primary ancestor and organic representative of the whole of his descendants, then already seen in principle "in" him (I Cor. 15: 22; Rom. 5: 12-21). Therefore is it said first "Be fruitful and multiply and people the earth ", and only afterward, "and subdue it to yourselves and rule it" (Gen.1:28). So then the Paradise garden is beginning and end, start and goal, basis, programme, and type of the whole task of man on earth.” (Ibid)

This same message is traced across the pages of the Bible. In the giving of the law, Moses writes in Deuteronomy 6:4-5, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.” And, in Leviticus 19:18, “Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.”

Jesus asserts the same when asked two different questions on two different occasions – the first question being about the greatest commandment, and the second about what a person must do to have eternal life.  Of the first question, the Scripture teaches the following: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied:“'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all yourmind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments” (Matthew 22:36-40).

And to the second question the Scripture teaches, “On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus.”Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"  "What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?" He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live" (Luke 10:25-28).

The apostle Paul says the same: “So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:16-21).

Nothing in the universe bears the uniqueness of the human creation, for we are made in the image and likeness of God.  Made in the image and likeness of God?  What should we expect? Unlike all of the rest of God's creation, we are created with an abundance of abilities that come from and are in the likeness of God Himself: cognition, verbal communication, relational ability, invention, appreciative ability, deductive ability, concern ability, rational expression, and governing ability, to name a select few.  So, what does this have to say about the gospel?

The answer to that question is directly related to the impact of sin on these creation likenesses. How far, how deep, and to what extent can they be corrupted by the effect of sin and the impact of sinful choices?  As well, how does God solve these corruptions in His gospel?

The  original untested but righteous compass that God gave to Adam and Eve in creation before the fall, has been displaced by the sinful choice of Adam and Eve ending in a lawless human spirit and marred image of God (Romans 5) , thus leading to corrupted: cognition, communication, relationships, inventions, appreciations, deductions, concerns, emotions, rationalizing, governing, etc. (Romans 3).

When God restores the originally intended compass through our regeneration in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, the residency of the Holy Spirit, and our growing understanding of these through regular engagement of His Word, we see restored likenesses of God's original creation (Romans 6). The drag of whatever still exists of the leftover flesh we have from our creation likeness to Adam has to be progressively dominated by the new creation likeness to Jesus (Romans 6).

For the child of God, all of the Adam likeness is left behind upon exit from this world into a new world to be created by God free of the sin of this world (2 Corinthians 5). Even for the world, the representative governing ability of Man over the Earth is someday to be restored (Romans 8).

What are some of the more tangible characteristics of a restored God likeness?

1.  Abounding appreciation towards all things. Paul says that in all circumstances he learned to abound (Phil. 4). He says to the Thessalonians that we are to give thanks in all things. 

2. Relational acceptance. Jesus says pray for your enemy (Matt.5). Paul says bear with one another (Romans 8). Jesus says to love your neighbor as yourself (Matt. 5). Paul says for husbands to love their wives as their own bodies (Ephesians 5). 

3. Released cognition so that we see and think more clearly. Nebuchadnezzar says twice in Daniel 4 that God’s sovereignty extends over all things. Paul says that nothing can separate us from the love of God (Romans 8). Jesus says that no one can take us from his hand. He says that if God cares for such small things as lilies and birds, won't he care for us (Matt. 6)? 

4. Renewed communication. Paul says to lay aside all course jestings (Ephesians 5). He says to encourage one another with the resurrection and return of Jesus (1 Thess. 5). Jesus says that every word we speak will be heard and judged (Matt. 12). 

5. Renewed concerns. Jesus says that peace makers are like God their father (Matt. 5). James says that pure and undefiled religion is to care for the widow and orphan (James 5). The parable of the Good Samaritan reminds us that our neighbor's benefit is our concern (Luke 10). Jesus tells us that having been released from our "gentile" life we are to be like God in Jesus giving our lives in exchange for others (Luke 10).

6. Renewed invention and communication. Paul says that everything we do (an aspect of invention) is to be done to the glory of God, as if we were serving Him. Jesus says that in our going we are to make disciples (communication) (Matt. 28).

7. Responsible and compassionate stewardship of the created world. The book of Genesis calls those created in the likeness of God to care for and steward the world into which they were placed (Genesis 2).  As well, the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus inaugurated a cosmic restoration in which we are called to participate (Romans 8, Colossians 1, and Revelation 21).

The Impact of the Gospel

The impact of this restored image of God is progressively and in a maturing way felt in:

         Our marriages

         Our families

         Our neighborhoods

         Our church bodies

         Our market places

         Our decisions over assets

         Our ultimate expectations 

The restored likeness of God sitting now at the center of our being in the new man, bounded by sin in the members of our bodies, is capable and expected to live life, unto God, in a new/old way (Romans 6).  It is old because that is how God created it to be before the fall. It is new because it has been restored, partially in time, fully after death, in Jesus Christ, the last Adam. 

All of the ways in which the New Testament describes the relational incarnations of this new, restored life, are predicated upon the residency of this restored likeness and image of God (John 3), the residency of the Holy Spirit to give it power (Romans 8), and our willful cooperation with it (Romans 6). When placed alongside unrestored people, its witness is powerful because it demonstrates: the image of God, the likeness of how He created the world to be, and what is available to those who submit to the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ for and in them. (Matt. 5)

In all of their relationships, Christians are learning to release this new life:

Husbands love their wives as their own bodies

Wives respect their husbands

Fathers do not exasperate their children

Children obey their parents

We forgive our neighbors random offenses

We pray for our enemy

We bear one another's burdens

We maintain peace among the brethren

We work as unto the Lord

We live the blessedness of giving over receiving

We invest our worth and expectations in eternity

The gospel (good news) cannot be extracted from this macro view. When it is, itminimizes the full extent of God's work and purpose. It runs the risk of nominalizing those who appear to act on the offer of salvation by short circuiting the full and miraculous work God has achieved in the life, death, burial, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ; thus, it produces "faith still-borns" (people who say that they belong toJesus, but never look or act like Him). 

