Enjoying God
Six Gifts from God (Isaiah 9.6)
Dec 17, 2007Christmas, for some, can be an especially discouraging time of year. One often hears of those suffering from "seasonal depression" or the "holiday blues" as they contemplate the loss of a loved one, a failed marriage, unemployment and the financial pressure of being unable to provide gifts for their family, or perhaps a child who simply won't come home.
But I have good news for you today! You have a reason to rejoice that far exceeds the combined effect of the difficulties and disappointments you face. The reason comes in the form of six gifts from God, but not the sort that you find wrapped with ribbon and bow and placed under a tree. Rather, these gifts are embodied in one person: Jesus Christ. Listen closely:
"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" (Isa. 9:6).
These gifts are six glorious truths concerning the person of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. But before we begin to unwrap them, one by one, there are a couple of things to note. First, when the prophet says his name shall be "called" Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, etc., he does not mean that Jesus actually bears these names, as if his mother Mary might have said: "Go tell ‘Wonderful Counselor' that dinner is ready!" Rather, these names or titles are descriptive of his character and personality. He IS the kind of person the names portray him to be.
Also, these are not merely the names or titles or descriptive phrases of some ancient historical figure. These are more than lyrics in a chorus from Handel's "Messiah" or words on a Christmas card. These names and titles express what Jesus is to you, in you, and for your sake. So I suggest that you read this passage personally: "For to me a child is born, to me a son is given . . ." Each gift has a tag with a single word.
(1) Sympathy! When the prophet declares that to us a "child is born" and a "son" is given, he highlights the fact that Jesus was and is a human being! Fully God and fully man. Wholly human and wholly divine. Both the son of a virgin peasant girl and the Son of Almighty God.
What significance does this have for you? Simply this, that "he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted" (Heb. 2:17-18). In other words, "we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need" (Heb. 4:15-16).
There is no temptation or trial that he cannot understand. There is no struggle or sadness with which he cannot sympathize. There is no hardship or difficulty for which he cannot provide strength to endure.
(2) Supremacy! The "government", declares the prophet, "shall be upon his shoulder." If Jesus is more than able to shoulder the weight of the world, he can surely bear your burdens!
Contrast this with the structure of our government and its separation of powers. The Legislative, Judicial, and Executive branches are designed, among other reasons, so that no one person or group of individuals should bear the weight of the whole. But Jesus rules alone! Supremacy of power and authority rests with him. He is the King of kings, President of presidents, and Judge of all judges.
Terrorists may destroy, politicians may posture, armies maneuver and nations threaten, but Jesus Christ sits on the throne in unchallenged and unassailable supremacy!
(3) Sagacity! He is the "Wonderful Counselor"! Can you think of any situation in which Jesus said the wrong thing, or spoke out of turn, stuck his foot in his mouth, or remained silent when his words were needed?
His counsel is unfailing and flawless, perfectly suited to the situation, always practical and prudent. There is no problem on which he needs to "study up" or refer to a professional. I often feel the frustration of having to say to those confused or in need, "I'm sorry, but I don't know what to tell you." Jesus is never lacking for advice or an answer to satisfy our souls.
And note well: he's not simply a good counselor or wise counselor but a wonderful counselor. And not only are there wonderful things about him, he is himself a wonder! It brings to mind that simple chorus we sang in the nineties,
"Jesus, what a wonder you are!
You are so gentle, so pure and so kind.
You shine like the morning star.
Jesus, what a wonder you are!"
(4) Sovereignty! He is the "Mighty God". Jesus is not only able to give perfect advice; he is also able to supply us with the power to heed it. He is able to enable you to achieve what he advises! When people leave my presence, taking with them what little wisdom I may have provided, I've done all I can do. I can't energize their wills or empower their hearts or stir their souls to act on what they know to be true. But Jesus can!
Of the six truths about Jesus in this passage, this is the one non-Christians despise the most. The world is willing to acknowledge the "baby" Jesus, "away in a manger," helpless, cuddly, and vulnerable. Christmas is o.k., if that's as far as it goes, for it poses no threat to one's sin and pride and personal autonomy. Speak and sing, if you must, of swaddling clothes and the tiny, tender infant. But then declare that this babe in a manger is also the Mighty God, Holy, Infinite, Sovereign over all, and they want nothing to do with him. Jesus in a manger is one thing. Jesus on a throne is something else altogether!
