Forgive and Forget: is it really that simple?

A friend recently made this comment.  “I think that the level at which we understand forgiveness shows the level at which we understand the gospel.” Personally, I believe this to be a very accurate statement because the gospel of Jesus Christ is essentially a gospel of forgiveness. Brian Zahnd, in his book Unconditional? said that “if Christianity isn’t about forgiveness, it’s about nothing at all.” (Zahnd, p. 2) Christ came to earth as a man and died so that his church might be forgiven of their sins. Jesus lived a life of forgiveness. Even as he was being killed Jesus cried out, “forgive them (his murderers) for they do not know what they are doing.” The gospel is a gospel of forgiveness and the extent to which we understand forgiveness reflects the extent to which we understand the gospel.

There is a cliché about forgiveness that has been making the rounds for years now. This cliché is one that is harmful to our understanding of true forgiveness. It misrepresents the very character of God and the gospel which he brings to us in Jesus Christ.

The cliché is “forgive and forget.” The logic is that if God forgives and forgets (by the way  – the word “forget” is used to refer to an “inability to remember”) our sins, then we must do the same. Jeremiah 31:34 is the verse most often cited for this opinion. The second half of the verse reads as follows: “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” A strictly literal interpretation demands the interpretation of forgive and forget. But is that what is really being said here?

When one asserts that God forgives and forgets and that we must also forgive and forget there are two issues that must be dealt with. Two issues that would seem to be very serious. One issue is on a practical level and the other is on a theological level.

The Theological Issue

The first issue I want to address is the theological issue. How does the idea that God actually forgets match up with the doctrine of God’s omniscience? Can an all-knowing God really forget something? Can an all-knowing God really cease to know something? The obvious answer is “no” because the moment that God ceases to know something (anything) he ceases to be omniscient. In the Gospel of John 16:30 the disciples said to Jesus (who was also God), “we know that you know all things.” He knows all things.

So then, what about Jeremiah 31:34? Is this verse in error? Not at all! When God says that he will “remember no more” he is referring to a covenant with the sinners. He does not cease to remember the sin, but chooses, at the moment of forgiveness, to treat the repentant sinner as if the sin had never occurred.

If we were to look in depth at the doctrine of justification we would discover that it is very similar to forgiveness. The essence of justification is that God no longer treats the believer as if he is sinner, but the sinner is given the righteousness of Christ and is therefore treated as being sinless. The fact of the sin remains, but God chose to treat Christ (by killing him on the cross) as if he had been the sinner, and treat the believer (now being justified) as the sinless one. Think about it. If God had chosen to forget or ignore the problem of our sin and had not provided a payment for it, he would have violated his own justice. Since God cannot violate his own justice he could not ignore the payment of sin. But instead of holding the believing sinner accountable he forgave the believer and transferred the penalty to Christ.

It comes down to this. God cannot forget because it is the very nature of God not to forget. If he were to forget anything he would cease to be God. God cannot forget because to forget or ignore the sin and it’s penalty would mean that all men would still be damned to hell as the necessary consequence for our sin.

The Practical Issue

Time and time again in the New Testament we (as believers) are entreated and commanded to imitate Christ. “Be holy as I am Holy” is the most familiar of these. In the Lord’s prayer Christ provided us with a template of how to pray. In this prayer is the phrase, “forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.” The debt that we owe as human beings is the debt of sin, or rather the penalty of it. Christ essentially says here that we are to forgive those who are debtors to us in the same manner that Christ forgave us. Basically, forgive those who sin against us as Christ forgives us when we sin against him.

There are a few instances in my life, as I’m sure there are in all our lives, in which I have had to extend forgiveness to someone who had sinned against me. For those sins that did not affect or hurt me very much, I did not have much trouble actually forgetting. To this day I probably cannot recall every single person who has ever sinned against me or the specific manner in which they wronged me. I do, however, specifically remember some of the sins that others have committed against me. Those sins incurred hurt on me that will not easily (if ever) be forgotten. But, just because I am not able to forget the specific instance does not mean that I am unable to forgive. I am confident that every individual person reading this has had the same experience.

Forgiveness is a choice, not an ability to remember or forget. It is a choice and a promise to not condemn the person who has sinned against you.

Conclusion

As we look at forgiveness it is true that God “remembers no more” our sins. Not that he has divine amnesia, but rather that he promises to treat us as if we bear the righteousness of Christ. The same is true for us as we forgive others.