The only way to look like Him is to follow Him into death, burial, and resurrection so that the original relationship to God and His purpose can be restored. The lawless man is killed with Jesus on the cross, and the new, righteous man is resurrected with Him in His resurrection. He is now (re)created and able to live to (for, by and in) God.

The affirmation of the Apostle John at the end of his life is an appropriate place for us to end as it encapsulates all of the above: To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father –to him be glory and power forever and ever! Amen.

April 2011

This week, I have been interviewed on multiple occasions about what my reaction is to the Same-Sex Marriage legislation that came before, and ultimately passed, the lawmakers in Albany.  Many of you at The Chapel saw some of those (edited) interviews; many others did not.  So, I thought I would outline for you some of my thoughts regarding this issue in an unedited format.

Let me start by noting a few items of importance.  First, in no way is this small article a full, exhaustive treatment of the subject of the Same-Sex Marriage debate.  Second, as a follower of Jesus, I would neither have a justification, nor a desire, to condone hate or discrimination toward any people – including those who are homosexual.  Third, this brief article represents my thoughts as informed by a Biblical, Judeo-Christian worldview, and as such, does not mean that I speak for anyone else specifically (though it is true that many of the thoughts herein are embraced by a sizable populace of Jesus followers).  I am not endeavoring to speak for everyone generally, or anyone specifically – I simply want to make an effort to lovingly, clearly, and with gospel centered integrity, help those who so desire to understand some of my thoughts regarding this issue.  For some added perspective on what I have taught from the Scripture regarding sexuality, including homosexuality, you could reference this teaching for free online here.

With the aforementioned caveats in place, I will say that my reaction to the legalization of same-sex “marriages” in New York State could best be described as “saddened.”  Before articulating the “why”, let me offer a brief corrective to those who would note that anyone who doesn’t agree with the State of New York’s decision are “bigoted”, “hate-mongers”, or “discriminatory.”  It is simply not true.  What is true is that some people, not all, on both sides of this issue have been unkind, malicious, and outright hateful in the name of everything that can be named, not the least of which is religion.   It is this kind of speech that deters honest, thoughtful dialogue about pressing issues – and tactics that are intimidation based, regardless of which side of any issue one is on – are wrong.  I can love those I disagree with.  In fact, that is the beating heart of the way of Jesus.  But I can also disagree.  Strongly.  That doesn’t make me a bigot, of necessity.  We should all be free to disagree and not have to be labeled in this country.  But as a follower of Jesus, my disagreement, though strong, must be couched in love and grace, so that I may not be guilty before the LORD of possibly saying the “right” things in the “wrong” spirit.  Too much of that has gone on in the name of Jesus.  Those of us who follow Jesus should set a different tone, while not compromising our convictions rooted in Scripture, testified in nature, and generally expressed and embraced since the Creation itself.

So, “saddened” describes my state of mind and heart regarding this issue.  There are many reasons, on many levels, as to why, but I will highlight only a few.

1. God’s Design for Marriage

For those who take seriously the obedience of faith in the God revealed in the Bible, and who hold to some sense of Biblical authority (namely, that  God acts and speaks to the world through His written word), then it seems to be very dangerous territory to try and “redefine” what God has already clearly defined.  I have articulated some of my understanding of the Godward design for marriage in a previous teaching that can be accessed here, so I won’t rehash in print what I communicated in speech.

What I didn’t mention in that talk, however, was the specific (and obvious) idea of procreation.  With a culture that is so focused on sexuality as “enjoyment between consenting adults” (whether homosexual or heterosexual), what is lost in the dialogue is the reality that the design of procreation can only happen between a male and a female.   Thus, marriage is a societal foundation – if everyone were to marry those of the same sex (for argument’s sake), there would be no posterity.  As well, often lost in the debate about Same-Sex marriage is the functional impact on children.  You can do your own research on the studies that have researched how well children fare with two moms, or two dads, or one mom, or one dad, as opposed to both a mother and father.  Honest research on this topic will only strengthen the argument in pointing to God’s design for marriage.

What concerns me further about this, is that the agenda doesn’t always seem to be about “redefining” marriage – it seems to be about simply making the homosexual lifestyle acceptable and normative in society.  In Canada, where they are even further down this track than we are in the U.S., I found it interesting some years ago that Canadian Parliamentarian Svend Robinson, himself in a homosexual relationship, did not feel the need to marry once the “right” was available on a legal level.  He said, “After nine years in a committed, loving relationship, how would the state’s imprimatur change anything?” (Globe and Mail, June 24, 2003).  It seems that, for him, the issue wasn’t about “redefining” marriage as it was about “deconstructing” traditional marriage.  When marriage gets “deconstructed”, then it seems there is an open door for any number of things: Laws embracing polygamy, or marriage of siblings, or worse.  If the redefinition of marriage for homosexuals is about the opportunity to freely get the rights of other “married” couples and to legally express their love to another adult, then the door opens wide for many other marriage deconstructions to take place.

