Believers today are being challenged
and exhorted to develop a better self-image, and to exercise more
self-love. It is our intent to present both the
unscriptural, and the scriptural aspects of this important facet of the
Christian life.
If I have anything prominently before
me except the Lord Jesus, that thing, however good it is, becomes a screen for
something of myself, and where there is any self- consideration, the region of
spirituality is lost. It may be an amiable thing, but because it is of man and
not of God, it is not spirituality. --J. B.
Stoney
Fall Of The
Fall
There is a growing number of
Christians for whom the fall has fallen. To the degree that the believer
weakens his concept of the fall, he weakens his Christian life and service.
Error concerning the fall results in error concerning the two Adams; and error
concerning the two Adams results in error concerning one’s spiritual growth and
outreach.
Totality Of The
Fall
Scripture leaves no doubt as to the
totality of the fall. It was utter, and irrevocable. God made it very clear to
Adam that if and when he should sin, he would surely die. And the day that Adam
disobeyed God’s single stipulation, he died spiritually--he died unto God. And
all the race of mankind died unto God in Adam that day.
"For as in Adam all die" (1 Cor.
15:22). As a result, "it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the
judgment." "Therefore, as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to
condemnation" (Heb. 9:27; Rom. 5:18). "As it is written, There is none
righteous, no, not one." "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of
God" (Rom. 3:10, 23).
Without question Adam was originally
created in the image of God. "And God said, Let us create man in our image,
after our likeness...."So God created man in his own image, in the image of God
created he him" (Gen. 1:26, 27).
But when Adam died to God, his
God-like image perished with him. "And the Lord said, My Spirit shall not
always strive with man, for that he also is flesh" (Gen. 6:3). "That which is
born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3:6). "Among whom also we all had our manner
of life in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the
flesh and of the mind, and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others"
(Eph. 2:3). "For to be carnally (fleshly) minded is death....Because the carnal
mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither,
indeed, can be. So, then, they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom.
8:6–8).
The extent of the apprehension of the
depth and utter ruin of the first Adam nature caused by the fall, determines the
extent to which the new life in Christ can be brought to full growth in the
believer; for just so far as man clings to one supposed "good thing" in him, so
for the power of the Cross is nullified in his life, and so far the growth of
the new life is constricted in him.
Freedom from the dominion of sin is
the message of the Cross, but it can only be realized in experience up to the
extent of the believer’s recognition of the fall, and a consequent offcasting of
the fallen life of the first Adam at the place called
Calvary.
Anomaly
Those who slight the fall refer
consistently to the image of fallen Adam as "marred," or "blurred," or "in need
of restoration." They dare not consider Adam’s image a total ruin because they
are seeking its restoration, its reformation. For them it is back to the
unfallen Adam, via Christ!
There is a strange anomaly at the
core of the Reformation realm. On the one hand they go to the extreme of
teaching that the fall was not beyond recovery of the original; while on the
other hand they go so far as to insist that man is so dead in sin that it is
impossible for him to believe--"total depravity."
These Calvinists insist that the
Spirit must first regenerate the dead-unto-God individual, thereby giving him
life in order that he may believe unto life. This the Covenant theologians
refer to as "monergistic regeneration: the faith which receives Christ for
justification is itself the free gift of a sovereign God, bestowed by spiritual
regeneration in the act of effectual calling." --J.I.Packer
"Faith Cometh By
Hearing"
The Scriptures present the reverse of
this theory. "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name
whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins" (Acts 10:43). First
believe, then receive. John writes, "He that heareth my word, and believeth on
him that sent me, hath everlasting life" (5:24). First hear, then believe, then
receive. "The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of
the Son of God; and they that hear shall live" (John 5:25). As a result of
hearing, the dead are given life.
James, Peter, and John all clearly
testify to the fact that life is entered into by believing, by faith. James:
"Of his own will begot he us with the word of truth (1:18). Peter, "Being born
again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God" (1
Pet. 1:23). John: "But these are written, that ye might have life through his
name" (20:31).
God commanded Israel to choose life.