In the light of  true forgiveness, God’s love shines so much brighter. It thrills my soul that he loves me, not forgetting my sin, but in spite of my sin! We  truly do have an awesome God and an awesome gospel.

Forgive and forget? No. God offers a much better forgiveness than that!

Conflict: An Exercise in Humility and Forgiveness

                Every human being has at one point or another been confronted with conflict. It is an inevitable part of life. If you have never encountered conflict, you haven’t been alive very long. From the time a child exits his mother’s womb and enters this world he encounters conflict. Mother wants to sleep and baby wants to be fed. Conflict! The two-year-old wants to venture out onto the street by himself and Daddy wants the toddler to live to provide him with grandchildren. Conflict! Ethan and Tray (both three-year-olds) both want to play with the same toy. Conflict! Lucy and Emily (teenagers at the same school) both want to be captain of the volleyball team. Conflict! Tim and Aaron (interns at a law firm) both want the one permanent position left. Conflict! Grandma wants to visit the grandkids on the West Coast and Grandpa wants the two of them (and just the two of them) to take a quiet vacation to a cabin in Montana. Conflict! Conflict happens. From the time of infancy to the time we die conflict is there. It is part of life. If you are done having conflict, you are probably dead. 

                It is important to note that conflict cannot fit neatly into the boxes of “right” and “wrong.” Conflict is actually never “right” or “wrong.” It is simply a situation. Calling conflict “right” or “wrong” is similar to calling sickness “right” or “wrong.” Is it wrong to be sick? No. It could be that you sinned (ex. You may have disobeyed your mother and gone playing in the rain when she had specifically forbidden it) and that sin resulted in you becoming sick (ex. Because you played in the rain you contracted pneumonia). But the sickness itself is not “wrong.” It could also be that you become angry at God, or someone else, because you are sick. That is a sinful action, but again, the sickness itself is not “right” or “wrong.” Conflict is not either “right” or “wrong.” It is how you choose to deal with conflict that is right or wrong. Do you choose to deal with it in a self-pleasing manner or in a manner that pleases God?

The Root of Conflict

                In the book of James, we find a theological, yet practical, handling of the issue of conflict. James 4:1 (ESV) asks the question, “What causes quarrels and what causes fights among you?” The answer is given in rhetorical format in the second half of the verse. “Is it not this, that your passions are at war within you?” James shows us here that conflict, specifically “fights” and “quarrels”, happens when passions (desires/wants) collide. Two people + two desires = conflict.

James then continues on to closely relate fights and quarrels to selfishness (4:2-5) and pride ( 4:6). In fact fights and quarrels find their root in selfishness and pride.  If a simple conflict turns into a quarrel, it is undoubtedly because one or more parties involved are selfish, prideful, and unwilling to compromise.

The Remedy for Conflict

                Thankfully, James does not leave us hanging there, but goes on to provide us with a remedy for fights and quarrels (4:7-12). The first thing James says in this section is, “Submit yourselves therefore to God.” Submission? That’s an awfully hard thing to do. Yes, it is. Especially if you are proud.  But verse 6 tells us that “God opposes the proud.” Submission is an act of humility. And verse 6 also tells us that God “gives grace to the humble.”

Submission to God is an act of humility that empties the person of his claim to his or her rights or entitlements. You may say, “I have the right to be treated with respect by people.” James says that to avoid allowing conflict to become a sinful fight or quarrel you must submit your will and your desires to God. Remember, “God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” If you want to act biblically, and therefore receive God’s grace, you must act humbly and be submissive to God.

Examples of Conflict

                In the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32) we find two examples of conflict. One handled biblically and one handled selfishly. The first example happens at the beginning of the parable when the younger son comes to his father and demands his portion of the inheritance. In essence, in that culture, he made it clear that he wished that his father was dead and that he had his money. This was a serious insult, especially in the Jewish culture where respect towards one’s parents was commanded by law and disrespect was punishable by death. The father, even after being highly insulted, responded graciously to his son and gave him his portion of the inheritance. This is the example of conflict rightly handled (at least as far as the father was concerned). Graciousness and humility were the overwhelming characteristics of the father in this situation. He had every right to refuse his son and even disown him for his insolence and disrespect, yet his response was one that was not concerned with his own personal hurt.