2. Worldviews Shaped by Legislation.  

One of the additional issues that saddens me is that many people in American society, bereft of any other moral foundation outside of themselves, base their morality on legality.  The law is an interesting moral teacher.  Many people simply believe that if something is legal, then it is moral.  So, for those who want to forward an agenda, the real work is to get whatever the agenda is “legalized.”  They know, from history, that a long track record of legalization seeps into the American conscience to the point that is goes from being legal to being moral.  When an issue goes from the legality level to the morality level, then that issue becomes cemented more firmly into the culture of a country. The adoption of this legislation in New York is another step in that direction, though it is by no means a mandate to the entire country.

3. Issues of Religious Freedom.  

I was glad that part of the caveat in the Same-Sex Marriage legislation was the protections for religious freedoms.  In other words, under this legislation, those clergy with religious objections to doing a same gender wedding would be under no legal obligation to do it.  At least that part is moderately comforting…but not completely comforting.  The truth is, these types of laws simply set-up the inevitable future conflict between “discrimination” and “religious freedom.”  Look no further than our neighbors to the north (Canada) to see this played out in real ways.  Pastors have actually been arrested and fined for preaching from the Scripture that God calls homosexuality sin (such as Pastor Stephen Boisson in Alberta, Canada).  That will be the inevitable conflict awaiting the United States in the not so distant future.  Any move in the direction of the “state” being able to tell a church what they can and cannot do regarding historical, orthodox, Biblically justifiable teaching is a step down an avalanche-pregnant cliff.

4. Further Erosion of Marriage.  

This part may not be the most popular part with my Christian friends. Frankly, I am less concerned with the Same-Sex Marriage legislation than I am with the ridiculously high divorce rate among those who claim to be followers of Jesus.  It seems somewhat ironic to me that you hear very loud voices from Christians in the state of New York who have been married multiple times (even three or more) who are “outraged” at this redefinition of marriage that those “radical homosexuals” want to inflict on society.  It may be high time for the community of Jesus followers to look in the mirror.  Could it be possible that if Christians took seriously the design of God for marriage, that maybe our country wouldn’t be at this place to begin with?  Or, even if we did arrive at this place, the overwhelming opinion in the country would be shaped because the beauty, value, and purpose of marriage would be so compelling in the lives of Christ followers (by the way, the One Who Himself designed marriage) that the country would naturally not even consider a redefinition of something so beautiful.

Our desire to curse the darkness, so to speak, regarding this issue, may not be as justifiable as we first think.  We want to point the finger at maybe 2%-3% of the population (the homosexual demography – understanding that I have seen figures that are both above and below the ones I listed), instead of looking at the attitude toward marriage in the overwhelming majority of the populace.  To squeeze it down a bit further, I would be happy if just those who claimed to seriously follow Jesus would seriously embrace His thoughts regarding marriage and divorce (and, though I don’t claim to have exhausted this subject either, I did take up the issue of divorce in a teaching found here. The Scripture soberly reminds us, “For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God” (1 Peter 4:17).

So, these are a few of the reasons I am saddened with the events that have transpired in New York.

But I am not without hope.  Whether or not this kind of thing becomes a trend in other states or not, what I am confident in is that, as the prophet Daniel concludes, “the Most High God is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to whomever He chooses”  (note Daniel chapters 4,5, and 7).

These events have also awakened some positive impulses in the Christian community I hope.  First, that those who have been filled with hate, instead of truth mixed with grace, would repent to the LORD and seek His forgiveness and help to love as He does.  That doesn’t mean condoning something that is contrary to the heart of God, it simply means loving in the midst of it.  Second, I hope that churches in the U.S. will give added emphasis to the design, purposes, and strengthening of God-sanctioned marriages for the purpose of glorifying God in them, and telling the world a better story about Jesus and His faithfulness.  And third, I hope this is a part of the purifying of the witness of the Church in the world, since sometimes it only comes by way of a sobering wake-up call.

At whatever point in the above comments someone may perceive that I have failed to be loving, please forgive me – it was not my intent.  I desire to see the truth of Christ presented with the heart of Christ, and I realize that I don’t always perfectly represent that.  As well, at whatever point the above comments register with you as truth, may God help you and I to embrace it through loving others with the grace and truth found in Jesus and articulated in the gospel.

Jerry Gillis, June 25, 2011

Ok, so there’s a lot of commotion around the recent book from Rob Bell called “Love Wins.”  Rightly so.  Rob wanted to influence the dialogue surrounding questions of heaven, hell, and the fate of everyone who has ever lived.  I have received a fair amount of questions asking about my thoughts regarding this, so I will offer a few.  But, before I get to commenting about the book (which I have read in its entirety), allow me to note a few things.

First, I really don’t have any question that Rob Bell loves Jesus.  Nor do I have any question that Rob loves people and wants them to know Jesus.  As well, I can appreciate Rob’s artistry in writing, and his willingness to ask questions about our faith.  We need to be in touch with the questions that do arise in our faith, and no Christ follower should be afraid of the pursuit of truth.

Second, I want to affirm my love for Rob.  Though I don’t know him personally, he is a brother and should be treated with respect and love (even if I choose to disagree with him – even disagree strongly).  And, no, this is not the requisite preparatory statement to make sure I say the right things by saying I love him, just to spew hate later on in this commentary.  That’s a waste of time, and very disingenuous.

Third, many have attempted to frame Rob’s book, and his theology, through the lens of his “art.”  No doubt, Rob writes creatively and poetically, but I can’t yield to the “I’m an artist, so let me just be creative” mantra.  We must call this book what it is – it is an attempt (creatively and artistically) to paint a different portrait of the fate of humanity than what has been so widely established by the majority of orthodox Christianity for 2,000 years.  This is a theology book, and should be treated as such.  In addition, Rob has made it a mainstream topic, so it can and should be interacted with on a public level.

