THE CHARGE OF "EXCLUSIVISM" AND AN ANSWER

We often hear the charge of "exclusivism" concerning our gospel of Christ. When we say that Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to have a relationship with God the Father, the ONLY way for the gap between God and man to be bridged, and the ONLY One who can bring a spiritually dead person [Which consists of all the human race] back to life because He alone is the ONLY source of the authority [power] to do so, it does sound rather "exclusive" doesn't it!

But, think about it, when someone argues that every single person's view of how to get to God is valid, and that each person's view must be held with equal appreciation for being true, [which is defined by many as "inclusiveness" as opposed to "exclusiveness."] what we find is that the road to "relativism" has been traveled by the one making that argument. They are literally saying that each individual is able to construct their own truth because, after all, who has ALL the truth anyway!  [Relativism is the philosophical position that all points of view are equally valid and that all truth is relative to the individual.]  

I would agree that no one person has ALL the truth about almost any subject that one could mention. But that, in and of itself, isn't the same as saying any and all views of how to relate to God are truthful. In fact, to accept the idea that all views of how to relate to God are valid is, in a real fashion, to revert back to the old idea of trying to be "like God," since only He alone can really say. If I remember correctly, that was at the heart of the original sin committed by the ArchAngel Lucifer, was it not! 

The gospel is NOT, in my personal view, one option among many other valid options about the way to redemption and salvation. Jesus Christ is not an option, He IS the only way.

It is even possible, I think, to make too much of a need to be open about other belief-systems and their way of "getting to God," for fear some people might be offended by our "Christ Alone" message as Christians. This is because the REAL issue IS NOT belief systems at all. Or even about being offensive, as damaging and callous as that can often be. The issue is far greater than any of that. 

The real issue is a matter of " Life or death!" It seems to me that in scripture mankind has been offered an either/or  [“Yes” or “No” if you will!]  choice of whether we will accept redemption and eternal life in Christ. A "yes"brings inclusion. The opposing choice of "no" is rejection of Him with the result of...you get the picture I'm sure. “He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life” [I Jn. 5:12]. 

So the REAL PROBLEM of "exclusion" is to be found in a rejection of the One Who is Himself God's gift of Grace for salvation. THAT truly does produces a heartbreaking "exclusion." 

I think I will continue to share the gospel of Christ alone as man's ONLY hope of eternal life. That pending reality of a final "exclusion" is far too important for me to fail to do so. Paul the Apostle put his finger on what I'm attempting to say when he said...

"As for me, may I never boast about anything except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. Because of that cross, my interest in this world has been crucified, and the world's interest in me has also died."
Galatians 6:14  [NLB]


Paul B.

THE POINT OF GREATEST TEMPTATION

I've always been amazed at that verse in Luke 4 where Jesus encountered Satan in that temptation experience in the wilderness. You remember Jesus had been forty days without food. There is no doubt that hunger was very real at the moment. You will also remember Satan said "Since you're the Son of God, [There was no doubt in his mind about that fact and it isn't the word "if" at all.] command this stone that it be made bread."

I think we are all honest enough to admit that wouldn't be a temptation to any one of us because we couldn't have done that if our very life had depended on it. But He could. After all, He was and is the Son of God. It would be important for us to remember at this point that Jesus DID NOT DO ANYTHING during His thirty-three years on earth, as the second man and last Adam, in the power or authority of His Divine nature. He willingly laid aside all that authority and lived as MAN submitted to the will and purpose of the Father. He truly WAS our stand-in. This is why in verse 4, He responded  that "it is written MAN shall not live by bread alone but by every Word of God." He was MAN submitted to doing the will of the Father.

My point really is however, did you notice that His temptation came in the arena of the greatest strength in His life. He COULD have exercised His divine authority or power, but didn't. I'm thinking that might be at least an illustration of the fact that OUR temptation comes in OUR arena of strength as well__not our weakness__who would have thought? I've aways been so sold on the idea that I've got to strengthen/guard where I'm weak because, if I don't, I'll wind up failing/falling in that area. Satan attacks me where I'm weak.

