The enormous amount of evil we can see (or hear) in one day is a bit of a modern phenomenon unlike anything in the time before electronic communication. Turn on the news and you'll see poverty, violence, murder, and corruption. Watch a comedy routine or a sitcom and you'll likely hear ungodliness glorified and God's name dishonored. We experience all these things on a daily basis.
Here's my concern: What's our reaction to it? I fear that far too often my own natural reaction is the same as that of many in the church. We harden our hearts to it, and become desensitized. "Sure, that movie had two sex scenes and dragged God's name through the dirt for two hours. Sure it depicted violence and misery where evil often triumphed over good," we say, "but it was a pretty good piece of film and you should go see it." Obviously film is just one example of the pattern of desensitization that extends into most parts of our lives.
But what should our reaction be? Hear what David says in Psalm 119:136: "My eyes shed streams of tears, because people do not keep your law." What an incredible statement of sensitivity! Oh that we would go to God in humility and beg for such sensitivity to sin. Lord, help me to never look down my nose at society, but to be broken as Your heart is over people's denial of You. Help me to see the places in my life where sin is and to be broken over my sin as well. Soften our hearts and change us to be more like Your Son, who wept over the city of Jerusalem. Put sorrow in our hearts where indifference once was, and magnify Your name in it.
August 24, 2008
August 23, 2008
Unity: Desirable, Possible, and Something to Fight For
I am honestly sorry for how incredibly long this post is. I hope that you will take the time to read it and find it edifying, as I do believe the subject matter is worth the time it takes to read.
Tonight I went to a praise and worship service and the focus was unity. For the record, I believe worship happened and that God was honored tonight. Desiring God's people to worship together and then providing a place for that to happen is an awesome thing to initiate for God's glory.
I can say now, by the grace of God, that I have become passionate about the unity of the church. This is owing to the study of Ephesians (and to some extent, in Philippians), and generally God changing my heart. If you had brought up the subject of unity to me a year or more ago, my attitude (to my shame) would probably have been general deflection or disinterest. God has changed that (He did, because I had no particular desire to) and I think that the desire for unity is a godly one.
And that's why I hate the ecumenical movement. This may sound contradictory, so I'll explain. The ecumenical movement tries to bring together people by moving any divisive thing out of the way. So basically the only thing one has to believe to be in the ecumenical movement is to believe there is a God, and generally this God must be the God of the Bible. However some ecumenicals would argue that any belief in a god is a belief in the God. It is a movement with unity at its center that then tries to orbit God and his Word around that central focus.
Forget that. Jesus Christ had nothing to do with that kind of unity. I could go many places in His Word to demonstrate that, but for the sake of brevity (which I realize probably won't be characteristic of this post), I will only point to the fact that he made no attempt to unify with the religious leaders of his day (who "believed in the God of the Bible") but instead called them to repentance. I also point to Matthew 10:34-42.
Christianity divides, simply because the fact that God opens some people's eyes to see the light of the glory of Christ (2 Cor 4:6) but to others the gospel is veiled (2 Cor 4:3-4). This will naturally divide us (by us, I mean human beings). The thing is many perishing people to whom the gospel is veiled are "religious" people (see the "many" in Matt 7:22, and the seeds that "immediately spring up" Matt 13:5-6, 20-21). Should we then be unified with them because of their religious claim? By no means! When people try to unify the church for unity's sake itself, disunity is the result. In short the ecumenical movement is doing the opposite of its intention. More on this later.
Should we then just give up on unity altogether and huddle in our small groups and our comfort zones and allow fellowship to suffer? By no means! Doctrine should not be sacrificed for unity, but unity should not therefore be left out of the picture. For if we have good doctrine and an understanding of God's Word, we cannot miss the call to be unified:
I'd like to point out that here's a bit of where my interpretation comes in. This part is my opinion, because the Word of God doesn't really address it: I believe the splintering of the church into different denominations is displeasing to God. I don't see anything (properly) dividing the early church other than mere distance. People in Ephesus went to the church in Ephesus. They didn't go to the one in Philippi, because it was too far to walk. But all the believers in Ephesus fellowshipped together. Why then is it that there are multiple "churches" per street in Pinellas County? Should there not just be "the believers in Clearwater" fellowshipping together, or "the believers in Largo" or Tarpon Springs, or whatever your city may be?
