The Rest of the Old Old Story

I’d like to direct those of you who read this to the commentary section of my Rest of the Old, Old Story site. I’m going to start updating it, beginning with the things found in today’s blog on Jeremiah 6.

Why should you read a commentary put together by me (especially one as sparse as is mine is right now)?

No reason, really, unless you’re reading this blog because it helps you. If this blog helps you, then the commentary will, too. In fact, anyone busy with the Lord’s work of building the church in contrast to the clubs and institutions of modern Christendom will find the commentaries delightful and encouraging.

Commentaries are not the Bible. They are not timeless. Commentaries represent the time they are written in, and they apply Scripture to the present age. I can say things about the application of Scripture to our day that Matthew Henry never could because he’s no longer alive. He’s not seen our day.

Commentaries also provide historical and social information concerning Bible times. Matthew Henry does that better than me, so it’s worth reading more professional commentaries, too.

Okay, on to today’s topic:

Jeremiah 6

We can only do part of this chapter in a blog, obviously. Otherwise, it would be way too long.

v. 10: To whom shall I speak and testify, that they may hear? Behold, their ear is uncircumcised, and they cannot listen. Behold, the Word of the Lord is a reproach to them; they have no delight in it.

This verse speaks for itself well enough. There are those that wish to speak the Word of the Lord (in context, this is Yahweh himself), and there are those that just aren’t interested in it because it condemns them.

Let’s go on.

v. 13: For from the least of them to the greatest of them, everyone is given to greediness. From the prophet to the priest, everyone deals falsely.

Isn’t that the way it is today? Our well-known speakers—men like Creflo Dollar, T. D. Jakes, Benny Hinn, and Joel Osteen—are given to greediness and to teaching greediness to others.

It’s important to point out here that Jeremiah is not mentioning this as something good. Nowadays, that’s not clear. It seems a lot of Christians thin that a lust for fame and fortune is a good thing.

God has one more very important charge against these prophets and priests:

v. 14: They have treated the wounds of my people lightly, saying, “Peace, peace!,” when there is no peace.

This verse is significant. The wounds among those known as God’s people are great. They are significant. But when those wounds are pointed out, the priests of the present prosperity cry out, “Peace, peace!”

Listen some time to Christian radio. If you’re willing to listen for a couple hours to Christian talk and preaching, then not a day will go by that you don’t hear some preacher or radio host talk about the sad state of the churches. They’ll mention division, worldliness, a lack of care for one another, the immorality of church members and how very much like the world the churches are.

That’s alright for them to do because they are offering “light” treatment. They want you to pray a little more, or read your Bible a little more, or assuage your conscience by giving to this or that charity (or worse, to them to pad their pockets more than they already are).

Those of us, however, who are calling for radical treatment are not borne so lightly. We are outcasts, and when we point out the very same problems that the radio hosts point out, those problems are denied. The cry of “Peace, peace!” goes out with great vehemence, loud enough to silence us, much as the Ephesians silenced Paul with their shouts about their goddess Artemis.

And so they go merrily along, racing towards judgment because God does not take immorality, greediness, division, selfishness, and worldliness as lightly as the prophets and priests of our modern churches do.

I have mentioned prosperity preachers, but please don’t be confused. Worldliness, division, and lack of care is as apparent in almost all the churches of institutional Christianity. It is not limited to the prosperity churches.

Because the leaders of the people of God were not “ashamed” about treating their wounds lightly, God said, “They shall fall among them that fall.”

There will be a day of reckoning! Here or there!

God’s Solution

But God has a solution:

v. 16: Thus says the Lord, “Stand by the roads and look. Ask for the ancient paths, what is the good way, and walk in them. Then you shall find rest for your souls.

People hate restorationists. They prefer to adapt the message to the modern age.

Surely it’s apparent that there must be some adaptation. Every culture has problems and evils that are different from other cultures. However, their cannot be so much adaptation that the ancient paths are lost.

It is God who said, “Ask for the ancient paths … and walk in them.”

Today denominationalism is accepted even though it is such an obvious form of division that the world scoffs at the inability of “Christians” to get along. We should have known this would be the case. Jesus prayed that his disciples would be as united with one another as he is with the Father. He said that this would be proof to the world that the Father sent him (Jn. 17:20-23).

There is only two responses to this. One, we “Christians” repent and unite.

This course is impossible, as all “Christians” admit. Why is it impossible? Because things are the way they are, and “Christians” aren’t interested enough in pleasing Jesus Christ to actually ask for the ancient paths and walk on them. They’d rather have their wounds treated superficially, with a little more prayer and Bible study—or at least with talking about more prayer and Bible study.

Which brings us to the second response. Two, we admit that these aren’t Christians, but satanic counterfeits raised up by the devil to bring dishonor to the name of Jesus Christ. Then, we discontinue our fellowship with them, obey Jesus Christ, and deny ourselves enough to unite with those that we have difficulty uniting with.

Getting Down to Practicalities

Unite on what basis? Who are the true Christians, and who are the satanic counterfeits? Isn’t it arrogant to try and sort them? Isn’t that an attempt to divide the wheat from the tares, a process that’s supposed to wait until judgment day?