(5) Sensitivity! Why this word to describe Jesus as "Eternal Father"? First, the term "father" is not used here in the Trinitarian sense, as if depicting relationships within the Godhead. The prophet is not saying that the Son is also the Father (a heresy denounced in the early church councils).
The word "Father" is a descriptive analogy pointing to Christ's character. What does a "father" do? What image is evoked by the word? I suggest he has in mind the tenderness and sensitivity of a compassionate and affectionate father. It is the security and love he provides, as well as protection and provision. Jesus, therefore, is fatherly, father-like, in his treatment of us. This is similar to what the psalmist had in mind when he said, "as a father shows compassion to his children, so the Lord shows compassion to those who fear him" (Ps. 103:13).
(6) Serenity! He is "the Prince of Peace"! He is the source of all serenity. He himself "is our peace" (Eph. 2:14), having broken down the barriers that divide us from one another and, most important of all, the barriers between us and God (cf. Romans 5:1).
A day is coming when he will establish peace among the nations and subdue all opposition to his rule. But now, in the present, he is here on your behalf to bring peace and joy and tranquility and calm to your heart. "I have said these things to you," spoke Jesus, "that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world" (John 16:33).
At Christmas, children often spend time dividing up the presents under the tree, counting who in the family has the most (well, I did anyway; yes, it was carnal and materialistic, but I was only a kid!). Today I'm here to reassure you that you will never go gift-less, not on Christmas morn nor any other time of the year.
Here are six gifts from God, specially wrapped and delivered . . . for you! A sympathetic friend, a supreme and unchallenged Lord over all, wonderfully wise, always able to act on behalf of those who trust him, sensitive and caring and compassionate, the giver of all peace and comfort and consolation. Merry Christmas!
Sam
The Controlling Power of the Cross
Dec 13, 2007What gets you going in the morning? Aside from an alarm clock and the prospect of being fired from your job should you choose to remain in bed, what energizes you to face each day? How do you account for your decision to press on in life when there seem to be so many reasons to quit?
Do you find yourself coerced by an external force, perhaps a threat, a promise, or the hope of winning the lottery (that's not an endorsement to purchase a ticket)? Is your life defined by the expectations of others or the fear of what may befall you should you choose to renege on your obligations?
The apostle Paul was a driven man, a man with seemingly endless energy, a man who gave every appearance to those who knew him of being impelled by an unseen power. How else do we explain his life, especially as it is portrayed in the book of 2 Corinthians?
I ask this question today in view of Paul's own explicit word of testimony concerning the driving force of his daily existence. Read it closely:
"For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died; and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised" (2 Corinthians 5:14-15; emphasis mine).
Quite clearly love is the power that accounts for Paul's remarkable life and willing sacrifice for the church and the glory of God. But whose love, and for what? You don't need to understand Greek to see that the phrase in question can be interpreted in one of two ways. Paul is either referring to his love for Christ or to Christ's love for him (and some would argue that both are in mind!). I'm glad the ESV has chosen not to interpret the phrase for us. In my opinion, that is the task for the student of Scripture.
Although Paul's personal love for the Lord Jesus Christ is passionate and unquestioned, I don't think that is what he has in view. There are at least two reasons why I'm convinced that Paul is referring to the love and affection that Christ has for us.
First, in virtually every other instance where Paul uses this particular construction (a personal genitive [in this case, "of Christ"] after the word "love" [Greek, agape]), it refers to the love which that person has or demonstrates or manifests. Thus, when we read about "the love of God" in Romans 5:5 or "the love of Christ" in Romans 8:35 or "the love of the Spirit" in Romans 15:30, it is the Father's love, the Son's love, and the Spirit's love for sinners that Paul has in view.
Second, and perhaps even more important, is the context. Clearly Paul has in mind Christ's death for us (he "died for all") as the preeminent expression of his love. As Paul reflects on the unfathomable sacrifice Christ made for sinners such as himself, he is gripped yet again with "the breadth and length and height and depth" (Eph. 3:18) of divine affection for hell-deserving transgressors. This, then, is the single reality that shapes and sustains and empowers his every breath, every decision, as well as every sacrifice he made.
The word translated control (ESV) or constrain literally means "hemmed in". It is as if Paul says, "I'm on a road where I can veer neither to the right nor left. I can't even retreat! I'm pushed forward by the transforming power of knowing that Jesus loved me to such an extent that he would give his life in my place on the cross."