I think this kind of fellowship is the "unity" that is commanded in Scripture. Unity in the "local" body of Christians. "Local" qualifies that the Christians are generally in the same location. The body is divided by nothing but distance. If the body is divided by something else, it is not the body. The people we are divided from by the Word of God are people who do not value Christ as their treasure, and therefore are not part of the "body."
However you happen to view it, the command for unity is present and clear. But so then is the truth that God's Word will divide people. But here's the clincher: God's Word not only divides, it also unites. How? By a common devotion to the Word of God as sufficient for our Christian walk and in life in every way. I see this idea in Acts 2:41-42:
Notice first who was unified: "those who received his word." This should be self-explanatory: Those who are not Christians have no part of Christian unity. What was "his word?" This (in summary) :
What then is the means of unification? I believe verse 42 of Acts 2 holds the key: "They devoted themselves to apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers." The key to unity is the Word of God, and a sincere belief , like that of the early Christians, that the Word of God was sufficient for their lives. In other words, they believed in the truth of Scripture, because an errant word is not a sufficient word. And they also believed in the clarity of Scripture, because an unknowable word is also not a sufficient word.
It is this core belief that should drive us together in unity. The Word of God is what we are to meditate on, the Word of God is what we should talk about in fellowship, it is the Word of God that instructs and informs our prayers to God. It is in the Word of God where we find out about who God is and how to serve Him and how to worship Him. If we, by God's grace, submit ourselves to God's word in a spirit of humility and teachability we should find that we can worship with others who have the same attitude.
What about theological differences? What a great reason to delve deeper into the Word of God! Having theological differences is true even in a body of two believers, so it is no excuse for disunity. Differences should not be ignored but discussed, but all based in the Word of God, not in man's reasoning. We may even find ourselves resolving differences based on a accurate understanding of God's Word.
As Christian unity comes by affirming God's Word, conversely disunity comes from a denial of the sufficiency of Scripture. This is why the ecumenical movement doesn't work. But when Christians from all different theological backgrounds are changed by the Word of God in their lives and become more like Christ, we should all become more unified to each other as well.
This may sound a little bit too Utopian to some. Indeed it is Utopian, for the church will only be perfectly unified in Heaven. But it can also be said that the eradication of sin in the life of the believer will only be accomplished on the other side of death's door. Will that then keep the believer from pursuing holiness in his life? It better not! And far be it from us to say "Well unity just seems like a far off dream" and then fail to pursue it, and disobey God's command.
I can already hear someone saying, "Are you then advocating we all meet in one building and sit under one pastor, and if you are then what pastor and what about this and..." The answer to probably most of those questions is I don't know yet. But that does not mean I give up on unity. To give up on unity just because it is a hard thing to achieve (or to try to achieve it apart from the Word of God) is not honoring to God. So for the questions I don't know how to answer, I continue to pray to God for wisdom and ask other people of kindred spirit to join with me in considering these things. But for the things I do know how to do, I should try to start them right now. Beginning with fellowship between believers (in the church you attend on Sunday and otherwise). Join me please in this endeavor.
Even fellowship and unity with in our own church would be a huge thing to strive for. But if it is God's desire that we be unified (and it is) and if Christ has ultimately won the war over the sin of disunity (and He has) and if we have the Spirit of God within us to give us the ability to battle against disunity (and believers do) then unity is desirable, possible, and something to fight for.
Tonight I went to a praise and worship service and the focus was unity. For the record, I believe worship happened and that God was honored tonight. Desiring God's people to worship together and then providing a place for that to happen is an awesome thing to initiate for God's glory.