No, it’s not. It’s Biblically commanded. We are not to have fellowship with wicked people, but we are to put them out from among us.

Not only that, we are not to confuse a Christian club that meets twice a week to give long speeches about the Bible with an actual Scriptural church. Churches meet, that’s true. But a meeting—and certainly not a meeting place—is not the church.

The church is a family, the household of God. Use what you know about a functional family to form a picture in your mind of the church. Don’t use the Moose Lodge or Boy Scouts to get your picture.

Really, pause a minute and think. Do you get what I’m saying?

Okay, that said, on what basis can you unite. Who are the true Christians, and who are the satanic counterfeits?

Unfortunately, the answer to that is pretty long. But I’ll tell you what. Here in the next few minutes, I will put up an unfinished, unedited version of a booklet I call The Sure Foundation of God. You can open it up and download it for free. The formatting is pitiful at the moment, but it’s no problem to read. It’s also not done, but the unfinished parts will only provide smoothness, no additional information. It will make a great study guide, even if it’s a less than adequate booklet.

That booklet will provide a good start on answering that question.

It’s 1:38 Central Standard Time on Dec. 31, 2009. Give me about half an hour to get back here with a link for the booklet.

It only took 14 minutes: Just click here. It’s a .pdf, so you may need to right click and save.

It is a basic premise of the scientific method that you need to prove what you believe.

When Albert Einstein suggested that massive objects can exert enough gravitational pull to bend space, he had to prove it. The way he did that was by waiting for a total eclipse, then looking for a star that was known to be behind the sun. Despite the fact that it was behind the sun, the star could be seen in the darkness of the eclipse next to the sun.

That was possible because space around the sun is bent by the sun’s gravitational pull. Light bends with it, so the light from that star curves slightly as it passes the sun, making it visible to Einstein when he looked for it.

We can learn from Einstein.

Unproven Christian Theories

Today, everyone fancies themselves a Bible interpreter. A little reading, a little revelation from the Holy Spirit, and, bing!, they’re ready to teach the rest of us what’s true.

We could learn something from science. It’s high time for those who say their Bible interpretations are true to prove they’re true.

Is that not what Jesus taught?

Beware of false prophets … You shall know them by their fruit … Every healthy tree brings forth good fruit, but a rotten tree brings forth evil fruit. A healthy tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, nor can a rotten tree bring forth good fruit … Therefore, by their fruit you will know them. (Matt. 7:15-20)

Today we think that true and false prophets (or teachers) are known by our agreement or disagreement with their Bible interpretation.

Not according to Jesus. According to Jesus, they are known by their results.

Do their teachings produce believing people full of grace (Eph. 2:8-9) that produce good works (Eph. 2:10), a zealousness for good works (Tit. 2:14; 3:8), and love from a pure heart, a good conscience, and a sincere faith (1 Tim. 1:5)? This should be the fruit of a good teacher, not Bible interpretations that you agree with.

Who are you, and why should your interpretation of a Bible passage be significant to any teacher, to God, or even to you yourself?

Testing what you think

Today I read an article about friction. We all understand friction. My foot slides on ice, and it does not slide on my carpet. That’s because ice provides little friction while my carpet provides much friction, as any rug-burned child can testify.

It turns out, however, that we don’t know what causes friction. We think rough surfaces provide friction and smooth surfaces don’t, but scientists have been able to prove that isn’t true. (Compare flat rubber with roughed-up ice, for example.)

One scientist came up with a brilliant idea. He speculated that electrons moving across the surface of the two materials cause drag (friction).

The article’s response to this speculation is worth noting:

It was an exciting idea, but was it right? Krim had just the tool to test this hypothesis: a quartz microbalance.

Oh, that we Christians would respond the same way! “That’s an exciting Bible interpretation, but is it right?”

I read a similar article about viral videos.

In this case, the author of the article was asked to find out what causes a video to go viral (i.e., to become wildly popular by word of mouth). However, the author’s bosses were not going to simply take his word for it. He had to prove he understood it by making a viral video himself!

These non-Christians understand what Jesus said: The proof is in the pudding.

Christian Examples

I’ll give an example. I’ve been listening to a brilliant teaching about Christian leadership for nearly 30 years. This teaching says that Christian leaders should be “among” the flock rather than lording over it. It emphasizes the fact that Jesus said we have only one Master—the Lord himself—and that we are all brothers.

This teaching, on the surface, is obviously true. It’s not a Bible interpretation; it’s practically a Bible quote. It pulls from 1 Peter 5:2 and Matt. 23:8 almost verbatim.

Great, no problem there. We are definitely allowed to quote the Bible.

The problem is that those who taught me those things applied it by opposing all authoritative leadership. They encouraged leaders to let the people of God be “connected directly to the head” and be led by Jesus Christ wherever he would lead them.

We have now left quoting the Bible, and we are teaching an application based on Bible interpretation. At that point, we need to ask, “Is this true?,” which is the equivalent of asking, “Does this work?”