"I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before
you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore, choose life, that both thou
and thy seed may live" (Deut. 30:19). Concerning this plea to choose life, Dr.
L.S. Chafer wrote:
God having designed that man as
creature ... more»
This is the traditional Pentecostal aberration: "Total
Depravity does not mean that human nature is essentially and completely
evil, but that every part of it is damaged and infected by inherited
Adamic sin. "It is insisted that there is no new nature involved at conversion,
but rather the impartation of spiritual life that regenerates the old Adamic
nature.
Eradication: This is the teaching that all sin is
eradicated from the sinful Adamic nature. The Wesleyan "pure heart," is
attained when the "second blessing" experience of the "Pentecostal flame"
consumes the sinful propensities of the old Adamic nature. Presto, new divine
nature!
2)
Arminian
One-Naturism
Another type of "one-naturism" is set forth by J. Sidlow Baxter in
his book, A New Call to Holiness. This holiness theory is that of
amelioration of the sinful Adamic nature. Dr. Baxter writes:
"Sin is a diffused infection of thought, desire, motive, impulse,
inclination, and even of instinct, right through the moral nature. From the
moment the Holy Ghost fully possesses us, He begins to correct, purify, refine,
inbreathe and renovate all the qualities, tempers, urges, propensities, and
functions of the mind, the sensations, and the will. This is how holiness
begins and continues to be inwrought" (p. 116).
This is the humanistic theory of change in contradiction to
the spiritual principle of exchange; "Not I, but
Christ."
3) Covenant One-Naturism
The most prevalent and insidious type of "one-naturism" today is
that of Covenant Theology. Through the error of considering Romans 6:6 to be
actual (condition), rather than positional, it is claimed that the old
Adamic man is actually crucified, dead, and gone--eradicated. Those holding
this view are forced, however, to admit to indwelling sin in the Christian.
Some teach that it is simply a residual influence left over from pre-salvation
days.
Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones and Dr. Jay Adams refer to indwelling sin
as "old habits." Dr. John MacArthur terms it the "old coat of humanness." Dr.
Charles Solomon says it is the "energy of residual sin." Another erroneous term
for the indwelling old man is "condition of flesh." The one-nature proponents
separate the alleged eradication of the old man from the indwelling "flesh."
However, the Word teaches that "flesh" is a person, as well as a
condition. "My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is
flesh" (Gen. 6:3). "Fathers of our flesh" (Heb. 12:9) sire progeny of flesh.
Belief in the eradication of the old man tends to relieve the Christian of much
of his responsibility concerning the activity of his indwelling Adamic
life and nature. He is wont to place the blame for his sinning upon Satan, and
upon "residual tendencies" and "habits" developed prior to salvation.
But here is the crux of the matter: it is not possible for the
source of indwelling sin to be eradicated, while retaining sin, the
product of that sinful source. Effect must have a cause! If you sin,
you have its source, i.e., Adam.
Dr. Lloyd-Jones taught that "The old man is non-existent. Your
old self is gone" (Romans Six, p. 65). Dr. MacArthur: "The old man is
dead, destroyed, removed…it isn’t around" (Tape GC 2147). Dr. Solomon:
"The old man and sin nature no longer exist in the Christian" (Rejection
Syndrome, p. 106). Dr. Bob George: "That old man is dead and gone; he will
never exist again" (Classic Christianity, p. 90). Dr. Bill Gillham: "I
claim by faith that the old man is extinct" (Lifetime Guarantee, p.
187).
What the one-nature eradicationist fails to understand is that death ever
means separation! Separation from God is living death. I, as a
new creation in the Last Adam, was positionally separated from the first
Adam at the Cross (Gal. 2:20). Hence I reckon myself dead (separated) from sin
and its source, the sinful indwelling old Adamic man. This is the meaning of
Romans Six.
Breached
Bulwarks-- There are
three great fissures in the Dispensational dike, through which doctrinally
contaminated Covenant theology is pouring. These inundating law-streams arise
from three sources: (1) Israel’s New Covenant, (2) Israel’s Sermon on the Mount,
and (3) Israel’s Millennial Kingdom.