I can say now, by the grace of God, that I have become passionate about the unity of the church. This is owing to the study of Ephesians (and to some extent, in Philippians), and generally God changing my heart. If you had brought up the subject of unity to me a year or more ago, my attitude (to my shame) would probably have been general deflection or disinterest. God has changed that (He did, because I had no particular desire to) and I think that the desire for unity is a godly one.
And that's why I hate the ecumenical movement. This may sound contradictory, so I'll explain. The ecumenical movement tries to bring together people by moving any divisive thing out of the way. So basically the only thing one has to believe to be in the ecumenical movement is to believe there is a God, and generally this God must be the God of the Bible. However some ecumenicals would argue that any belief in a god is a belief in the God. It is a movement with unity at its center that then tries to orbit God and his Word around that central focus.
Forget that. Jesus Christ had nothing to do with that kind of unity. I could go many places in His Word to demonstrate that, but for the sake of brevity (which I realize probably won't be characteristic of this post), I will only point to the fact that he made no attempt to unify with the religious leaders of his day (who "believed in the God of the Bible") but instead called them to repentance. I also point to Matthew 10:34-42.
Christianity divides, simply because the fact that God opens some people's eyes to see the light of the glory of Christ (2 Cor 4:6) but to others the gospel is veiled (2 Cor 4:3-4). This will naturally divide us (by us, I mean human beings). The thing is many perishing people to whom the gospel is veiled are "religious" people (see the "many" in Matt 7:22, and the seeds that "immediately spring up" Matt 13:5-6, 20-21). Should we then be unified with them because of their religious claim? By no means! When people try to unify the church for unity's sake itself, disunity is the result. In short the ecumenical movement is doing the opposite of its intention. More on this later.
Should we then just give up on unity altogether and huddle in our small groups and our comfort zones and allow fellowship to suffer? By no means! Doctrine should not be sacrificed for unity, but unity should not therefore be left out of the picture. For if we have good doctrine and an understanding of God's Word, we cannot miss the call to be unified:
Eph 2:22 "In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit."
Eph 4:1-6 "I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
Phil 1: 27 "Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel,
Phil 2:1-2 "So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.
I'd like to point out that here's a bit of where my interpretation comes in. This part is my opinion, because the Word of God doesn't really address it: I believe the splintering of the church into different denominations is displeasing to God. I don't see anything (properly) dividing the early church other than mere distance. People in Ephesus went to the church in Ephesus. They didn't go to the one in Philippi, because it was too far to walk. But all the believers in Ephesus fellowshipped together. Why then is it that there are multiple "churches" per street in Pinellas County? Should there not just be "the believers in Clearwater" fellowshipping together, or "the believers in Largo" or Tarpon Springs, or whatever your city may be?
I think this kind of fellowship is the "unity" that is commanded in Scripture. Unity in the "local" body of Christians. "Local" qualifies that the Christians are generally in the same location. The body is divided by nothing but distance. If the body is divided by something else, it is not the body. The people we are divided from by the Word of God are people who do not value Christ as their treasure, and therefore are not part of the "body."
However you happen to view it, the command for unity is present and clear. But so then is the truth that God's Word will divide people. But here's the clincher: God's Word not only divides, it also unites. How? By a common devotion to the Word of God as sufficient for our Christian walk and in life in every way. I see this idea in Acts 2:41-42:
So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.
Notice first who was unified: "those who received his word." This should be self-explanatory: Those who are not Christians have no part of Christian unity. What was "his word?" This (in summary) :
"Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified. Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 2:36,38)"
What then is the means of unification? I believe verse 42 of Acts 2 holds the key: "They devoted themselves to apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers." The key to unity is the Word of God, and a sincere belief , like that of the early Christians, that the Word of God was sufficient for their lives. In other words, they believed in the truth of Scripture, because an errant word is not a sufficient word. And they also believed in the clarity of Scripture, because an unknowable word is also not a sufficient word.
It is this core belief that should drive us together in unity. The Word of God is what we are to meditate on, the Word of God is what we should talk about in fellowship, it is the Word of God that instructs and informs our prayers to God. It is in the Word of God where we find out about who God is and how to serve Him and how to worship Him. If we, by God's grace, submit ourselves to God's word in a spirit of humility and teachability we should find that we can worship with others who have the same attitude.