                The second example of conflict comes near the close of the parable. The younger son has realized the error of his ways and has returned home. The father has welcomed him with open arms and has thrown a party to celebrate the return of his wayward son. While this party was going on, the older son came in from the fields and heard the noise of the party and inquired as to the occasion. A servant told him about his brother’s return home and the excitement and joy of his father. The older son became indignant and refused to enter into the party. The father then, in love, came out and entreated his oldest son to come and join in the celebration. The son refused. His pride had been damaged by the fact that he had been a faithful son and yet his father had never thrown him a party such as the one that was thrown for the younger (wayward) son. Jesus closed the parable with the older son still standing outside the house and outside the party, indignant and prideful. He had not yet learned humility and, therefore, was unable to handle conflict biblically. He remained prideful and unforgiving in his heart.

Forgiveness: A Must

One of the keys to good conflict resolution is forgiveness. The most famous passage on forgiveness is probably Matthew 18:21-22 (ESV). “Then Peter came up and said to him, ‘Lord, how often will my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.’ ” During this period in history, the Jew had kind of a “three strikes and you’re out” system. So for Peter to offer to forgive his brother seven times was being very generous. However, Jesus responds to Peter’s question by multiplying Peter’s estimated number by seventy. Now, most Bible scholars agree that Jesus was not aiming to set a definite number at which you were to cease in offering forgiveness. Jesus was rather seeking to make the point that we are never to cease in offering forgiveness. This kind of forgiveness echoes the kind of forgiveness that God has shown to Christians. 1 John 1:9 (ESV) says that “if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Whenever we fall in to sin, if we confess it, God is faithful to forgive. He doesn’t put a limit on his forgiveness and the scriptures make it clear that we are not to put a limit on our forgiveness either.

When we think about forgiveness biblically we will realize that we have no reason to hold anything against anyone else when we stop and consider how much we have been forgiven. We sinned against a holy and perfect God and He forgave us without limit. Anyone who sins against us is merely sinning against another sinful human being. How then can we justly withhold forgiveness?

So, how do we deal with conflict in a manner that glorifies God? We must respond with humility, submission, and forgiveness. Forgiveness requires that we have a humble and submissive attitude. A prideful heart will not be prone to forgive. May God grant us the humility to deal with conflict in a manner that brings glory to the Father, and humility to forgive as we have been forgiven.

Biblical Counseling and Its Neighbors: Conversations over the Fence - by Ed Welch

Biblical Counseling and Its Neighbors: Conversations Over the Fence

Ed Welch June 13, 2011

View Comments

Lines should always be drawn with care. They identify some as in, others as out. They may say that some are right, others are wrong. Yes, we could say that lines simply identify differences, but differences can be strongly held and quickly become moral imperatives. We are, indeed, schismatic by nature.

Scripture draws lines. There is a categorical difference between those who follow Jesus and those who don’t. Other than that basic line, however, Scripture tends to put us all in the same group. A murderer and a person with a quick temper? They are more alike than different—they live in the same neighborhood. Pharisees and me? Yes, my self-righteousness acts up every day.

So when we draw lines among Christians, we want to make sure that they are broken lines—porous boundaries, moveable fences—that serve to aid unity rather than disrupt it. This means, in part, that fences are opportunities to discuss both why the fences exist and how to keep fences from becoming walls.

Who Are the Neighbors?

Among Christians who are involved in counseling there are at least two distinguishable groups: 1.) integrationist (“Christian”) counseling and 2.) biblical counseling. This follows Eric Johnson’s suggestions in his book,Foundations for Christian Soul Care (IVP, 2007). Eric further breaks integrationists into two groups: conceptual and ethical, and biblical counselors into traditional (e.g. NANC—National Association of Nouthetic Counselors) and progressive (e.g. CCEF—Christian Counseling & Educational Foundation).

Eric’s distinctions make sense. These groups do sound different from one another. While all are clearly united in their desire to be faithful to Scripture, each group has its distinct vocabulary, emphases, methods, and interests. Each group does have a different “feel.” The problem is that differences easily morph into boundaries and walls. How does that happen? It happens if we simply do nothing. Walls don’t need hostility, they just need a little neglect.

Conversations, therefore, are essential. They can debunk stereotypes and sharpen both our theology and practice. They can make our theological infrastructure more explicit and remind us that we are really neighbors who share a common goal.