These rifts are not only caused by Covenant-engineers from the outside, but
also Dispensational-sappers from the inside. Unless these torrents are
terminated, the Church will suffer greater devastation in the grip of Covenant
Theology than she has from the turmoil and personal wreckage caused by the
Arminian Charismatic chaos.
Pauline
Dispensationalism -- Our theme is as follows: The Church is to be
kept separate from all else, including Israel and her Law, via clear-cut
Pauline Dispensationalism.
The Lord Jesus Christ loves His Church, for whom He gave Himself on the
Cross. He did so that He might cleanse and sanctify her with the washing of
water by the (rightly divided) Word of truth. He would present her to Himself a
glorious Church, not having Charismatic spot, nor Covenant wrinkle, nor any such
thing, but that she should be holy and without earthly Jewish blemish (Eph.
5:25–27).
The glorified Lord delivered His sanctifying and glorifying message
exclusively to His Bride through Paul—a life-giving Word infinitely higher than
His earthly message to the nation of Israel. The Pauline Gospel, governed
by Pauline Dispensationalism, belongs to the Church.
Dual
Gospels--Most dispensationalists and all Covenant
theologians fail to realize that there are two Gospels, each dependent
upon the Blood of the Cross. The one Gospel is earthly (Kingdom), the
other is heavenly (Grace). Both Gospels are “according to Jesus,” and
present only one way: by faith.
One Gospel was ministered by Christ on earth, during His pre-Cross
humiliation, and was exclusively addressed to Israel regarding her
Millennial Kingdom. The other—altogether “new creation” other—was ministered to
Paul by the glorified Lord Jesus Christ; after Calvary, from heaven, exclusively
to and for His chosen heavenly Body.
John the Baptist’s, Jesus’, and the Apostles’ Gospel concerned the Messiah
and His Kingdom-specifically and repeatedly referred to as “the Gospel of the
Kingdom” (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; Mark 1:14; Luke 9:2, 6). The other, “the
Gospel of the Grace of God, “was neither preached nor mentioned until Paul went
forth to declare it (Acts 20:24; Rom. 3:21–28; Eph. 3:1–3).
Heaven-based
Church -- The Church’s Source is in heaven; as a unique body she
was brought into being on earth at Pentecost. She will return to her eternal
Source and abode in heaven at the Rapture—not partially, but each and every
member of His completed Body. The glorious heavenly Church has no relationship,
no continuity, with anything prior to the Cross, nor after the Rapture. His Body
will be completed; His spotless Bride presented to Himself in heaven.
Paul’s heavenly Gospel is exclusively for the Church. One need not go down to
earthly Israel for anything! Why should a heavenly citizen, “blessed with
all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ, stoop to purloin
some “spiritual” blessing from comparatively poor Israel? Like the wealthy
shoplifter, in the 5 & 10! The Bride shares the throne with her Bridegroom,
whether in heaven, or on earth.
Anti-“Ultra”-- Before going further, be assured that the
dispensational aspects of the Word presented here are simply normal, clear-cut,
Pauline teaching. We have always been opposed to all so-called “ultra,”
“extreme,” [or post-Acts2] Dispensationalism. We insist that the Church was born
on the day of Pentecost; we insist upon the privilege and responsibility of the
Lord’s Supper; we insist upon believers’ baptism by immersion. We have been
associated with the Bible Church movement for over half a century; we are just
seeking to give God’s revelation to Paul its proper place and nothing more—there
is no more!
Heavenly
Gospel-- The
Gospel for the Church, the Gospel of the Grace of God, Paul’s Gospel, is not
mentioned in the Scriptures until 1 Corinthians 15:3–5. “For I delivered unto
you first of all that which I also received [from Christ in glory], that
Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that He was
buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the
Scriptures; and that He was seen…”
“But I make known to you, brethren, that the Gospel which was preached by me
is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I
taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1:11, 12).
“For I [the glorified Lord] have appeared unto thee [Saul] for this purpose, to
make thee a minister and a witness of these things which thou hast seen, and of
those things in which I will appear unto thee” (Acts 26:16).