Since I am not speaking hypothetically, I will answer that question for you. It is not true, and it does not work.

This form of leadership is espoused by Gene Edwards and Frank Viola throughout their very popular books. I have watched many house churches apply their leadership advice for around 25 years now.

To this day I do not know of one house church that has grown and prospered with that sort of leadership. In fact, I do not know of one movement in the history of Christianity that has experienced growth in size, spirituality, or power except based on the strong, authoritative leadership of one or more men.

The teaching that shepherds ought to let their flock simply be led by Christ is false. It does not work. It’s fruit is awful … as far as I know, 100% awful. And if the fruit is bad, then the tree is rotten.

Interpreting the Bible Jesus’ Way: By the Scientific Method

We don’t throw out the Bible for “whatever works.” However, when something doesn’t work for anyone at any time and flies in the face of the testimony of church history, then we can be absolutely confident that teaching is false.

The Bible says that leaders should be among the flock. It says that they shouldn’t take the title of “Master,” “Rabbi,” or “Teacher.” It says that leaders should be among the flock, not lording it over them.

This is true. Those are Biblical commands, one from our Lord himself and one from an apostle. We should obey those commands.

The apostle Paul did not lord it over the flock of God. The apostle Paul did not take titles that he should not have had. The apostle Paul was among the flock, not over it.

The apostle Paul was also an authoritative leader who said, “Let him who thinks he is spiritual acknowledge that the things I write are the commands of Christ” (1 Cor. 14:37). He wrote letters in advance to the Corinthian church just so that he would not have to show up and use his “authority, which the Lord has given us for building up and not for your destruction” (2 Cor. 10:8).

Insightful Bible Interpretation?

Is this teaching insightful Bible interpretation on my part?

Not at all! It leaps out at those who are paying attention, as Jesus commanded, to what works. Those people will listen to the right teachers, and they will put the right Scriptures together into the right teaching.

And it will be proven by the results.

A good understanding have all those who do his commandments. (Ps. 111:10)

Someone wrote me telling me that they’re reading the early Christian writings, including David Bercot’s Writings. Then he asked me if I have any advice.

For those that want to live the life that the apostles and early Christians lived, I do have advice. It is as follows:

I can’t really tell what advice you’re asking for. Bercot’s Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up is a terrific introduction to the early Christian writers. I can’t think of anything that motivates people to actually read those writings as well as that book does.

I can give this very general advice. You can see in the early writings just how important the church was to them. That was no surprise to me, as I ran across writings by Gene Edwards on the church almost 30 years ago. Ever since I’ve been longing to be a part of something that resembled the churches in Acts–together, sharing all things, intent on one purpose, sold out for God.

That desire has produced quite a journey over the last 25 years. Having wound up with people who are together, sharing all things, intent on one purpose, and sold out for God, I can testify that the church is just as important to God now as it was 1900 years ago. The Scripture says that all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. That’s most true in the church! What a spiritual impact we make when we join forces with other believers, becoming a real family in Jesus Christ!

Today, we have to have flexibility because people come from such different backgrounds. No matter how much truth we have (or think we have), we have to give people time to come to that truth. However, we don’t have to give people time to make a true, wholehearted commitment to Jesus Christ. You can’t have a church of people other than that.

Yes, there’s always tares. Those are people that say they’re disciples, and maybe they even look like disciples, but they prove over time not to be. We’ll always have people like that in our midst. In the Scriptures and in the early church writings, we see that the churches had people with problems–sometimes bad problems.

Nonetheless, the Gospel preached by the apostles and the early church was that Jesus Christ is Lord and we have to submit to him. Those people need to be gathered, and they need to learn together what’s important to God, laying aside their personal opinions. Even God can’t fill a cup that’s already full.

You’ll see in the early writings what an emphasis they had on following Christ. 1 Clement is a good example, but all the writings are the same. Christians are marked out by denying themselves, not returning evil for evil, honesty, etc.

I’ve given my life to preaching Christ’s Gospel. Deny yourselves, take up your cross, and follow me was his message. He also prayed for our unity, and the early churches put incredible emphasis in the unity of disciples (not merely those who “believe” but are openly disobedient).

My advice is to follow Christ and to do it with all those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

The page I’d direct you to on my web site is my doctrine page. The church I’m a part of is Rose Creek Village, which is at http://www.rosecreekvillage.com. May God grant you grace to follow him and to have brothers and sisters with you as you do!

Today I read another article about a Protestant becoming Catholic through the reading of the early church fathers. Is this really where the writings of the church fathers lead?

I’ve been reading the writings of the 2nd through 4th century fathers for 20 years now, and I have never thought about becoming Catholic. On the other hand, the person who introduced me to the early church fathers became an Anglican priest–for a while–because the Anglicans claim apostolic succession like the Roman Catholics do.

I don’t think the early church fathers lead in any way toward Catholicism, but there is a reason that people are confused into believing that they do.

It’s because Protestants neither care about nor understand the church.

The Church Is the What???