Finally, in the way of introduction, should you want to reflect on some teaching that has been done here at The Chapel at CrossPoint relative to the subject of hell, and what happens after we die, you can access these: http://theater.thechapel.com/play/?p=1022&title=The_Burning_Elephant, and http://theater.thechapel.com/play/?p=244&title=What_Happens_the_Moment_After_I_Die?.

Now, let’s move ahead.  “Love Wins” is the title of the book, and in the way of summary, Rob makes the case that given enough time, everyone, whether in this life or the next, will succumb to the love of God and so will ultimately be reconciled to God.  He perceives of hell as the consequence of choices to reject Jesus in this life, and then the “pruning” that will happen in the afterlife until such a time as that person can no longer withstand the love of God.  In other words, he leaves open the possibility that everyone who has ever lived will be rightly reconciled to God at some point, either in this life or in the one to come.  Though he doesn’t affirm that outright, he does intimate that this will be the case (obviously, the name of the book is “Love Wins”), and his view is what some would define as “universalism” (the idea that everyone will ultimately come to God and live with him in peace, security, and joy forever).  To be fair, Rob would deny he is a universalist, but if he isn’t, his position is either a slight mutation of universalism or is standing right outside the door. The goal of my thoughts in this piece is not to do a summary review of the book – that has been handled very responsibly in other places (for an excellent review of the book, see: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/april/lovewins.html, or http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2011/03/14/rob-bell-love-wins-review/  - but please note these are long reviews, so be warned).

As I read through the book, the truth is that I thought “there is nothing new here to see.”  Even when Rob was describing what borders on the idea of universalistic theology, there have been a few theologians in the past that have had some of the same thoughts (Origen of the early church fathers, and more recent theologians like Schleiermacher and Tillich).  They are not in the majority (not even close), and don’t express what orthodox Christianity has affirmed en masse for the last two millennia.  When Rob was talking about heaven (which I think was his best chapter), he was simply reframing the thoughts of many before him (not the least of which is N.T. Wright in his book Surprised by Hope).  Rob credibly acknowledges as much in the back of the book.  I found myself saying “yes” a number of times when reading the chapter on heaven and the reality of heaven’s “already/not yet” tension.  Rob also borrows from, or is influenced by, C.S. Lewis (and who hasn’t been influenced by Lewis?).  But Rob takes some of Lewis’s thoughts from The Great Divorce, and extends them even further out – even Lewis had the wherewithal to write in the preface to his book that he was in no way trying to create or do theology, but was writing a piece of fiction creatively and fantastically (yet Biblically informed).

So, what are my thoughts on the book?  Well, let’s just say that a “tug of war” would be a good metaphor to describe my thoughts – both in how I feel, and in what I read.

Tug of War #1 – Biblically justifiable vs. Biblically indefensible.  Some of what Rob does is solid, it seems to me.  But it is so intermingled with out of context Scripture that it could cause a great deal of confusion.  At times, I felt humbled by the greatness of God when reading, and at other times was very frustrated with the truncation of the greatness of God.  When there is no consistency of hermeneutic (manner of interpreting the Scripture), it is really difficult to follow (as well as creating the space to make the Scripture say whatever you want it to say – which, by the way, the reviews I linked you to do a good job of giving examples of this).  Further, Rob uses only the Scripture that attempts to make his point (and, sometimes, doesn’t use it well), while leaving vast passages of Scripture about the reality and eternality of hell completely untouched (see John 3:18-19, 36; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Revelation 22:14-15, to just scratch the surface).  And what of the mission of the Church?  Rob’s position on hell and his thought that love wins, either in this life or in the life to come, effectively neuters the mission of the Church.  At very best, his position (it seems to me) makes the mission of the Church nothing more than a band-aid manufacturer for the ills of society (which is NOT to say that the Church ought not be involved in meeting the social ills of our culture – but that is not all of what we do – the Church must demonstrate and declare the gospel of Jesus).

Tug of War #2 – Evangelical vs. Liberal theology.  There are parts of this book that would be classified as evangelical in the truest sense.  There are others (like the doctrine of hell presented here) that are classical, liberal Protestantism.  Obviously, liberal Protestantism doesn’t resonate with me because my conviction is that it doesn’t resonate with the Scripture.

Tug of War #3 – Rob Bell vs. Rob Bell.  I seemed to pick up, on a variety of occasions, that Rob is trying to take the evangelical faith handed down to him at a young age, deconstruct it, and put it back together again.  You can read the tensions that he seems to feel about that.  On one hand, I totally understand where he is coming from, and the truth is that good questions need to be asked about some of these issues.  I just struggle a bit with where he is landing (again, predominately on his perspective of hell which comes from his overemphasis of one attribute of God).  I don’t fault his process at all (many of us have walked, or are walking, the same road), I just disagree with his conclusions.

Tug of War #4 – God vs. God.  Yep, you read that right.  What I am getting at is this – Rob emphasizes the love of God as the controlling characteristic of who God is.  Let me first say that I could not believe more heartily in the reality of the Scripture’s affirmation that “God is love.”  There simply is no definition of love outside of God, because God is love.  Rob helps flesh that out in a number of ways, and lifts our spirits as he writes of the indescribable love of God.  But we cannot, Biblically, speak of God in only that fashion (at least in the way we understand love).  God IS holy.  God IS truth.  God IS life.  God IS just.  God IS good.  And, certainly, God IS love.  Holding these all together is imperative, and that is where I think the problem of this book lies – it holds love alone as the attribute of God that “wins”, thus, it leads to Rob’s (mistaken) conclusion.