What about theological differences? What a great reason to delve deeper into the Word of God! Having theological differences is true even in a body of two believers, so it is no excuse for disunity. Differences should not be ignored but discussed, but all based in the Word of God, not in man's reasoning. We may even find ourselves resolving differences based on a accurate understanding of God's Word.
As Christian unity comes by affirming God's Word, conversely disunity comes from a denial of the sufficiency of Scripture. This is why the ecumenical movement doesn't work. But when Christians from all different theological backgrounds are changed by the Word of God in their lives and become more like Christ, we should all become more unified to each other as well.
Eph 2:19-22: So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.
This may sound a little bit too Utopian to some. Indeed it is Utopian, for the church will only be perfectly unified in Heaven. But it can also be said that the eradication of sin in the life of the believer will only be accomplished on the other side of death's door. Will that then keep the believer from pursuing holiness in his life? It better not! And far be it from us to say "Well unity just seems like a far off dream" and then fail to pursue it, and disobey God's command.
I can already hear someone saying, "Are you then advocating we all meet in one building and sit under one pastor, and if you are then what pastor and what about this and..." The answer to probably most of those questions is I don't know yet. But that does not mean I give up on unity. To give up on unity just because it is a hard thing to achieve (or to try to achieve it apart from the Word of God) is not honoring to God. So for the questions I don't know how to answer, I continue to pray to God for wisdom and ask other people of kindred spirit to join with me in considering these things. But for the things I do know how to do, I should try to start them right now. Beginning with fellowship between believers (in the church you attend on Sunday and otherwise). Join me please in this endeavor.
Even fellowship and unity with in our own church would be a huge thing to strive for. But if it is God's desire that we be unified (and it is) and if Christ has ultimately won the war over the sin of disunity (and He has) and if we have the Spirit of God within us to give us the ability to battle against disunity (and believers do) then unity is desirable, possible, and something to fight for.
For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith—that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.
Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever. Amen. (Eph 3:14-21)
August 12, 2008
Transformation and Renewal, Not Conformity.
Lately I've been thinking about my everyday life, and the everyday life of the average American Christian. And here's what I've seen: we love our culture too much. Not in the true sense of love though, that would seek to drive our culture to God. But rather in the sense that popular culture has said to the Christian, "Come, sit down. Watch this show. Make some money. Be prosperous. Get comfortable." And we have done so. Though we may disdain the teaching of the "prosperity gospel," which seeks to make God's message and the culture's message harmonious, we do not however disdain the places in our lives where our aim is comfort above and against God's glory.
Maybe I could provide some examples. Example number one will be familiar to those readers who have seen Dan's blog on modesty. Who told girls that their clothes had to attract guys (like a UV lamp attracts bugs)? It was our culture, not the Word of God, and when we shop (notice the "we," guys often shop with the same motives as girls do) to glorify ourselves instead of buying our clothes to the glory of God, we become no different than those who aren't saved.
But let's not just stop there. How about entertainment? Modern American society rivals the ancient Roman society (which at times had non-stop games for months) in its love for entertainment. Oh, how often do we compromise godly virtues for a moment of entertainment! How often have I watched something inappropriate in the name of comedy! Friends, do we really think that we can continue to drink in all the violence, selfishness and lust that our culture seeks to "entertain" us with and be unaffected by it? Did Jesus Christ ever command us to watch something solely because we found it entertaining or humorous? Why then do we seek our own amusement with more vigor than we seek to minister to the church, or to evangelize those "among whom" we are to "shine as lights (Phil 2:15)?"
I'm not advocating monasticism here. I realize the desire to be "in the world, not of the world" is a good desire. Christ prayed "I do not ask that you [God the Father] take them out of the world (Jn 17:15)." I acknowledge that. No one should necessarily throw their TV in the garbage and go live in the desert somewhere with just their Bible. That's clear.