Oh really? If pride comes before a fall, and it does, then I must be proud of where I'm weak. No wait__pride is usually a possibility__ only where I think I'm pretty good. Do you suppose we completely misunderstand this thing of temptation so that we guard our weaknesses, but are vulnerable at our strengths because of the very fact that we don't think we'll fall there?

As an illustration of this might help. Think about the ministers of days past who have fallen. Would you be surprised to learn their failure came at the very point where they were strongest in their teaching or reputation. Take a Jim Baker of several years ago who could raise money out of scarecrows. His fall came because of greed and misusing money. Or a Jimmy Swaggart, who was known for condemning those who were being immoral, choosing immoral behavior himself. Remember Gordon MacDonald who wrote the finest book on marriage I have in my library and yet he failed in his marriage vow. Enough said.

By the way, I wouldn't even mention these men were their failure not public in nature. And even with that said__I do not in any way judge or condemn them__they are not my servants after all. But they are my brothers and offer some insight to this thing of being tempted at the point of our strength.

We certainly could go to those in scripture who failed as an example as well. Peter, a man of extreme courage. Remember how he charged that large group at the arrest of Jesus sword in hand and yet failed hours later losing courage at the prospect of being identified as a follower of this one called Jesus arrested and charged with blasphemy. Or Moses who was extremely obedient after being taught by his mother of God's plan for him, in choosing to suffer the reproach of Israel rather than enjoy the pleasures of Egypt. Yet disobediently, struck that rock the second time rather than speaking to it as commanded. Or David, a man whose passionate heart was after God, in a moment of passion, gave his heart to another.

Add all these illustrations to that Luke 4 passage and we may be getting a picture that one would be wise to ask a friend this question. "What is my greatest strength?" Then, be open to the fact it could be at this point the enemy very possibly could gain a foothold in your life.

Were you to ask that question, the answer may be..."You're strong in doctrinal purity and truth" or "You're strong in mercy" or " You're strong in the family" or "You're strong in honesty" or__you get the picture.

For the first, we would generally find them may failing because someone disagrees with a minor doctrine or someone might not accept a doctrinal truth the same way [inerrancy] and the doctrinally strong one will separate from them because of pride in their understanding or way of explaining a certain doctrinal position.

For the second, they may need to stand for a truth at some point but, because of fear of hurting some one's feelings, they capitulate.

For the third, they maybe see a son or daughter divorce or a daughter get pregnant and cannot find it in them to embrace that one in love and acceptance, for the life of them. Because it would be [in their minds at least] a capitulation in standards for family life.

For the last one, they may fail to report a gift to the government or twist a word or phrase to cover a mistake and this would be because of a gain of something personal, such as reputation or financial gain.

The whole point is that failure comes because our eyes are tightly shut to our vulnerability at the point of strengths. We would never fail BECAUSE of our strength there__but we do. It is, after all, His strength that is made real in our weakness but, in Kingdom living our greatest weakness IS our strength, and
we just don't seem to get that fact down well.

May God never allow me to write something to anyone else without applying it to my own life first. I think I'll ask Mary, my wife, what she thinks my strengths are. She knows me better than anyone else and loves me enough to tell me the truth.

Paul B.

UNDERSTANDING GROWING UP SPIRITUALLY

A few years ago, I used a chart in helping to explain spiritual growth. I wish to do so again.

11 Corinthians 3:18 is undoubtedly a tremendous verse with much meaning." But we all, with open face beholding in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." I think I'm safe in saying that, among others things, this verse is saying...

1--We all  [All Christians]

2--Are right now  [Present tense]

3--enabled to look upon  [No veil covering us as Moses had to be covered]

4--The Lord  [Clearly and distinctly seen present in the gospel]

5--And we all  [All Christians]

6--Are being changed  [Present tense..right now]

7--To mirror or reflect Him   [His reality expressed in us]

8--All is His work in us through His Spirit.  

Albert Barnes says this...