In this book, God’s love is allowed to win the tug of war of God’s characteristics, instead of living with the tensions and realities and beauty of all God is. It seems to me that in Rob’s efforts to teach us to live with the tensions (which I commend), he actually overwhelms the tensions by letting “love” win.  Love does win.  So does truth.  So does justice.  So does holiness.  And these aren’t pitted against each other – they live happily with one another in the heart and actions of God.

"You may say to yourselves, 'These nations are stronger than we are.  How can we drive them out?'  But do not be afraid of them; remember well what the LORD our God did to Pharaoh and to all Egypt."  Deuteronomy 7:17-18

The Scripture repeatedly calls us to remember.  Remember God.  Remember what He has done.  Remember His faithfulness.  And it seems that the purpose of remembrance is not to dwell in the past, but to give strength and courage for the present and future.  Keep in mind, remembering is not the same as looking back.  Remembering is a "mind" position - looking back is an "eye" position.  We see it clearly when Jesus says, "Remember Lot's wife."  What did Lot's wife do?  She looked back at Sodom.  Thus, we learn this (in my paraphrase), "Remember not to look back."

Remembering the LORD honors Him.  But allowing ourselves to live in the past does not - because it lacks faith for today and tomorrow.  God gives us days for a reason.  They end.  And we are intended to live in the next day when it arrives, not stay stuck in the past one.  That said, God is honored when we remember His work in the past so that it fuels our mission in the present.

Our local congregation (www.thechapel.com) has just had a birthday.  In the beginning of 1961, a few folks gathered at a local school and began meeting as a local body of believers.  And here we are 50 years later.  Though I wasn't around (nor even born!), my reflection and remembrance is one of honor.  I honor Pastor James Andrews who founded this congregation and led it for nearly 40 years.  I honor Pastor Al Cockrell who came in and led the church through a transition in a critical time after Pastor Andrews died.  And I honor all the people that make up the congregation called The Chapel.  Together, all of these folks built a foundation that I have had the privilege of building on top of for the last 9 years.  I'm so grateful for their faithfulness, sacrifice, and willingness to step out in faith over these last 50 years - and I trust that we will be doing the same for many years to come.  I remember to honor the LORD, and the LORD's work among His people.

But I don't look back.  God still lives.  Still gives.  Still provides.  Still works.  Still transforms.

And still gives perspective.

Sometimes, when I dwell too much on one local congregation, my local congregation, I tend to lose sight of what our Great God is doing in our region.  In our country.  In our world.  Sometimes we need to pick our head up out of the weeds and see the vastness of the landscape before us.  Sometimes we need to see the vastness of our mission so that we don't have even the slightest yearning to look back and live on a remembered faith instead of an active, living one. 

I was doing a bit of that today.  One of the academic institutions that I attended (www.gordonconwell.edu) has some great information on the status of Global Mission through their Center for the Study of Global Christianity.  Just as perspective, let me give a few nuggets of interest.

In 1900, the global population was 1.619 billion.  By 2025, it will be 8.011 billion.

In 1900, the total population of Christians (all kinds) was 558 million.  In 2025 it projects to 2.7 billion.

What that means, among many other things, is this:  In 1900, Christians made up 34.5% of the global population.  In 2025, Christians are projected to make up 33.7% of the population.  Bottom line, over a 125 year period beginning in 1900, Christianity has not (will not) increased at all as a percentage of the global population.  But let me not leave you too sad.

The goal of our mission is saturation of the gospel - conversion is a product of saturation.  While we want to see everyone come to faith in Jesus, we can't really control that (we participate with God, but God is the One Who saves).  Our mission is to saturate the world with the proclamation and demonstration of the gospel.  So, let me show you how that looks over a 125 year period.

In 1900, the unevangelized population of the world was 880 million (which equaled 54.3% of population of the whole world).  In 2025, the unevangelized population projects to 2.3 billion (which equals 28.8% of the whole world).  In other words, though the overall conversions to faith in Christ have not moved in 125 years, the percentage of saturation has dramatically increased in that same period.

I'll share some more along these lines in my upcoming teaching.  But suffice it say that my perspective of God's activity in the world is constantly being challenged and reshaped.  And when I remember what God has done in the past, it gives me strength and courage to have faith in the present to engage the mission of God in the world because we still have alot of work to do!

Well, to say that I am out of my league with this post would be an understatement.  Trying to articulate the right idea of femininity is very difficult when only knowing the reality of masculinity (and though having a wife, we are still a majority "boy" house since I don't have any girls, and two boys, as children).  But, since you are reading this blog, it appears that I am somewhat stupid enough to tackle the subject (speaking of "somewhat stupid" - is that possible?  Isn't it akin to saying things like "I'm slightly drunk" or "I barely killed him"?).

There is plenty to be said about femininity - and I'm not going to say much of it.  It seems that descriptors of femininity (softness, sensitivity, understanding) aren't what are at the root of femininity.  In fact, I think femininity needs to be defined in a different way, so I am going to say something that may be a bit stark, but I will try to explain myself.

Femininity should also be defined by Jesus.  Now let me explain.

The first chapter of the Bible reminds us that God created humanity "male and female" and that both were created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27).  Thus, masculinity and femininity are both important to the full complement of understanding the image of God.  God is beyond gender in His being ("God is Spirit" according to the Scripture), but God is not beyond being described in gender terms (Jesus reveals God as Father).  Within the gender descriptor framework, God also speaks of Himself in feminine terms on occasion (see Isaiah 66:13 as an example, and also note Jesus using this as well in Matthew 23:37).  So, we need to understand that in the original intent of God's creation of humanity, male and female represent the image of God.