“All the Apostles (except Paul) accompanied the Lord and followed Him to the
cloud (Acts 1:9). Paul sees Him the other side of the cloud, and it is this
which characterizes his entire ministry.”
The glorified Lord directly communicated to Paul not only the great
fundamentals of the heavenly Church Gospel, but totally new revelation
concerning His Body—truths that He never shared with the nation Israel. These
truths concerned our identification with Christ crucified, buried, resurrected
and ascended; our heavenly position; our co-heirship and co-reign with our
Beloved Bridegroom, and much more.
Dr. Chafer wrote, “The current neglect of the extensive doctrine of the
Church is not only blameworthy, but has led to a considerable array of baneful
errors. The Church is the purpose of the Father in the present dispensation, and
His supreme purpose in the universe” (Systematic Theology IV: 54).
Infinitely
Above-- All the while the
Lord Jesus’ heavenly Gospel in content and position is infinitely above the
Kingdom Gospel that He shared with earthly Israel—which they rejected.
Those who do not center in the truths which the ascended Lord
communicated directly to Paul will not know who and where they are
in ... more»
Question: "What does it mean to pray in Jesus' name?"
Answer:
Prayer in Jesus’ name is taught in John 14:13-14, “And I will do whatever you ask in my
name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything
in my name, and I will do it.” Some misapply this verse, thinking that saying
“in Jesus’ name” at the end of a prayer results in God’s always granting what is
asked for. This is essentially treating the words “in Jesus’ name” as a magic
formula. This is absolutely unbiblical.
Praying in Jesus’ name means
praying with His authority and asking God the Father to act upon our prayers
because we come in the name of His Son, Jesus. Praying in Jesus' name means the
same thing as praying according to the will of God, “This is the confidence we
have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears
us. And if we know that he hears us—whatever we ask—we know that we have what we
asked of him” (1 John 5:14-15). Praying in Jesus’ name is praying for
things that will honor and glorify Jesus.
Saying “in Jesus’ name” at the
end of a prayer is not a magic formula. If what we ask for or say in prayer is
not for God’s glory and according to His will, saying “in Jesus’ name” is
meaningless. Genuinely praying in Jesus' name and for His glory is what is
important, not attaching certain words to the end of a prayer. It is not the
words in the prayer that matter, but the purpose behind the prayer. Praying for
things that are in agreement with God’s will is the essence of praying in Jesus’
name. more»
What is shared herein is designed to further your
acquaintance with the Lord Jesus on high, and to enrich your fellowship with Him and with
the Father. Through prayerful meditation in None But the Hungry Heart #5, we trust the
Holy Spirit will bring about a strengthening of faith and an upward drawing of heart.
Furthermore, it is hoped that these thoughts may provide
you an opportunity to try your "faith wings"--to learn more fully the need to
abide above, and thereby walk here below in the "Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (Romans 8:2).
"And this I pray, that your love may
abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment (discernment); that ye may
approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offense till the day
of Christ, being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto
the glory and praise of God" (Philippians 1:9-11).
"We love Him, because He first loved
us" (1 John 4:19).
We first come to know something of the Lord Jesus' love by
what He did for us; but that is only the basis for coming to know His love in what He is
to us. The first is known at the Cross, the latter is entered into through personal
fellowship with the risen Lord.
"There are three steps in appreciation of His love for
us. First, I learn that He loves me so much that He saved me. He is our treasure 'My Beloved is mine' (Song of Solomon 6:3). The second step of affection is the consciousness that He loves me
so much that He has a right to me. He would have me for Himself. 'I am my Beloved's' (Song of Solomon 6:3).
"The third step is the consciousness that He loves me
so much that He wants my company 'His
desire is toward me' (Song of Solomon 7:10). Love's
delight is found in the company of its object. May we know in a deeper way, and in a
fuller measure, the sweetness of personal intimacy with 'the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me' (Galatians
2:20).
"Much ministry is lost upon us as to any practical
result, because we are not prepared to be detached from things here, so as to be simply
here for Christ. And the preparation for this is to come personally under the influence of
the blessed attractiveness of the Lord Jesus. When we sit under His shadow with great
delight, everything else becomes so small, and loses its hold upon our hearts."