I read a blog one day by a former Protestant pastor turned Catholic priest. He said the turning point for him was when a Catholic asked him what is “the pillar and support of the truth.”

He answered, of course, that the pillar and support of the truth is the Scriptures. So the Catholic told him, “Why don’t you go read 1 Tim. 3:15.”

1 Tim 3:15 says, of course, that the church, not the Bible, is the pillar and support of the truth.

He was on his way to becoming Catholic.

Which Church?

The question every Protestant will ask himself when he reads 1 Tim. 3:15 is, “Which church?” Which church is the pillar and support of the truth?

The Roman Catholics think it’s obvious. So do I.

But I think the Roman Catholics are obviously wrong. Here’s why.

How Can a Church Be the Pillar and Support of the Truth?

Rather than listening to Catholic reasoning or Protestant reasoning, why don’t we look at what the apostles said about the truth. How was someone supposed to know the truth.

Twice the Scriptures talk about how to escape corrupt men who try to seduce us away from the truth. Once, it’s in Ephesians 4:11-16. There the combination of, one, church leaders equipping us to build the church and , two, speaking the truth in love to one another leads to our being solid in the truth.

The other is 1 Jn. 2:26-27, where John tells us that the anointing will lead us into what is true and not a lie.

One important point Protestants miss when they read 1 Jn. 2:27 is that the “yous” in that verse are plural. The anointing will lead us, not me, into the truth.

Let’s think about this a moment …

How are we being led into truth? How are we being protected from error?

According to Ephesians 4 and 1 John 2, the church–which 1 Tim. 3:15 tells us the pillar and support of the truth–will guide us into truth by the following method:

1. Church leaders equip us to be beneficial to the church … to build it up (Eph. 4:12)
2. We speak the truth in love to one another (Eph. 4:13-16)
3. The anointing–the guidance of God–leads us together into the truth

Now that we’ve got the how, let’s get back to the which …

Which Church Was That Again?

So what church can lay hold of these promises of God? Any church can, right?

No, actually not. Only pliable churches can lay hold of these promises of God. Only churches that can be led by the anointing can lay hold of these promises.

The Roman Catholic Church is not pliable.

Also, only local  churches can lay hold of these promises. You have to have Christians gathering together, seeking God together, and speaking the truth in love to one another. That requires a local church.

The Roman Catholic Church may have some local churches, but it claims to seek and know truth at the heights of hierarchy. It most certainly does not come from “lay” people.

The Roman Catholic Church Has Hijacked the Church Fathers!

Because Protestants have foolishly ignored the wonderful heritage of the apostles–the traditions taught by the apostles themselves and preserved in their early churches–the Roman Catholics have hijacked the fathers. They run an ongoing pretense that the church fathers are Roman Catholic!

They’re not!

There was no pope in the early church.  Apostolic succession had to do with the preservation of truth, not authority.

The former Episcopal priest mentioned in the article that starts this blog took Cyprian of Carthage as his patron saint. He says:

He’s the one who said, ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation.’

In fact, Cyprian is one of many early Christians who said such a thing. Ireneaus, for example, writing some 70 years before Cyprian and less than a century after the death of the apostle John, says:

It is not necessary to seek the truth among others which it is easy to obtain from the church; since the apostles, like a rich man in a bank, lodged in her hand most copiously all things pertaining to the truth, so that every man, whoever will, can withdraw from her the water of life. She is the entrance to life; all others are thieves and robbers. (Against Heresies, III:4:1)

But which church?

Remember, there was no pope in the church in Irenaeus’ day. In fact, Irenaeus twice had to save the Roman church from the failings of its bishops, once when Victor was being seduced by the Valentinians and once when Eleutherus wanted to split the churches of the empire over the date on which to celebrate Passover (which we now call Easter).

The churches did consult with one another. Irenaeus adds:

Suppose there arise a dispute relative to some important question among us. Should we not have recourse to the most ancient churches with which the the apostles held constant intercourse and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question? (ibid.)

Notice, however, that Irenaeus does not suggest consulting Rome.  In fact, in the matter of the Valentinians and the dispute over Passover, Rome consulted him!

He recommends going to any church that can answer the question.

The Roman Catholic Church loves to make a big issue out of the fact that Irenaeus listed the succession of bishops in the Roman church from Peter to Irenaeus’ own time. But why did Irenaeus choose Rome?

Since, however, it would be tedious in such a volume as this to reckon up the successions of all the churches … (ibid., III:3:2)

All Irenaeus had was a collection of churches. There was no hierarchy for him to point to as the official organization that offered salvation to the world. When he spoke of a church, he meant a local church, just as Paul and John did when they spoke of the preservation and finding of truth within the church.

Missed By Protestants and Catholics Alike

There is a Protestant translation of the early church fathers called The Ante-Nicene Fathers.  Despite being Protestant, they make the same mistake that Roman Catholics do, substituting some denomination or hierarchy for the local church.

In Tertullian’s brilliant work, The Demurrer Against Heretics, he writes about the truth that comes from the apostles through the churches. Yet even though he uses the word “churches,” in the plural, five times in chapter 21 of that work, the Protestant translators subtitle the chapter, “All Doctrine True Which Comes Through the Church from the Apostles.”