What we should keep in mind, however, is that God has revealed Himself very specifically in Jesus.  Jesus was obviously a man.  And Jesus was/is God.  So why is this so important to our discussion?  Because Jesus is the perfect representation of God to us - in the fullness of His image (Colossians 1:15 states "He (Jesus) is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation").  Thus, femininity should also be defined by Jesus since He is the completeness, and fullness, of God in human form.

If you are still tracking with me, then that leads me to what I think might be the way to approach biblical femininity.  Instead of looking at the descriptors of femininity like I mentioned at the outset, I think we look to Jesus and what He fundamentally displayed to humanity as the basis for real femininity.  So what would that be?  How would we characterize Biblical femininity?

Humility and Servanthood.

I know.  It's the same as what I said should characterize masculinity.  But that's because Jesus is the source for true masculinity and femininity, since He is the exact image of the invisible God, and it takes masculine and feminine to fully complement the idea of creation in the image of God.  So how do these aspects of Jesus play out in the context of femininity?

Well, let's start with humility.  The woman who has a genuine humility before God demonstrates characteristics that have a God-saturated nature to them in the context of femininity.  For instance, modesty in dress and speech would flow from humility before God.  Purity in sexual expression would flow from humility before God.  A woman's identity would be shaped, not by Madison Avenue, but by her God that she lives in humility toward.

And take servanthood.  Servanthood is the basis for nurturing, one of the beautiful characteristics of God ordained femininity.  Servanthood would also be the foundation for respect, which Paul speaks of as key to the marriage relationship demonstrating the mystery of Christ and the Church (Ephesians 5:33).

When we flip these characteristics of humility and servanthood upside down, we see the corruptions of femininity.  We will reserve the next post for that discussion.

Continuing our dialogue on what Biblical masculinity looks like, I think we need to recap a couple of things.  Fundamentally, we learn  what masculinity looks like through Jesus and all the gospel teaches us about Him.  From that, and from our review of Philippians 2:5-11, we highlighted two aspects, or descriptors, of masculinity as seen in Jesus: humility and servanthood.

So, if we can agree that the characteristics of humility and servanthood are two large, general descriptions of masculinity as seen in Jesus, then it becomes easy enough to see how masculinity gets corrupted.  All you have to do is flip humility and servanthood upside down to see them corrupted.

Let's start by flipping humility upside down.  When we invert humility we are left with one really frightening thing - pride.  Pride may very well be the most insipient, and most basic, of all the sinful issues we struggle with in our masculinity.  Pride wears different masks.  See if you recognize some of the costumes: arrogance, false humility, self-reliance, independence, selfishness, intellectual/social/emotional/spiritual superiority, egotism, and entitlement.  You might possibly be able to offer up more - my list is just representative, not exhaustive.  What's so upsetting about this is that if you go back and look at the list, you will find that the world we live in applauds most of these corruptions in our masculinity.  Men, we are told, don't need anyone - we can figure it out on our own.  We have all the tools to do anything if we work hard enough, get smart enough, and stay strong enough.  But at its core, that's not Jesus strong - it is just a futile attempt to fully embody masculinity.  Men need to be reminded about the courage it takes to walk with the humility of Jesus.

In the same vein, we can flip servanthood upside down as well.  Where does that leave us?  It leaves us as leaders with no context.  The reason this is so corrupted is because it is so close to true masculinity with a great exception.  Men do have a responsibility for leadership in the economy of God (specifically Christian men as is made clear in Ephesians 5).  But our leadership is to be a servanthearted leadership that is willing to sacrifice for the glory of God and the good of people, not a dominating leadership or control based leadership.  Jesus made it clear in Matthew 20:20ff that the kind of leadership he expects is one of service and sacrifice, not domination and control.  The kingdom of God is a domination free kingdom.  When a leader has no context (i.e. - servanthood), then the leader is free to yield to the corruption of humility (pride), which will then lead to domination, control, and all other forms of masculine corruption.

Men (including the one typing this) need to know these things so that they will have a context for all the masculinity they want to exhibit.  Heroism, courage, and sacrifice are all noble things - but they must be properly and securely placed in the context of servanthood to and humility before Christ. If not, they will become, in themselves, corrupt expressions of masculinity.

Next post will be about femininity.  Hopefully I will have something to say about it by the next post.

The world we live in sure has ways of defining what it is to be a man.  If we were to watch enough commercials for beer, we would discover that apparently real men drink a lot of beer, hide out in their sports memorobilia man-cave that is actually made of beer cans, and often have the intelligence quotient of the hops in the beer.

Other pictures of manhood might teach us that we are truly a man when we can beat someone up or physically dominate them.  You know the type - they feel they have to have on a piece of "TapOut" gear at all times so nobody mistakes them for a sissy.  Or the guy who is probably a few twinkies beyond his prime but still feels compelled to always sport self-scissored sleeveless shirts.  In the winter.  While snowblowing his driveway.

But until we get away from being pressed into the mold of the world, we just won't see manhood and masculinity for what it should be.  And like anything else, there really is only one way to define masculinity - through the reality of Jesus.  Jesus is perfect masculinity, and when we look to the His life and His death, we see that reality come to life.

"Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:  Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.  And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death - even death on a cross!  Therefore, God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the  earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."  Philippians 2:5-11

Ultimately, this is the picture of masculinity - Jesus.  And Jesus' masculinity could be summarized in two words from this passage:

Servanthood and Humility.