"By contemplating the resplendent face of the blessed Redeemer, [Seen present in the gospel] we are changed into something of the same image. It is a law of our nature that we are moulded, in our moral feelings, by the persons with whom we associate, and by the objects which we contemplate. Thus, we are changed into His very image by a continued succession of glory, as it were, streaming upon us from the Lord." 

The idea is, according to Barnes and others, that by contemplating or seeing Him afresh, we become changed into the likeness of that same One we are seeing and contemplating and we are conformed to that which is revealed there. In simple language, we become like Him and it is obvious to others. 

My question is, when and how does this "seeing Him afresh" take place? I want to share something I heard years ago from someone, and I cannot remember who it was,  [Jim Hylton I think]  that I've never forgotten and has been a help many times in my own personal life and growth.

Let's suppose this verse really is saying as we see Him more and more clearly, we become like Him more and more, by the power of the Holy Spirit working in us. [I think it is saying that]  So, the question to be asked is when do we, generally, see Him most clearly? For me, it has been when I've been hurting or facing failure in my own life. It is those times that I see Him graciously reveal Himself anew in His love and faithfulness. Then is when I hit myself on the forehead in recognition that I'd forgotten Him, but He, thankfully, hadn't forgotten me.

This verse may be revealing to us a cycle of experiencing God in this way. Permit me to explain what I mean.

You hit bottom, with failure, or pain, or tragedy, whatever it is that takes the spiritual wind out of your sails. You then, find yourself broken, repentant, or crying out in hopelessness. It is dark and despair is lingering over you. But God breaks through with a fresh word or view of His presence and grace in some fashion. It could be from the Word, a song, a friend, a sermon, or just a contemplative thought on your part. But He's unmistakably there in a fresh way. You see Him present. You recognize His voice in your heart of hearts.

In that moment it is like a mountain top experience almost, because He's so real and present with you in it. How could you have doubted? How could you have forgotten or failed, whatever the case may be? You're growing stronger now. Kingdom living has been renewed. Life is good. You're alive again.

But, an usual, you ultimately go on to another time of complacency because, after all, you're busy or pressed or just trying to live life that has so many demands on your time and thoughts. No doubts about Him__just__well__you know__ as I said__ busy and pressed. Things that are familiar are no longer seen with Him as the backdrop. After all, they are just normal, everyday things. And God seems__so distant__again.

Then it comes__again. Failure or pain or tragedy. The tears, darkness, and even doubts begin their journey across you mind and soul. Where is God in all this? You certainly need something from Him. Or maybe you've settled in your thinking, again, with a false and unbiblical view of Him, that He couldn't care, forgive, or deliver this time, after so many times before. You don't deserve it after all with what you did.

But He does show up. A mountain top again. But on the horizon, complacency__again.  Failure__again.
You get the picture.

This diagram below, which has been a guide to me for years and graciously put into pictorial form by my wife, might be helpful and revealing. Go through it. My conclusions will come on the other side of the diagram.

Conclusions...

1--We will not ever__NOT fail or face pain or tragic events.

2--We will ultimately__by His Spirit__ be brought to brokenness or repentance. [Or some form of crying out for help]

3--He will faithfully show Himself present and forgiving, gracious, powerful__whatever the need might be__for recovery.

4--We will inevitably get complacent or foolish.__again, which inevitably lead to failure__again.

5--We will not ever__NOT fail or face pain or tragic events,

You see the pattern.

It is much as the Nation of Israel did seven times in the Book of Judges in the Old Covenant [Testament] where that cycle resulted in seven Judges being raised up to deliver His people from their troubles.

But notice,.. in our New Covenant relational experience, we have hope beyond measure. 

1--We are never as low as we were. [The upward cycle]

2--We will always experience Him in greater ways than before. [Higher revelation]

3--We will always be changed to some degree with those new revelations of who He really is in our lives. [Always different and further in growth than before]

No one is saying this is the ONLY way for spiritual growth to take place. But it is my reasoned opinion that this may be the more likely experienced way, in the fallen world in which we live, that we are open to seeing the Lord. It is called the process of brokenness. That, my friend, is called life and growth.

Such is our wonderful journey in knowing our Gracious Lord in a New Covenant relationship even while we are in this flesh and fallen world.  And will be so until__one day__ the work of changing us into His Glory__ will be finalized as we see Him face to face.