They’re wrong! All doctrine is true which comes through the churches from the apostles!

It’s part of his argument! He argues, “Is it likely that so many churches, and they so large, should have gone astray into one and the same faith?” (ibid., 28).

Sure it’s likely, if there’s a pope. If there’s no pope, however, and all the churches of his day (A.D. 200 – 220) were independent, then his argument has weight.

Which Church? A Practical Application

I recommend reading the church fathers. I recommend believing that there’s no salvation outside the church. After all, it’s the Scriptures themselves that tell us that if we are not exhorted daily, then we are in danger of hardening by the deceitfulness of sin (Heb. 3:13). You need the church, as Paul argues so effectively in 1 Cor. 12. You cannot tell the other members you don’t need them.

But once you believe there’s no salvation outside the church, then you have to get in the church that those early church fathers were talking about: the local church.

Which one is that?

It’s the one that’s scattered through all the denominations, split up and fighting with one another over stupid doctrines designed by men that are offensive to God.

It’s the one whose members are in fellowship with fakes, trying to reach out to them and smile at them in the pew next to them. They don’t know those people in the pew next to them, but they can be reasonably confident those people do not want to forsake all their possessions for Christ, open their homes to destitute brothers and sisters, or risk their lives ministering in the inner city or overseas. Shoot, those people in the pews haven’t even heard that they can’t belong to Christ if they don’t hate their family, deny themselves, and forsake their possessions (Luke 14:26-33).

We have to rescue that badly-divided, ineffective, almost invisible church. We have to gather those that have heard the Gospel of complete submission to Christ so that they can show the world around them what Jesus can do through people wholly submitted to him.

We have to gather them so that the truth can be gathered once again into the only container that can hold it: the local church.

I have heard a thousand complaints–from supposed but false Christians–about Jesus Christ’s statement that none of us can be his disciple without forsaking all our possessions (Luke 14:33). What does that mean? I’m on a computer. I’m wearing clothes. I’m sitting at a table in a warm house. In what way have I forsaken all my possessions?

That decision isn’t up to me. The truth of Jesus Christ’s statement is revealed and known when set upon “the pillar and support of the truth.” The pillar and support of the truth is a pliable and local church–nothing else.

Radical Christianity and Radical Restoration of the Church

When I say restoration, I don’t mean restoring some doctrine. I mean restoring the local church. I mean gathering those that love God with their whole hearts and who have wholeheartedly submitted to Christ, then letting them know they no longer need to fellowship with half-hearts. In fact, it’s divisive do do so.

That’s radical. Most people would say it’s impossible.

It’s not; it can’t be.

There isn’t any other church, and we need the salvation it possesses. In that church, there is great grace. In that church, there is a power unknown to those who have not experienced the daily fellowship of the local church, a gathered group of disciples, who are being taught by God as he bestows his anointing in subjection to the teaching of the apostles as found in the Scriptures.

Today, there is a huge flow of people leaving institutional Christianity to meet in homes. This is a terrific opportunity to be taught of God! This is a terrific opportunity to throw off denominational bonds and unite the disciples!

It needs two things:

1. It needs to preach a true Gospel. Jesus calls us to wholeheartedly abandon our lives to follow him.
2. It needs pliability and flexibility. It must be able to be taught by God. It cannot be focused on or based in doctrine carried over from denominations based in intellectual interpretations of the Scripture. The Scripture was written to produce good works in disciples (2 Tim. 3:16-17), not create ridiculous reasonings and doubtful disputations.

It’s worth it.

Genesis 1:14-19 describes the creation of the sun, moon, and stars on the 4th day.

Think about that sentence a moment.

What sort of days happen without the sun, moon, or stars? Can we really be discussing 24-hour days,  whether or not Genesis says there was an evening and a morning, when there’s no sun?

Some 1800 years ago, a respected Christian teacher, an elder in the church in Caesarea, wrote:

Now who is there, pray, possessed of understanding, that will regard the statement as appropriate, that the first day, and the second, and the third, in which also both evening and morning are mentioned, existed without sun, and moon, and stars—the first day even without a sky? (Origen, De Principiis, V:1:16)

Did Origen simply reject the authority of Scriptures because he thought that no one with any sense could fathom days without a sun? No, he adds:

In [the Scriptures] were intermingled not a few things by which, the historical order of the narrative being interrupted and broken up, the attention of the reader might be recalled, by the impossibility of the case, to an examination of the inner meaning. (ibid.)

In other words, because the historical order is impossible, we’re supposed to look for the hidden meaning.

That’s what we’ve been doing for the first three days of creation.

A Greater and Lesser Light

Have you ever noticed that the sun is not called the sun in Genesis one? It’s called the greater light that rules the day. And the moon is not called the moon; it is called the lesser light that rules the night.

It doesn’t take great insight to see the “hidden” meaning of night, darkness, day, and light in the Scriptures. We Christians are “children of the light and of the day” (1 Thess. 5:5). Jesus once said that “night is coming, in which no man can work.” In the same Scripture he says, “I must work while it is still day” (Jn. 9:4).