However I don't believe that's the temptation for the American believer. We've all heard the phrase "being too heavenly minded to be any earthly good." Though I have never seen one person with that problem, I have seen scores of Christians (including the one in the mirror) who are often too earthly minded to be any earthly good.
In fact, I would venture so far as to say if we are not "heavenly minded" we won't be "any earthly good." What good is a Christian that is drenched in American culture? About as much good as red dye is in cherry Kool-Aid®. What do we have to offer a culture that we're no different from? We can't offer them the God who gives ultimate joy if our highest joy is no different than theirs.
Jonathan Edwards would seem to agree. His twenty-second resolution reads:
But we shouldn't think of Edwards as extra-spiritual. He was merely following Biblical commands.
The difference between transformation and conformity is "the renewal of your mind." I can't renew my mind if I'm feeding it the same things I did when I was still dead in sin. The 1st century Jewish believers couldn't have renewed their minds if they had stayed under the works-based teaching and culture of the Pharisees. The Ephesian believers couldn't have renewed their minds if they had kept their books of magic, or (if they had had them) their subscriptions to the monthly magic magazines. How then do we expect to renew our minds if our time in front of the TV is more substantial then our time in the presence of our Father in heaven, through prayer and reading His Word?
You then should do what you need to do to be renewed. Cut out what you need to cut out. Get immersed in God-centered things that will encourage you to change. Most importantly, pray that God will show you where you compromise, and that He will empower you to make the changes in His strength. And pray for me. I'm in the thick of the same battle. I'll be praying for you in your battle as well.
Maybe I could provide some examples. Example number one will be familiar to those readers who have seen Dan's blog on modesty. Who told girls that their clothes had to attract guys (like a UV lamp attracts bugs)? It was our culture, not the Word of God, and when we shop (notice the "we," guys often shop with the same motives as girls do) to glorify ourselves instead of buying our clothes to the glory of God, we become no different than those who aren't saved.
But let's not just stop there. How about entertainment? Modern American society rivals the ancient Roman society (which at times had non-stop games for months) in its love for entertainment. Oh, how often do we compromise godly virtues for a moment of entertainment! How often have I watched something inappropriate in the name of comedy! Friends, do we really think that we can continue to drink in all the violence, selfishness and lust that our culture seeks to "entertain" us with and be unaffected by it? Did Jesus Christ ever command us to watch something solely because we found it entertaining or humorous? Why then do we seek our own amusement with more vigor than we seek to minister to the church, or to evangelize those "among whom" we are to "shine as lights (Phil 2:15)?"
I'm not advocating monasticism here. I realize the desire to be "in the world, not of the world" is a good desire. Christ prayed "I do not ask that you [God the Father] take them out of the world (Jn 17:15)." I acknowledge that. No one should necessarily throw their TV in the garbage and go live in the desert somewhere with just their Bible. That's clear.
However I don't believe that's the temptation for the American believer. We've all heard the phrase "being too heavenly minded to be any earthly good." Though I have never seen one person with that problem, I have seen scores of Christians (including the one in the mirror) who are often too earthly minded to be any earthly good.
In fact, I would venture so far as to say if we are not "heavenly minded" we won't be "any earthly good." What good is a Christian that is drenched in American culture? About as much good as red dye is in cherry Kool-Aid®. What do we have to offer a culture that we're no different from? We can't offer them the God who gives ultimate joy if our highest joy is no different than theirs.
Jonathan Edwards would seem to agree. His twenty-second resolution reads:
Resolved, to endeavor to obtain for myself as much happiness in the other world as I possibly can, with all the power, might, vigor, and vehemence, yea violence, I am capable of, or can bring myself to exert, in any way that can be thought of.As he lived out this resolution (and the others) in his life, he in turn affected the world in which he lived. Edwards became one of the driving forces in the Great Awakening, a period of spiritual revival in early America. Moreover, these words, written by 19 year old Edwards, continue to be of "earthly good" over 200 years after he wrote them.
But we shouldn't think of Edwards as extra-spiritual. He was merely following Biblical commands.
1 John 2:15 "Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him."
Romans 12:2 "Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.