Paul B.

IS ANYTHING IN SCRIPTURE NON-ESSENTIAL?

I put a quote on my Facebook page the other day from Scott Saul, a Pastor in Nashville Tenn. He said.....

"The more you mature, the more flexible you become ABOUT non-essentials, not less."

What does he mean non-essentials? Does this mean there are some things that don't matter in scripture? Are we to have a correct understanding of everything talked about in the bible? Is that even possible?

I remember hearing a pastor once say concerning doctrine, “You are either one-hundred percent right or one-hundred percent wrong on what you believe about something the bible says. There is no in-between and there are no gray areas. God is not confused or unsure. Why should we be?”

I think the guy was correct concerning God not being confused or unsure. But for the rest of us, well, things are a bit different as far as Paul the Apostle was concerned.

In 1 Corinthians 13:12 he clearly asserts, under inspiration I believe, that we see things [things he's writing that we now call scripture] through a glass that's rather dim at times. Peter even confessed that Paul said some things hard to understand. [11Peter 3:15-16 is in the context of Escatology and the phrase "hard to understand" is better understood "not easily grasped" I believe.]

So we wind up with people often having two extremes on some things in scripture that are, admittedly "not easily grasped" and we only know partially because of being this side of eternity.[ In eternity we WILL know as we are known, but we're not there yet are we!]

One extreme view of understanding things scriptural is held by the Fundamentalists who often draw more lines than you can count in the sand of theology all in the name of their perception of "Doctrinal Truth." Too often if you disagree with them on ANY issue of doctrine, your belief is called "sin" and you a "sinner" for holding to it. Every truth talked about in the bible is a "hill to die on."

Then there is the extreme position of the Liberals, [about scripture] who are bound and determined to erase as many lines in the sand of theology as possible in the name of their perception of "grace and love." They get just as angry as the fundamentalists only they are at the opposite extreme doctrinally. As usual, reality is somewhere in between those two extreme mindsets.

But there are some legitimate essentials that relate to "Salvation" that I believe, by their very nature, are a "hill to die on." Thus, the need for some things to be called "essentials." This means that in this context only, all other things could legitimately be called "non-essentials." So a doctrine being called a "non-essential' relates ONLY to the weightier doctrines that deal with salvation or eternal life. It DOES NOT mean "non-essentials" are unimportant or less true, when correctly understood, or are not needed for knowledge and Christian living. They are important. Just not essential for the reason stated.

 What might the essentials for salvation be? In essence, if someone does not believe these things that are “essential for salvation,” they simply cannot be Christian in the true sense of the word. Here are what I see as the things I would call the "essentials."

A belief that God is real. [Hebrews 11:6]    (There is no such thing as an atheistic Christian)

A belief that mankind is lost and each person is a sinner in need of God’s grace and mercy and that includes me. [1 John 1:10] ( God and man are separated)

A belief in Christ’s deity and humanity as a Person sent from God. [1 John 4:2-3: Romans 10:9]  (Christ is fully God and fully man without sin.)

A belief that Christ died on the cross and rose bodily from the grave for our sins. [1 Corinthians 15:3-4]  (He bridged the gap between God and man whatever one's view of the atonement)

A belief that faith in Christ and His life and death is necessary for a relationship with God. [John 3:16]   (He alone is the object of our faith)

As I see it, these are the key doctrines. Without these, you simply don’t have any sense of what it means to be Christian. This is where the "exclusivity" of the gospel message cuts across the ideology of the rest of humanity and creates quite a backlash for us. But that is as it MUST be for us to present Christ for WHO He is and WHAT He has really done.

All other doctrines or beliefs can be called "non-essentials" which only means they do not relate to matters of salvation or eternal life. That doesn't mean they are unimportant. It doesn't mean they shouldn't be studied and taught as one sees and understands them. But it does mean people can understand them differently and be Christian.

Now read Scott Saul's quote again.  "The more you mature, the more flexible you become ABOUT non-essentials, not less."

Paul B.