-C.A.C.
"But we all, with unveiled face
beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory
to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord" (2 Corinthians 3:18).
"Saul armed David with his armor....
And David said unto Saul, I cannot go with these; for I have not tested them" (1
Samuel 17:38, 39).
Years of preparation are worth a moment of truth! Rest
assured that once we are developed and trained by the Holy Spirit, the work whereunto He
has called us will be ready and waiting (Acts
13:2). "Our Lord must have an instrument which He
has formed in the fire and to which He has given peculiar knowledge of Himself."
"The greater the knowledge committed to a servant, the
more necessary and important it is that he should be much alone with God about it, in
order that he may realize the nature and effect of it on himself before he undertakes to
make it known to others.
"It rebukes the haste and readiness with which many
now enter the ministry, attempting to impress others with a measure of the truth which
they have not proved for themselves. Surely the servant should ever be able to say: 'I believed, and therefore have I spoken' (2
Corinthians 4:13). It is better to lose time as to work
in preparation for service than to lose time in repairing one's mistakes in undertaking a
work for which one is not yet qualified."
"A servant's discipline must always be in advance of
the service prepared for him. He cannot lead beyond the point to which he himself has been
led. But when the depth and reality of the truth has been established in his own soul, he
is made the channel of it."
"I have found that many a thing which I had presented
in an extreme way because I was sure of it, I put forth in a simpler and a more real way
when I had touched it in my own experience." -J.B.S.
"That which we have seen and heard
declare we unto you" (1 John 1:3).
"I count all things but loss for the
excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus, my Lord" (Philippians 3:8).
Positionally, our Father subjected our old nature to the
Cross and its resultant death. Experientially, He applies the work of the Cross to our old
life, thereby progressively holding it in the grip of that death. He is
"unforming" the old nature in death, and conforming the new nature in life.
"Life more abundant requires that what He did for us
shall be made good in us. In His Cross He dealt with our sins, and He also dealt with
ourselves; but that is something which has to be made good progressively. It is as we
ourselves are dealt with in the power of the Cross that the way is made for His life to
express itself in ever deepening fullness.
"The fact is that it is the old life which is in the
way of the new life and its full expression. It is the natural life which obstructs the
course of the divine life. Thus what has been done for us has ... more»
Occasionally, we receive correspondence
from individuals (liberal, progressive, postmodern, moral relativist, monist, etc.)
being judgmental and seeking to censor our liberty in
Christ and our obligation to exercise discernment.
Curiously, these individuals fail to see the hypocrisy of their own position--that of
engaging in the very behavior which they CLAIM is religiously, philosophically or politically unacceptable. Typically,
they quote Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."
as a 'proof text'
to the exclusion of what the rest of Scripture has to say on the subject.
Of course, their motive is often that of intimidating anyone who would seek to discern
error/falsehood from truth, immorality from virtue. Consider the following thoughts written by Miles J. Stanford.
The
terms "judge," or "judgment," are used in different ways in the Word of God;
their meanings and usage are mainly governed by the context in which they are
found.
When they mean to condemn, to sentence, or to punish, man
[individually] is to leave that prerogative with God. "Vengeance is
mine; I will repay, saith the Lord" (Romans 12:19). [During
"the times of the Gentiles," God has
established government--civil authority--as His earthly delegated
representative/agent to administer justice upon evildoers. See
Romans 13:1-7.]
At other times the
words mean to distinguish, to decide, to determine, to conclude, to try, to
think, and to call into question. This is what God would have believers do
in love, especially as to whether or not preaching and teaching is true or false
to His Word. Paul wrote, "And this I pray, that your love may abound yet
more and more in knowledge and in all judgment; that ye may approve things that
are excellent" (Philippians 1:9,10).
The Lord Jesus both warns
and commands to "Beware of false prophets" (Matthew 7:15).
We could not "beware," or know a false prophet unless we exercised
true judgment. For that we are given the correct standard:
"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to
this word, it is because there is no light in them" (Isaiah 8:20).
There are realms in which the believer is generally not to judge. In
most instances he is not to judge whether or not a person is saved, if he
professes to be scripturally* born again.