Despite the fact that Jesus said it was day while he was here, and that night was coming when he left. However, though he refers to himself as the light of the world, Paul also refers to the church as the light of the world. Why is it night if Jesus left us as the light of the world in his place?

Genesis one answers that for us. Jesus is the greater light. He rules the day. The church, however, is the lesser light that rules the night.

Like the moon, the church has no light of its own. Its light is the light of Jesus Christ. It’s job is not to produce its own light. Its job is to behold the light of the sun by rising above the earth, then reflecting that light to those who dwell in darkness.

Like the moon, the church has waxed and waned throughout its history, varying the amount of light there has been on the earth.

The Stars

Stars are said to represent all sorts of things in Scripture.

When we enter our glory, Paul says that we will vary in glory as the stars do. Jesus Christ himself is represented by the morning star, which is actually a planet: Venus. (Depending on where Venus is at in relation to the earth, it can also be the evening star.) Angels are also represented by stars in Rev. 12 (possibly), where satan is said to throw down 1/3 of the stars from heaven.

In fact, in that same chapter, twelve stars represent the tribes of Israel in a figure pulled from Joseph’s dream in Genesis 37.

Signs and Seasons

In Genesis 1, though, stars are particularly said to be in the sky for signs and seasons.

A star led the magi to Israel when Christ was born. Stars are also the only indicators, besides the weather, of what season we are in. Today we have calculated the orbit of the earth so precisely that we can simply count the days of the year on a calendar. That calendar, and the number of the days of the year, are based on the stars. Humans can tell that we’ve made one circumnavigation of the sun by stars returning to the same position that they were in the year before.

Today we recognize from the calendar that the beautiful constellation of Orion begins to rise in the east at dusk around this time of year with Sirius, the dogstar and the brightest star there is, following behind it. In the past, however, it worked the opposite way. Humans knew that winter was coming on because Orion and Sirius began to rise in the east in the evening. No matter the temperature, they knew that winter was about to come on hard and full (assuming they lived in the northern hemisphere).

The early church taught that these cycles are a sign of resurrection. God has set nature in continual cycle. The earth goes to sleep over winter, but it rises anew each spring. The days shrink to minimal length, but they climb again to warmth and long hours of light.

Early Christians marveled at the orderliness of nature. Today we can explain all of this. Orbits, gravity, and other natural laws can cause us to lose our sense of wonder. No matter how much we appreciate the incredible knowledge science has garnered, may we never lose our sense of wonder. It has been set deep inside us by God.

David wrote:

Day to day utters speech, and night after night gives knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. (Ps. 19:2-3)

It is good to stand in awe. Whether the orbit and spin of the earth happened by gravity compressing clouds of molecules into a spherical planet over a billion years or by divine fiat in an instant, it is the hand of God that put us where we are, spinning as we do at nearly 1,000 mph and circling the sun at 66,000 mph, this earth and its cycles are technological marvels that should move us to “be still and know that he is God” (Ps. 46:10).

It is in us to do, that awe placed deep in our hearts by the very breath of God.

The Testimony of God

To me, more than anything, day 4 of creation represents the testimony of God to who he is. The more we learn of the heavens, the more majestic God appears. As we’ve grown, our God has grown as well–or at least our understanding of him has.

The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows his handiwork.

Truly, we can say with God that we see that it is good.

I’ve taken a couple days to address day three of creation because it stumped me for a while. “Hmm,” I thought, “Maybe day 3 really is just about saying God created dry land and plants.”

I really didn’t believe it, though, so I waited. Sometimes I have to seek God just a little bit more. It’s not good for us to adopt a cavalier attitude. Some treasures have to be sought for; you have to diligently ask.

The thing that jumped out to me today was the trees. Gen. 1:11 says, “Let the earth … bring forth the fruit tree yielding fruit after its kind.”

What about the other trees?

Had Moses never heard of a cedar tree? A fir tree? An oak tree? Not all trees are fruit trees. Why are only the fruit trees mentioned?

In the creation story of Genesis one, only edible things are mentioned. Nothing inedible is created on any of the six days of creation.

Have you ever noticed that?

There’s Only Food in Genesis One

It seems apparent to me that this was no accident. On day six, after the creation of man, God says that humans are to have dominion over all the fish, birds, reptiles, and mammals that he formed on day 5 and 6, and he says that the herbs and fruit trees he formed on day 3 are for our food. He doesn’t mention the grass, but the grass is food for the animals (and if grains are included among the grasses rather than the herbs, then grass is food for us as well).

Now God doesn’t say animals are food for humans in Genesis one, but after the flood, in Genesis 9:2, he gives a list that uses the same wording as day 5 and 6 of Genesis one.

Atheists and skeptics like to suggest that there are two creation stories, one in Genesis one and one in Genesis two; that there are two flood stories mingled into one, the one requiring seven clean animals on the ark and the other requiring a pair of every animal; and finally, that all of the Pentateuch (the 5 books of Moses) is a combination of works compiled later.