What Fence Divides Us?

What are the differences? As curious as it might sound, we are all still trying to sort that out. With biblical counseling and integrationists, a.k.a., Christian counselors, the discussion, up to this time, has been slow and difficult. It has been bogged down primarily around one question: “Do you—or don’t you—benefit from secular data?”

The conclusion of this debate has been, though with many nuances, “Sometimes you do and sometimes you don’t.” I don’t want to minimize the gains made by the many articles and books devoted to the question, but my point is that this question won’t identify the most important differences. This question doesn’t identify the fence.

There is so much left to do in order for us to have conversations that are mutually sharpening, and progress will continue to be slow. Counselors are busy people. We have enough to do with our conferences, continuing education, and reading within our own “camp.” Who has time to read what the neighbors have written?

If we do read books from outside our own camp, we can be quick to make judgments based on a turn of a phrase or a citation that makes the author guilty-by-association. We can so easily set up straw-men from neighboring camps and knock them over with a simplistic critique. Thoughtful interaction is rare.

I can think of perhaps three integrationists who have offered an informed critique of biblical counseling. Most judgments are based on an anecdote from the 1970’s or assumptions that are untrue. Perhaps, integrationists and Nouthetic counselors can say the same thing about those of us at CCEF.

How Do We Start the Conversation?

We start by doing what counselors do best. We listen and enter into the world of the other person (or in this case the other counseling perspective) in such a way that the person representing the perspective says, “Yes, that’s me. You understand.”

This isn’t easy, but most counselors have these skills. But what are we even trying to understand? What information is important? What will help us in this endeavor?

Listen to the Person’s Story

First, listen to the person’s story. How did this person, who now represents a particular perspective, get into counseling initially? What were some of the influences? Were they hurt by a counseling approach? Were they blessed by one?

I have spoken at a few secular conferences in which my blatantly biblical and Christ-centered presentation was well received, or at least politely received. Yet there have always been a few hecklers. When I have had an opportunity to speak with them their stories were very similar: they believed they had been hurt by pastors who ignored their pain or merely slapped a few biblical texts on it. If you discover this story, the task at hand is not so much to identify differences but to express your sorrow and perhaps even ask forgiveness.

Or consider another possibility. Let’s say the person you are speaking with believes that Alcoholics Anonymous saved their marriage. If you set off to find differences in your approaches you are essentially criticizing the person’s mother, and that’s rarely a good way to have a profitable conversation. We can hold our positions for deeply personal reasons.

Understand the Person’s Institutional Location

Second, understand the person’s institutional location. For example, a professor at a secular university will approach psychology in a different way than I would. Though we might share very similar values, our work sites will affect our perspectives on counseling and the questions we ask. If someone works for a state agency, he or she will have a different approach than someone who works at a church. Someone who ministers in a Baptist setting may approach counseling differently from someone in a Presbyterian setting.

Examine Theological Commitments

Third, since our counseling theory and practice ultimately rises from theological commitments, take on the hard work of examining these commitments. All counseling practice rests on a foundation of both explicit and implicit theology. Some of it we may be able to articulate, some of it is assimilated without our knowledge or even permission. The task is to X-ray our counseling practice and see the theological bones that support it.

Some authors will do most of this work for you. For example, Larry Crabb works hard to spell out his biblical rationale. Robert McGee in Search for Significance does the same. Whether you agree or disagree with the conclusions, you know where they stand. Usually, however, an author will offer a very sketchy biblical perspective and we are left with the task of drawing out and identifying the theological details.

If we make it through the first two steps, this third one might be the toughest. It takes familiarity with different theological systems and the skills to highlight key theological issues. The Journal of Biblical Counseling has dabbled in this.

For example, it included an article that suggested the trichotomist/duality distinction was an important one for identifying differences between biblical and integrationist counseling. Other articles tried to identify Jay Adams’ unique view of the biblical category of flesh and of habit as a way to ferret out differences between biblical and Nouthetic counseling. Many articles have addressed motivation theory, the interpretation of situational variables, and the counselor’s role—but without overtly identifying contrasts with other views. None of these, however, have created enough discussion.

What are the Next Steps?

How do we go about talking over the fence to our neighbors? One task ahead is to generate some of the theological categories that might be useful in identifying our differences. Some of my colleagues can probably do that better than me, but I am motivated, so I will plan to offer some suggestions soon, unless they do it first.