"The Lord knoweth them that are his" (2 Timothy 2:19).
Nor are we to judge another's motives. Only God can see into the heart
and know the motives that underlie actions. (1 Corinthians 4:1-5)
[However, Scripture does allow for some exceptions--e.g. Philippians
1:15-18].
And we are not to judge believers concerning the
eating of certain kinds of foods or drink, or keeping certain days, etc.
(Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 10:23-33; and Colossians 2:16,17)
All too many believers remain immature or are actually drawn into error
because they seek to exercise love apart from Scripture-guided discernment and
judgment. Christians who are mature, of "full age," are
"those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good
and evil" (Hebrews 5:14).
One of the reasons for the Church being
in such a sickly condition today is that believers have not obeyed the commands
of God's Word to judge error. "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark
them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye
have learned, and avoid them" (Romans 16:17).
The false teachers make the "divisions," and not those who protest
against their errors.
An often misapplied Scripture is
"Judge not" (Matthew 7:1). This is a command against
hypocritical judgment, and is not directed to those who in love and
sincerity discern whether a teacher or teaching is true or false to the Word.
"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what
judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall
be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy
brother's eye, but considereth not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how
wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and,
behold, a beam is in thine own eye. Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out
of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of
thy brother's eye" (Matthew 7:1-5).
Actually, the last statement
of this Scripture commands sincere judgment: "then shalt thou see clearly
to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." We are not to
forget nor seek to avoid the fact that our Lord Jesus commanded us to "judge righteous judgment." He commended one,
"Thou hast rightly judged." He asked others,
"Why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?" (John 7:24;
Luke 7:43; 12:57). Paul wrote, "I speak as to wise men;
judge ye what I say." Again, "He that is spiritual judgeth
all things" (1 Corinthians 10:15; 2:15).
It is all too common and easy for Christians
to assume a critical and censorious attitude toward those who do not share their
opinions about matters other than those which have to do with Bible doctrine
and moral practice. But it is our privilege and duty to do all we
can to encourage their spiritual growth. We are to love and pray for one
another, and to consider ourselves lest we be tempted. The safest and most
profitable thing to do is to judge ourselves.
"For if we would judge ourselves, we should not
be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened (child trained) of the Lord,
that we should not be condemned with the world" (1 Corinthians 11:31,32).
It will make all the difference if we judge our own faults as uncharitably
as we do the faults of others; and judge the failings of others as charitably as
we do our own!
* Mr. Stanford's statement was
written several decades ago, ... more»
Holiness is one of those words that means different things to
different people, isn't it? What associations does it conjure up in your
mind? For some of us I suspect holiness has decidedly unattractive
connotations. A "holy joe" is one of those religious fanatics who
embarrasses you by his antisocial killjoy attitude to life. "Holier than
thou" is the way we describe pompous prigs who reckon themselves
morally superior to everyone else. Even at its most positive, the word
"holy" I guess conveys rather austere if nostalgic memories of the hymns
we used to sing in school chapel... "Holy, holy,holy" - intoned to a
ponderous organ amid hushed whispers, stained-glass windows, gothic
architecture and acute physical discomfort. No, holiness is not a
quality to which the majority of people feel attracted.
But then it would rather defeat the object of the exercise if they
did. For the whole point of holiness is to be different, separate,
clearly distinguished from everything that is profane and ordinary. In
Old Testament times the pots and pans they used in the sacrifical ritual
of the Temple were "holy"...because they were kept especially for that
"sacred" purpose. The priests were "holy" too, because of their special
role in offering the sacrifices. Defining such objects and persons as
"holy" was a way of making clear to the Jewish people that in a very
real sense God didn't belong to this world. He was different and
therefore those who wanted to have dealings with him had to be different
too.
The holiness code that comprises a substantial part of the Book
of Leviticus generated a sacred-secular divide in ancient Israel for
precisely this reason. To embed in every Jewish mind an awareness of the
mystery and transcendence of God... what biblical scholars have
sometimes called his "otherness".