That's not a picture that the world wants to paint of masculinity.  It just doesn't seem powerful enough.  But think about it.  All the things that we desire in being a man - heroism, courage, sacrifice - all of these are subsets of humility and servanthood.  Truth is, if all we desire to be as men are guys who are heroic, courageous, and sacrificial, then we are missing the mark.  Because these aspects of nobility need to have a foundation - a context.  And I suggest that as we look at Jesus we find that context to be Jesus acting heroically, courageous, and sacrificial because of his humility before the Father and His willingness to be the Father's servant and a servant of the world.

In fact, it doesn't take too long in our reading of the gospels to have Jesus spell out for us what the Father thinks is great.  I would encourage you to read the first gospel - Matthew - and there you will find (in Matthew 20:20-28 and Matthew 23:5-12) Jesus teaching us what the Father considers "great."  Guess what you will find?  Humility and Servanthood.

Humility and servanthood are strong, not weak.  Any weak man can serve himself.  It takes Jesus Strong to serve God and others.  Any weak man can boast about himself and his accomplishments.  It takes Jesus Strong to boast only in the cross.  Humility and servanthood are the essence of strength, not the demonstration of weakness.

But, these traits of humility and servanthood can easily be corrupted and co-opted, and they often are.  That's what we will talk about next post.

Ok, I am going to do something a bit different than I typically do on this blog (like I do a good job of keeping up with this blog anyway...).

Here is an overview of what I am going to do over the next few weeks, and why:  I was reading in Proverbs 20 this morning and I found myself thinking about v.7:

"The righteous man walks in his integrity; how blessed are his children after him."

So, I began to think about what that means for me as a husband and a dad while I took some time to meditate on this verse.  Sometimes, though, "meditating" on a verse goes south for me.  It's kind of like when you are praying sometimes, and while you start well talking to Jesus about your life and your neighbors and praying for missionaries around the world, you realize after about a 15 minute coma that where you ended this "prayer time" was thinking about the time you put Ex-Lax in Jimmy's milkshake for calling you a "doofus."  Not exactly the height of spirituality.

That's sort of what happened to me.  I started well this morning, but ended up thinking about football - more specifically, thinking about my kids playing football.  Even more specifically, I was thinking about how big they are going to be when they grow up ("Dude, if this is what it looks like for a pastor to have some "time with the LORD", then I'm not sure I'm interested...").  Why would I be worried about how big my kids are when they grow up?

Good question.  Unfortunately, God gave me an answer.

You see, I was a small one growing up.  I'm fully grown into my six foot, 1 inch, 185 lb (if I didn't eat a fifth piece of pizza) frame now, but life wasn't always so...well,....tall.  I went to high school at less than 5 feet tall (you read that right).  I weighed double digits.  I was what my mom used to call "a late bloomer."  Compound the late bloomer joy with the fact that most kids in my grade were nearly a year older than me (due to some early move up in kindergarten or something), and it was a perfect cocktail for a kid to feel insecure.  Sure, I compensated (but I won't go into how until I get on Oprah), but it was still a "little" (no pun intended...seriously, why would I mock my own pain...I'm leaving that to you..) challenging to deal with.

Back to my kids.  I was wondering if they were going to go through the same stuff.  I was thinking that I didn't want them to be late bloomers (even though my wife was also a late bloomer.....CURSES - our genetic predisposition foils us again), and be the smallest guys on the team and get smacked around for a while.  Then it hit me.  God was pointing out my own brokenness to me, while I thought I was contemplating their good.  Then God reminded me of something, and I wrote it down (don't get weirded out - I'm not saying God dictated this to me or anything....kind of like those people who tell you "God gave me this song" and after they sing it you are thinking to yourself "Dude, DO NOT blame that awful song on God...").  Here it is:

We bless our kids when we don't let our brokenness become their burden.

Here is what I am saying: I don't want to project on my kids anything that comes from broken places or wounded places inside of me.  I don't want to sound dramatic (not a fan of drama) - I'm not paralyzed by the scars it caused or anything; in fact, it seems that it is very rare that it even rears it's head because of the overwhelming way in which grace has saturated my life.  But, it shows up occasionally (like when you are supposed to be meditating on God's Word and you are obsessing about how athletically built your kids will one day be...).  But even though I seemed to be slipping away in a weird train of thought instead of focusing on God's Word, God showed Himself Sovereign even over my thoughts.  He is teaching me about my brokenness so that he can teach me about what I am teaching them.

Ok, take a breath (but don't pause too long or you may drift off in thought about that time when....).  Snap out of it.

Why all of this?  Well, because I am thinking now about what I am teaching my boys about what it means to be a man.  What is Biblical masculinity?  What is Biblical femininity?  They need to understand this.  I need to understand this.

Why?  Because I want them to be blessed.

So, this is installment #1 (an orientation of sorts) of what looks to be a 5 part series of blogs about some ideas around Biblical masculinity and femininity.  Stay tuned.

Pastor Jerry's 5th travel update.

Pastor Jerry's 4th travel video update, from China!

Pastor Jerry's third video update is now available!

Pastor Jerry has sent us his 2nd video travel update. 

Pastor Jerry is traveling this week to India and will be trying to send us regular video updates while away. You will be able to find them on facebook as well as here at jerrygillis.com - here's the 1st video from Pastor Jerry!

"Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training.  They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever."  1 Corinthians 9:25

I think the idea expressed in what Paul writes above is one of the more cumbersome ideas to live out.  Here's why:  we preach the gospel (as we should) and proclaim that salvation will never, ever be a result of our own works (which is of utmost truth and high priority).  But then we are stuck with this idea that "works" are bad and it carries over into how we live our lives after we believe in Jesus and receive the full impact of the gospel.  That's why, when we begin to preach or teach on the idea of some types of "disciplines" for the follower of Jesus that people get scared or intimidated - or worse.  But discipline, or training, is a natural part of our existence in this life, and is also a natural way of existence in the Kingdom of God.

If I want to learn to type, or hit a baseball, or speak German, or become a discus thrower, or drive, then I will need some training.  I will have to "work" at it.  This isn't a bad thing; it's the natural thing to do.  In fact, it's the only way.  We simply can't learn to do all these things automatically - it will require effort and training and discipline.  Simply put, training or discipline is just a vehicle to learn to do what we could not already do naturally.  That's why Paul says in the verse above that those who compete in games (think Olympics, that was more in line with what Paul was referring to) need to go into strict training.  In other words, they exert effort through exercising their muscles, stretching those muscles, eating certain foods, abstaining from certain foods, and getting proper rest.  As a result, they are prepared for the task at hand.  Paul then teaches us that athletes train to get a perishable crown (it was usually a wreath for the head - basically the ancient version of a gold medal), but "we do it" to get a crown that will last forever.  We do what?  Train.

I know this may strike you as odd, but Jesus trained too.  Putting aside the unanswerable theological question of when (as in what age) Jesus knew He was the Messiah, we read something interesting in Luke 2:52, "And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men."  At this point, Jesus was 12 years old (a significant time in the life of a Jewish boy as he moves from child to man).  He had stayed back in Jerusalem after the Feast of Passover, even though his parents had left and were making their way with a caravan of people back to Nazareth.  They traveled a full day, then realized Jesus wasn't with them.  When they finally found him back in Jerusalem a couple of days later, He was in the Temple (His Father's House).  And guess what he was doing: "After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions" (Luke 2:46).  He was training.

We see from Paul, and certainly from the life of Jesus, that training is not a bad thing - discipline in the way of Jesus is not a bad thing.  It's the normal thing.  But how do we reconcile that to the fact that "works" is not a part of our salvation.  Well, maybe we should look at it this way as we understand what "works" really means.  As Dallas Willard aptly put it: "God is not opposed to effort, He is opposed to earning."  Did you catch that?  One is an action ("effort") and the other is an attitude ("earning").  To take action in the way of Jesus is simply to reflect an understanding of what the Kingdom of God really is; namely, God in action.

So don't fear training.  Some of you already do it in the normal course of your life.  You are trained at work.  Maybe you are studying (training) at school.  Or possibly you are someone who exercises frequently.  In all of these cases, you already understand training.  Now job number one for you and I is to make sure that our training in the way of Jesus is the priority.  Paul said it this way: "For physical training is of some value, but godliness has value for all things, holding promise both for the present life and the life to come" (1 Timothy 4:8).

"Apart from Me, you can do nothing." - Jesus

I was reading recently about the top selling Christian books of the new millenium.  Since we are a decade into it, it was interesting to review what the general populace in the Christian community has been consuming.  It gives us a good idea of what we are thinking.  Of the top 100 titles, over 50 of them were about family/marriage/parenting, with basically the rest being about the self (you know, how to be the best "you" you can be).  Of the few remaining titles, there were 6 about the Bible and 4 about evangelism.  But here is the one that stopped me cold - of the top 100 titles in Christian book sales for the new millenium, 3 were about Jesus.  Three.

Seems maybe we have forgotten that Jesus said we can do nothing without Him.  Nothing.

But it appears that we beg to differ.  To be more ruthlessly honest, it appears that I beg to differ at times.  It seems that we act as if we can do this "Christian" thing on our own - just work a little harder, have a bit more discipline than the next guy, etc.  It's as if we think that Christianity is our effort to be like Jesus.  It's not.  That's the opposite of the gospel.  Christianity is not our effort to be like Jesus, it is Jesus' effort to be Himself in us.  You might want to read that last sentence again.

As Leonard Sweet pointed out, Jesus didn't even try to live His life on this earth by His own power.  He said "Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself...", and in another place Jesus said "I can of Myself do nothing" (see John 5:19, 30).  So, since Jesus could do nothing of Himself, what did He do?  He said it this way, "Whatever the Father does the Son also does", and again, "I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me."  And finally, "Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?  The words I say to you are not just my own.  Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work" (see John 5:19, 8:28, 14:10 respectively).

Jesus lived his life through the indwelling of the Father.  So do you really think that Jesus is going to tell us to live our lives any differently?  That somehow we should live our lives on our own, in our own strength, and just try to "copy" Jesus?  Good luck - that is the recipe for abject failure.  "Trying to be like Christ" is not only hard, it is impossible.  Only Christ can be like Christ.  And that's the point.  He indwells us.  He lives in us.  And He wants to live His life out through us.

So we could take all the great information from all of the books in the bestseller list and put it into practice.  We could have better parenting skills, better communication in marriage, and all other kinds of ways to get some "self-help."  But, in the end, apart from Jesus we can really do nothing.  When the life of Jesus is being lived out in us, we will be better spouses, parents, and people -  because it manifestly becomes bigger than ourselves, it becomes about Jesus and His power.

We need to step out of our "youniverse" and into Jesus' universe.  Everything, and I mean every thing, is for Him, through Him, in Him, and by Him.  He must have the preeminence.  If we don't allow that, the alternative is not good:  we begin to drown in the pool of narcissism while thinking what great swimmers we are.  The "youniverse" is nothing more than a black hole.