Join the Conversation (Added by BCC Staff)

How can we start constructive conversations over the fence between “Christian integration counselors” and “biblical counselors”? What might the benefits be? The potential pitfalls?

Peace in the Midst of Change

A lot is set to change in the next couple of weeks. New church, new city, new home, new job, new almost everything.  This change has been in the works for the past few months, but in just a few days my wife and I will start a whole new chapter of our lives together. As we prepare to move on I find it a great opportunity to look back at the chapter that is closing a thank God for the way that He has worked.

As of this past week Sarah and I have been able to celebrate my graduation from college, our one year wedding anniversary, and the announcement of a new addition to our family. We praise God for His sovereignty! There is no way that we would have chosen this time in our lives to be expecting a baby, but God is omniscient and knows what is best for us, even if it does seem to be a bit challenging. Philippians 4:6-7 are verses that have been good reminders that through our communion with God, we are given a peace that doesn’t make sense given the situation. We have many reasons (humanly speaking) to worry and to fret, but we have an even greater reason to simply rest in the promises of God.  We know that we are in His will and we know that He will glorify Himself through the circumstances that we encounter.

In three days we will begin a trip that will cover almost half the country on our way from Northern Wisconsin to Southern California. We will be taking up a new ministry opportunity there with a small local church.  We are excited to see what God will do in the next few years. 

Pujols: More Than The Game

               This book was of special interest to me for three reasons. First, I am a longtime baseball fan and Albert Pujols has been one of the most outstanding players of the past decade. Secondly, I have heard rumors that Pujols was of the Christian faith, as am I, and wanted to know for sure. Lastly, I was curious, supposing he was a Christian, what his view of sports was. It could be that he simply loved the game or that he looked at it as a means by which to share Christ.

                The book did far more than answered my questions and satisfied the curiosities that I had. Scott Lamb and Tim Ellsworth are great writers and I have long respected Lamb for his stand of biblical doctrine and philosophy.

                What impressed me most about Pujols is that he is a solid Christian and that he is not afraid to use his “platform” of baseball to find opportunities to share the gospel with others. Pujols also has a passion for down syndrome children that stems from his love for God and family.

                I would definitely recommend this book especially to those who have a love for sports and sports ministry. You will be challenged, inspired, and rebuked by the life of Albert Pujols.

What do all of these people have in common?

"What do all of these people have in common?

Benjamin Keach
Hanserd Knollys
William Kiffin
Howel Harris
Daniel Rowland
Christmas Evans.
Jonathan Edwards
George Whitefield
J.P. Boyce.
John Eliot
David Brainerd
William Carey
Adoniram Judson
The translators of the Geneva Bible and the King James 1611.
John Bunyan
John Newton
Augustus Toplady
William Cowper
Joseph Hart
J.C. Ryle
D.M. Lloyd
J.C. Philpot
B.H. Carroll
Henry Mahan.
Matthew Henry
John Calvin
John Gill
William Hendriksen,
Herman Bavinck
Louis Berkhof
J.L. Dagg
Charles Hodge and his son
A.A., A.W. Pink
William Shedd
Cornelius Van Til
Gerhardus Vos
B.B. Warfield
Thomas Watson

Answer: Calvinistic Soteriology."

Critique of Brian McLaren

I recently was made aware of a website that offered free books to anyone who would read them and post a 200 word review on their blog and on a retail website. As I am always on the lookout for ways to build my library at little to no cost I jumped on the opportunity. The site lets you browse 10-15 different books and lets you choose the one that you want to receive and review. When I first signed up the selection of books was relatively uninteresting, but I did find a book that was the opener for a series on the "Ancient Practices." This book was authored by Brian McLaren. At the time I did not know much about him. I had heard his name associated with the Emergent Church Movement, but other than that knew nothing about him.

Some are of the opinion that a Conservative Christian should not be reading books that come from such a radically liberal camp, but I disagree on that point. I feel that it is good to be exposed to what they have to offer and to what they are teaching. My reason for this opinion is that there will be people in our churches and communities that find the insights provided by the Emergent camp to be very "helpful" and "beneficial" to their Christian life. Not all believers are discerning readers so it is necessary for Pastors and leaders in the church to be at least acquainted with what these people are reading when they pick up a book that comes from these circles. There are some things that we can learn from them (though it is typically very little) and some teachings that we need to be quite wary of because they sound ever so close to biblical truth but in reality undermine the authority of scripture.