The trouble was, some of them took it too far. The idea of
holiness always has this risk attached to it. In the wrong hands instead
of being a vehicle of witness to the sublime uniqueness of God's
person, holiness can all too easily be perverted into mere religious
eccentricity...a pious theatrical that awakens at best the amusement of
the watching world, and at worst its contempt. The boundary between
being sanctified and being sanctimonious, between being pious and being
downright peculiar, is a frighteningly narrow one. The risk of the
former degenerating into the latter is always greatest when the people
of God feel threatened.
Take the period, for instance, five centuries before Christ, when
the Jews were taken into Babylonian exile. It was a devastating
experience for them. Suddenly they found themselves surrounded by a
totally pagan society. Everything familiar had been snatched away from
them. The instinctive response of any ethnic or religious minority in
such a hostile environment is to become culturally defensive; to guard
with jealous pride every cultural distinctive it is possible to
preserve. And that is exactly how the exilic Jews reacted. They may not
have had the Temple any longer, but they could still circumcise their
children and observe the Sabbath. The might have to speak Aramaic in the
market-place, but they could still use Hebrew in their synagogues.
These cultural markers thus became more important than they had ever
been before. For they were the only way the they could retain their
identity as Jews in the cosmopolitan melting-pot of Babylon where they
were now forced to live.
In many respects it was a perfectly understandable, even laudable
development. We observe exactly the same kind of thing in many
countries today where minority groups strive to preserve their local
dialect or their national dress against a cultural tide that would
homogenize the entire world if it could. But the trouble was that in the
case of the Jews, because of their special self-consciousness as the
chosen people of God, this need for the maintenance of their cultural
distinctiveness got tangled up with their ideas of holiness. They turned
their traditions into a system of regulations and defined holiness as
obedience to these rules.
Take for example the issue of ceremonial washing. The Book of
Leviticus certainly laid down certain regulations regarding ritual
ablutions in its holiness code. But the scribes of post-exilic Judaism
amplified these regulations to such an extent it was considered improper
to eat a single mouthful of food if the appropriate handwashing
procedure had not been observed. Mark, you may have noticed, draws our
attention to this practice with what I sense may be a slightly sarcastic
edge to his tone. (Mark 7:3-4)
Now as I say, this kind of legalistic attitude towards things
like ritual washing became increasingly influential in the post-exilic
period. The original biblical idea of holiness was being subtlely
subverted by the need of Jews to defend their sense of cultural
superiority in a world where they were now politically and economically
powerless. The rabbis vied with one another to pile more and more
regulation on top of the ancient law of Moses. They were convinced that
only by the painstaking observance of such rules could the Jewish people
maintain their cultural distance from the Gentiles and thus preserve
their unique privilege as God's "holy" people.And in the first century
no group was more zealous in its conformity to those rabbinical rules
than the Pharisees.
Now in some respects the Pharisees have had a bit of a raw deal
at the hands of Christian commentators over the years. The very word
"Pharisee" has a pejorative, almost villainous overtone to it, which is
really unfair. For there was much about the Pharisees that was
admirable. (i) this was a group who believed passionately in the
inspiration of scripture and devoted themselves to the rigorous
exposition of the biblical text. (ii) this was a group who zealously
pursued personal holiness (iii) this was group who scrupulously tithed
their income. (iv) this was group who enthusiastically sought to win new
converts to their faith.
Who does that remind you of? I have to say ... more»
To the list of the enemies threatening the security of the United States, the Pentagon has added WikiLeaks.org, a tiny online source of information and documents that governments and corporations around the world would prefer to keep secret.
The Pentagon assessed the danger WikiLeaks.org posed to the Army in a report marked “unauthorized disclosure subject to criminal sanctions.” It concluded that “WikiLeaks.org represents a potential force protection, counterintelligence, OPSEC and INFOSEC threat to the U.S. Army” — or, in plain English, a threat to Army operations and information.
WikiLeaks, true to its mission to publish materials that expose secrets of all kinds, published the 2008 Pentagon report about itself on Monday.
Lt. Col. Lee Packnett, an Army spokesman, confirmed that the report was real. Julian Assange, the editor of WikiLeaks, said the concerns the report raised were hypothetical.