Ok, maybe. It’s been 3,000 years since the Pentateuch was written, so who knows. Maybe it wasn’t all planned together as one consistent message by man. That makes the inspiration and breath of God all the more amazing because the spiritual message God put in the Scriptures is consistent, amazingly consistent.

Genesis 9:2 hearkens back to the creatures created on day 5 and day 6 in Genesis one, carefully reminding us that only food is mentioned in the creation story. Nor is it an accident. Do you think the Israelites were unaware that the fruit tree was not the only tree on earth? Were they unaware that edible and medicinal herbs are not the only plants that grow in the ground?

No, they knew. The creation story of Genesis one mentions only food … on purpose.

Why Only Food?

Because skeptical, scoffing evolutionists are wrong.

If you read my blog on any regular basis, then you know that I don’t think skeptical, scoffing evolutionists are wrong about evolution. I believe all life evolved. I don’t believe the soul of man evolved. I believe it was breathed into us by the breath of God, but I believe our bodies evolved. The chain from Ardipithecus ramidus through the australopithecines and the hominids is too consistent in time, geography, and morphology for me to deny. I think the consistency of that chain is as much the testimony of God as is the consistency of Genesis.

However, skeptics and scoffers love to use evolution as an argument that man is not purpose. Man, they say, is a simple lucky side branch on the evolutionary tree. There’s no purpose to us, it could just as well have been some insect that evolved to be the dominant species on the planet. In fact, dinosaurs ruled the earth for millions of years, and we’ve only ruled it for a few thousand years. We’re meaningless; just a side show, not an end.

I wonder what double blind study or what powerful empirical evidence they used to come to that conclusion?

God doesn’t agree. The creation story is all about man. It’s not about creation in general. It’s about man. That’s why it doesn’t matter if the science is accurate. It doesn’t matter whether the sky is really a solid dome (which is what the word firmament strongly implies) with the sun, moon, and stars in it. It doesn’t matter whether water can really be above the stars. It doesn’t matter whether grass, herbs, and trees can grow before the sun is created.

Genesis one isn’t about those things. It is only about man.

Because man is the purpose of creation.

So it took 14.7 billion years to go from the big bang to us (assuming scientists are right about all that). So what? Scoffers and skeptics want to use  science to argue against our being the purpose of God, but they ignore the fact that science has seen that “time” is almost a meaningless thought. I’m reading the June 2007 issue of Discover, and it has an article entitled “Does Time Exist?”

From our perspective, it looks like it took a very, very long time to get to us. But from God’s?

We don’t have any way of knowing. It could have been a fraction of a second, or it could have been much longer that 14.7 billion years would seem to us. This is a big universe. Maybe–indeed, probably–the earth is not the only place he’s working with life.

Anyway, enough of all my scientific speculations. The point is that Genesis one announces loudly that its concern is the creation of man, nothing else. Everything else is the side show; God cares about man, and it is man into which he breathed the breath of life.

Sorry, One More Science Comment

We keep finding out about some amazing abilities of animals. Apes can count, and one managed to obtain a several hundred work vocabulary. Parrots can not only distinguish between metal, plastic, wood, and various shapes, but they can name them when presented to them. One bonobo chimp had a 3,000 word vocabulary and African Grey Parrots have vocabularies up to 2,000 words.

It is not our abilities that make us unique. Yes, we can talk better that chimps and parrots, a lot better. Yes, we can reason better than any animal on earth. Yes, we’re the ones who have dominated the earth, not lions or dolphins.

However, it is not our intelligence that makes us unique. God chose us, gave us a soul, and entered into fellowship with us.

In the long run, it will be our eternal life that makes us unique. God has called us into fellowship with himself, offered us immortality, and made us not children of the earth but children of God.

Genesis one is not some general description of creation. It is the choosing of man as the heirs of God.

Now that’s intense truth!

I was really having a hard time getting anything out of day 2 of creation. Maybe Answers in Genesis can deal with the science of having water above the firmament which holds the sun, moon, and stars, but I can’t. How do you have water above the stars?

And I don’t think Genesis one is about science. What does God care about whether we understand science? We didn’t know about galaxies being millions and billions of light years away until the last few decades. Surely that isn’t important.

God cares about transforming us into his image, making us sons and daughters. So what do the waters above the firmament and the waters below the firmament have to do with that?

As I looked at it this morning, that was a mystery to me. So I waited, hoping God would give me something.

I think he did. Here’s my best shot. That’s what teachers do on subjects like this. They ask God and give it their best shot. Teachers need to get the important traditions of the Church right; those are the basic teachings of Scripture. Then, afterwards, if teaching is really their gift from God, then God will give them some insight into deeper things for one purpose: the building up of the saints.

It’s good for us to be excited about God and excited about the Scriptures. Teachings like these help that happen.

One Day Wasn’t So Good

What God showed me (I hope it was God) is that day 2 is the only day where nothing is said to be good.

Is that interesting, or what?