I say all this to say that I was fairly optimistic when I picked up the book Finding Our Way Again: A Return to the Ancient Practices, by McLaren. The first chapter didn’t seem to present or indicate that there was any kind of problem with his theology. In that first chapter he introduced the problem that he desired to address. His claim was basically that Christianity had become a system of belief that had little or no effect on the personal everyday lives of those who claimed to adhere to it. I cannot disagree with his assessment of the problem. I am sad to say that many of those who claim to be Christians do not live like it; they bear no fruit; and they are miserable in their sin. McLarens solution, though, is where his true colors start flying. He claims that we ought to utilize the practices of ancient Christian’s (he uses the term “Christian” loosely so as to include those from Eastern Orthodoxy, Judaism, as well as Muslims) as a “footpath toward a life that is truly alive.” This pathway is not one specific “way,” but could be any number of different ways or paths to the one end of living “a life that is truly alive.” He says nothing about biblically living a life that is pleasing to God. He says nothing about the work of the Holy Spirit in the life of a Christian. He says nothing about the grace of God that brings men into a right relationship with God. McLaren apparently does not think too highly of scripture.

After reading the book I did a little research on McLaren and found that he could be considered to be anything, but a biblical Christian. He denies the truth that Christ is the only way, truth, and life and believes that people can come to the Father by means other than through Jesus Christ alone. Therefore, I don’t think that McLaren is even saved. He claims that men like Ghandi (a Hindu) sought to follow the way of Christ without identifying themselves with Christ. Last I checked that was completely unbiblical. One that does not “take up his cross and follow after Me (Christ) is not worthy of Me,” (Matt. 10:38). McLaren says that it is “advisable in many circumstances to help people become followers of Jesus and remain within their Buddhist, Hindu, or Jewish contexts.” How can one truly be a follower of Christ and not forsake those beliefs that are contrary to Christ?

My Conclusion:

McLaren is essentially a “postmodern Christian,” which is no Christian at all. He holds that we cannot objectively and absolutely know truth and that there is not absolute and exclusive way to God. He is NOT a Christian and should NOT be considered to be an authority on any topic relating to Christian/Biblical Theology or Christian living. He knows nothing of what it means to be a true follower of Christ. I think it is safe to say that Brian McLaren is what Paul calls a "false-teacher."

I am not saying that you ought never to read anything written by him. I wouldn’t suggest it unless you are able and willing to read with a biblically discerning spirit. His books are great places to develop your critical thinking skills, but are terrible if you are looking for something to help you grow in Christ.

2 Timothy 2:15

            “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.”

Book Review

Finding Our Way Again: The Return of the Ancient Practices, by Brian McLaren

                In his book Finding Our Way Again: The Return of the Ancient Practices, Brian McLaren intended to address Christians and encourage them to “rediscover the Christian faith as a transforming way of life.” His goal was (and is) noble, his assessment of the problem was clear, but his solution was vague and far from Biblical. McLaren claims the Christian faith as his own, but throughout the book makes it clear that he considers the Christian faith to be anything but exclusive in its truth claims. He says that “the way – Jewish torah, Christian gospel, or Muslim deen – leads us toward the peace, wisdom, and joy that we seek.” By this he essentially says that each of these ways, which are drastically different from each other, are equally valid ways of reaching that “peace, wisdom, and joy that we seek.”

                McLaren claims that the problem with Christianity (by “Christianity” he means Muslims, Catholics, and any other religion that is remotely similar) is that it has become nothing more than a “system of belief” and that it needs to be more or a “way of life.” I couldn’t agree more, but he offers little to no Biblical support for his methods of change which are basically doing simplistic rituals to help yourself do better. The book is basically a self-help book with the façade of being Christian in nature. McLaren is a modern-day false-teacher and his teaching should not be taken seriously.

What about Worship?

Over the Christmas break I had two main goals that I wanted to accomplish.

First, I wanted to seek the Lord's will for the next step in ministry for my wife and I. The goal of seeking was successfully accomplished! Now we are continuing to wait on the Lord for guidance. We were presented with a few different options and now we are searching each one out in faith that God will point us to the right one.