The difference between transformation and conformity is "the renewal of your mind." I can't renew my mind if I'm feeding it the same things I did when I was still dead in sin. The 1st century Jewish believers couldn't have renewed their minds if they had stayed under the works-based teaching and culture of the Pharisees. The Ephesian believers couldn't have renewed their minds if they had kept their books of magic, or (if they had had them) their subscriptions to the monthly magic magazines. How then do we expect to renew our minds if our time in front of the TV is more substantial then our time in the presence of our Father in heaven, through prayer and reading His Word?
You then should do what you need to do to be renewed. Cut out what you need to cut out. Get immersed in God-centered things that will encourage you to change. Most importantly, pray that God will show you where you compromise, and that He will empower you to make the changes in His strength. And pray for me. I'm in the thick of the same battle. I'll be praying for you in your battle as well.
Living Morally Significantly
About a week ago, I was reading the intro to Desiring God by John Piper where he talks about his path to the main thesis of the book, "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him." In a paragraph on our tendency to consider it unholy to be motivated to do good by a desire for happiness, I came across the following apparently benign statement:
For one reason or another that sentence just leaped off of the page at me. I think it was the word "seemed." The consequences "seemed so insignificant." "Seemed" implied to me that the consequences of buying ice cream for the enjoyment of it was not morally insignificant. But how could that be? Having read Desiring God before, I considered the big picture of the book: joy in God, in and through every other joy. With this in mind, I wrote in the margin of my book, "if we found pleasure in God through small things, they would cease to be morally insignificant."
How can we make seemingly inconsequential actions meaningful? For example how can I glorify God in taking out the trash? Well that one's easy, we conform to the character of God by doing the responsible thing and by not letting things pile up. But how do we glorify God in say, changing the radio station when we hear a song we don't like? Here, I might have to borrow an old phrase from a teacher's handbook : "Answers may vary." However, for me in that case the answer was, "Changing the station is an expression of our inherent search for beauty. Ultimately God is the source of all things beautiful, and that which is beautiful is so because He is."
But why? Why shouldn't certain moments have no moral significance? Certain things are just so minute as to not even merit thought. Why should these be anything other than morally inconsequential? There are probably several reasons but I will list two:
"At the time, buying ice cream in the student center just for pleasure didn't bother me, because the moral consequences of that action seemed so insignificant (18)."
For one reason or another that sentence just leaped off of the page at me. I think it was the word "seemed." The consequences "seemed so insignificant." "Seemed" implied to me that the consequences of buying ice cream for the enjoyment of it was not morally insignificant. But how could that be? Having read Desiring God before, I considered the big picture of the book: joy in God, in and through every other joy. With this in mind, I wrote in the margin of my book, "if we found pleasure in God through small things, they would cease to be morally insignificant."
How can we make seemingly inconsequential actions meaningful? For example how can I glorify God in taking out the trash? Well that one's easy, we conform to the character of God by doing the responsible thing and by not letting things pile up. But how do we glorify God in say, changing the radio station when we hear a song we don't like? Here, I might have to borrow an old phrase from a teacher's handbook : "Answers may vary." However, for me in that case the answer was, "Changing the station is an expression of our inherent search for beauty. Ultimately God is the source of all things beautiful, and that which is beautiful is so because He is."
But why? Why shouldn't certain moments have no moral significance? Certain things are just so minute as to not even merit thought. Why should these be anything other than morally inconsequential? There are probably several reasons but I will list two:
- To remember God. On a day to day basis, I spend hours without even giving a single thought to the Creator and Sustainer of whatever it is that I'm focusing my attention on instead of Him. Thinking through minute actions and basing them on the character of God, or my response to His character helps me to not only evaluate what I'm doing, but also worship God on a moment by moment basis.
- Glorifying God in everyday actions is commanded.
Prov 3:6: "In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.
1 Cor 10:31: "So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
Col 3:17: "And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him."So in summary, every decision or action, big or small, whether it be anything from changing the radio station to talking to a friend to starting your to-do list, connect what you do back to the character of God and glorify Him in everything.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