Now the typology is simple. Water can represent people, and it can represent purity and washing. In this case, I think it represents both. God separated heavenly wisdom and heavenly beings from earthly wisdom and earthly beings.

And this wasn’t good.

It wasn’t good, but it was necessary.

What encouraged me this morning was the tremendous full feeling I got as I saw that God had everything under control from the beginning. He had a plan, and nothing on earth was a surprise to him.

Now, I already knew that, of course. All of us Christians know that. But it was really driven home for me in this passage, and I hope I can pass that feeling on.

God knew there would be a rift between him and the earth. Right at the beginning he separated the waters above from the waters below. He knew there would be problems on earth, so he preserved heavenly beings and heavenly wisdom by pulling them far away from us … beyond the sun, moon, and stars, in fact.

That was not good. It was just necessary.

Heavenly Wisdom, Heavenly Things, and Heavenly Places

Those things were preserved. Seemingly, they are far away, but God doesn’t deal in distances. Science is discovering that space and time are not necessarily what they seem. They can be bridged in ways we don’t yet understand.

God understands, though. He’s beyond space and time, and heaven is not a planet in some solar system. Its distance cannot be measured in light years. It is further than the stars, but it is also near at hand.

(Okay, my explanation is just my guess. But the idea, the idea that heaven is not a matter of space and time and is not a planet–I think that’s a given; we Christians know it to be true.)

Here we are now. Earth has already fallen. All of creation is groaning, waiting for the deliverance that will one day come with the glorious revelation of the sons of God.

While we wait, there are things that did not fall. They are preserved. There is a heavenly wisdom. There are “things above,” where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of the Father. Those things are accessible to us who have been born again.

This is just one more evidence that “you must be born again.” You will not be able to access the pure waters that come from above by good works. You will not pull things down from heaven by your own righteousness.

There is a righteousness that comes from God, and if we will walk in that righteousness, much comes with it. The things that come with it are from above, from the Father of Lights, which home there is no shadow of changing.

The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceful, gentle, and willing to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. (James 3:17)

Before we go to day 3, I need to do a short, interim post on righteousness being a gift to the upright in heart and the difference between righteousness and uprightness in heart. Maybe I’ll make a web page and link it from here. I can’t do that right now, though. I have to go grade a friend’s son’s math exercise so he can pass his next test …

I started back through Genesis today, and I decided to really devote myself to the principles of Scripture interpretation that I talk about all the time. It made for a very short but very pleasant reading of only a part of Genesis chapter one.

In its early days, the church taught that Jesus came to fulfill the Law in the sense of “expand” or “bring to fullness.”  The Law given to Moses was necessarily limited because it was given to a fleshly people, not a spiritual one. When Jesus came to change us, giving us a new heart and pouring out his Spirit on all flesh, then the Law could be brought to its fullness.

What does that mean?

Well, one of the things that it means is that when the Scriptures address split hooves and the chewing of cud, we can forget about pigs and cows. As Jesus said, nothing going into a man can defile him. The food God really cares about is his Word, for man lives by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

If you wish to be clean, this is what you must partake of. You must fellowship with those who meditate on the Word of God and who separate from the world. (This tie between meditating on the Word and chewing the cud used to be well-known enough that the word “rumination” still means both things.)

Genesis One and the Creation

So when I opened to Genesis chapter one this morning, I was not looking for a step-by-step, scientific description of the creation of the world. I was looking for the things God really cares about … spiritual things.

The stage opens on this world with the Spirit of God hovering over the face of a massive sea. There is not emptiness. There is the Spirit of God hovering. God waited no time at all to begin his work. He has been watching and setting the stage from the very beginning.

On day one, the very first thing that God creates–though water already exists and, seemingly, a globe as well–is light. God separated the light from the darkness, and he called the light day and the darkness night.

Day and night and light and darkness are constantly used in Scripture to represent the conflict between God and satan and between knowledge and ignorance.

God set up this battle in the very beginning. The very first thing he created was the conflict between light and darkness. He made the light, and he saw that it was good. He doesn’t say the darkness is good. Nonetheless, he doesn’t banish the darkness. He keeps it. He separates it from the light, and he calls it night.

I learn from this that God meant for this earth to be a place of battle. There is a kingdom of light, which is the kingdom of Jesus Christ, and there is a domain of darkness. That is not an accident. God meant for that to happen. In fact, it was the very first thing he meant to happen. He created that battle on day one.

Interesting, isn’t it?

Evening and Morning

What else is interesting is that God created evening and morning the first day.

We Americans consider the day to start in the morning. A Jewish day, however, starts with sunset. The night is the first part of the day, and the day is the last part, pretty much opposite from us.

God set the day up to be evening first, daytime second.

This is because the light delivers from darkness. It is darkness that comes first, then the light comes to rescue us.

All of us began in the domain of darkness. We did not begin in the kingdom of God. We’re children of Adam first, and only after does Jesus Christ deliver us from the death of Adam to be children of life and light.

Well, that’s my take on day one. Hopefully, I’ll get day two up tomorrow. I hope God gives me something! Waters above and waters beneath? hmm …