My second goal over the break was to conduct a personal study on worship as it pertains to the individual as well as to the corporate worship setting. Going into the study I had a general theology of worship in my head, but most of that theology had come from the way that I had been taught growing up. I had never taken the time to do a personal, specific study in the area of worship. My study is ongoing, as it will be for some time, but I have learned much in just the few weeks of digging.

The first thing that I learned is that worship is more about the heart than it is anything else. One can go through the motions of worship and have all their externals looking good and have their heart far from God. This is the type of worship that Christ condemns in Matthew 15 when he says "this people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me." Their outward actions and words proclaimed the praises of God, but they had no love for him in their hearts. True, biblical worship stems from a heart that has a passion for and is devoted to God and God alone.

The second thing I learned is that worship is no confined to any specific time or place. This is a "no brainer" for most on the intellectual level, but on the practical level most of us do confine our worship to a specific time and place. The Sunday Morning Worship Service is where we typically confine our worship to. Either that or the musical portion of each service. It is where we "sing our worship and praise to God." While it is true that the Sunday morning service is a time of worship and it is also true that the musical portion of any service is also worship, worship cannot and should not be confined to these times. In John 4 Christ tells the Samaritan woman that neither of the two mountains that she had mentioned would be the "place of worship," but rather worshipers would worship in "spirit." That is to say that worship will not be tied down to any specific time or place. Worship comes out of a heart that rejoices in who God is and that worship can flow at any time. Actually it should flow all the time.When we realize this truth we are confonted with the question, "why corporate worship?" If worship is not confined to those times when the church body meets together then why do we meet together at all? That's a good question and one that I wrestled with. Corporate worship is a display of the unity that the church body has in Christ. We gather as one body to celebrate Christ and worship God through both the singing and the preaching.

Thirdly, I learned that worship must be done in truth. This also come from John 4 and Christ's discussion with the woman at the well. Christ said that the Father is seeking true worshipers who would worship him in spirit and in truth. The fact that the Father is seeking such worshipers gives us an idea as to how important these two principles (worshiping in spirit and in truth) are. When Christ says that we must worship the Father in truth he is saying that we must worship him in light of who he really is. We must have an accurate view of God  if we are to worship him correctly. It would do us no good and it would bring God no honor to worship him for his holiness if he were not holy. The same goes for his justice, mercy, grace, and love; or any other attribute. If we worship him for something that he is not then he receives no glory from it. We must worship God according to the true revelation of himself.

There is much more that I have learned and I'm sure there is much more that I will learn, but these are just some beginning thoughts.

Questions

Recently someone commented on one of my blog posts under the name “Anonymous” with the following question: “I was wondering why you are a regular endorser of calvinism and reformed theology?” Since my post was simply relaying a free Kindle book offer which only lasted for a couple of days I deleted the post within two or three days of posting it. Therefore, I did not see this question on my blog dashboard until I had already deleted the post from the regular message board which prohibited me from replying to this person directly in the post. Since I am unable to do that, I will take this post to briefly answer the question that was posed.

First, why do I regularly endorse Calvinism? That is an interesting question because my regular endorsement of it goes only as far as the free Kindle book offers that I post. The same goes for Reformed Theology. Yes, I do believe in the Doctrines of Grace because they are in the Bible and if calling me a Calvinist helps you to identify me with that then so be it. Why do I support the Doctrines of Grace (Calvinism)? Because it is biblical and it is vital to our understanding of salvation and sanctification.

Second, why do I regularly endorse Reformed Theology? My primary endorsement of Reformed Theology comes, as with Calvinism, from the free Kindle book offers. In addition to those offers I do have a post endorsing Tabletalk Magazine which is published by Ligonier Ministries. Ligonier Ministries was founded by R.C. Sproul who is of the Reformed Tradition. My recommendation of R.C. Sproul himself and the magazine come from my interaction with both. I have read multiple books by Sproul and am a subscriber to Tabletalk Magazine and have been both greatly edified and challenged by each book and magazine. They are both firmly rooted in Bible teaching. The magazine, specifically, deals with the issues of Christianity in today’s culture better than any other magazine that I have come across. It deals with the issues in a biblical manner which means that it is both true to God’s Word and is relevant to our world and culture today.

I hope that answers the questions of “Anonymous.” If you would like to discuss this issue to a deeper level please email me at stephen.green@ni.edu.

PS. I also wouldn't mind knowing the identity of "Anonymous." You know who I am and it would be nice to know who I am interacting with.