The water that flows in a river has no choice but to follow the direction set by its banks on the right and left. Such is how Paul feels. Thus the idea is far more than that of mere "moral influence" or "persuasion." It's as if Paul says, "If ever I should be tempted to think first of my own welfare, the love of Christ at the cross takes hold of my heart and liberates me from myself and for the service of others. If ever I should use my suffering as an excuse to slow down or back off or withdraw altogether, Christ's willingness to endure the wrath of God on my behalf lights a flame in my soul that no amount of earthly comfort or promise of man's praise can extinguish!"
Perhaps this doesn't resonate with us as it did with Paul because we don't understand the magnitude of what was entailed in Christ's death for us. If that is true, let James Denney shed light on the significance of that powerful preposition translated "for":
"Plainly, if Paul's conclusion is to be drawn, the 'for' must reach deeper than this mere suggestion of our advantage: if we all died, in that Christ died for us, there must be a sense in which that death of His is ours; He must be identified with us in it; there, on the cross, while we stand and gaze at Him, He is not simply a person doing us a service; He is a person doing us a service by filling our place and dying our death!"
This, says Paul, accounts for all that I am, all that I do, everything I endure, and everything for which I hope and live. Were it not for the amazing grace and undying love of Christ as manifest in his dying my death, I would degenerate into a self-absorbed solipsist. When I feel self-pity rising up in my heart, I'm reminded of the love of Christ and thereby empowered to slay it. When I find bitterness taking root in my soul, I'm reminded of the love of Christ and thereby impelled to renounce it. And when indifference threatens my commitment, the cross of Christ's love ignites a zeal that sustains me through every trial.
Here is what controls, constrains, and impels me, says Paul: It is that Jesus chose not to hate me (though I was hateful), but to love me (though I was unlovely), and gave himself for me that I might now live for him.
Does the love of God revealed in the cross exert a similar power in your life, or in mine?
When long-held dreams are shattered against the rock of unexpected reality, do you find strength in the knowledge that he died your death so that you might live in the power of his resurrection life?
When others betray or abandon you, are you sustained by the assurance that the cross is the measure of his commitment to you and the pledge, in blood, that he will never leave you or forsake you (cf. Hebrews 13:5)?
Does the reminder that "he who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for" your sake (Romans 8:32) prove adequate in times of despair and depression and confusion?
I ask you today (as I ask myself): What "constrains" your choices? What "controls" your mind? What animates your affections? What empowers your relationships? I pray that, together with Paul, you can say it is the glorious and incomparable assurance that he "loved me and gave himself for me" (Gal. 2:20b).
Sam
What's Your Theology?
Dec 06, 2007On numerous occasions I've had people ask me about my theological convictions, most likely because I appear to be an odd mix of views that cannot be found in any one confession of faith or reduced to a single label, system, or denomination.
Others have asked the same question when they see the variety of churches in which I've either served as senior pastor, associate pastor, board member, or simply member. This would include Southern Baptist, Presbyterian, independent Bible church (with a Plymouth Brethren orientation), Vineyard, Anglican, and charismatic. By now, I suspect many of you might be inclined to say, "Sam, you're not so much eclectic in your theology as you are confused!"
So, I've decided to yield to the pressure of these repeated inquiries and briefly explain what I believe, with only a brief comment on why and a few references to material either in my books or on my website that will provide support. My aim has always been to be biblical. But, of course, everyone would say that about his or her beliefs. So here goes.
I am a Calvinistic, charismatic, complementarian, Christian hedonist. If that weren't enough to confuse you, I am also amillennial and baptistic, though I believe in rule by a plurality of Elders and maintain a moderately sacramental perspective on the spiritual presence of Christ in the Eucharist (there's a word that reflects my four years in an Anglican church!).
Please understand that the issues below are not regarded as fundamental in the sense that one must believe them in order to be a Christian. I have not listed such foundational truths as Trinitarianism, the inspiration and infallibility of Scripture, the virgin conception, sinless life, penal substitutionary sacrifice, and bodily resurrection of Christ, or the doctrine of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.
I'm focusing, rather, on issues that differentiate men and women who are all Christians. In other words, I trust you understand that I believe someone who is an Arminian-cessationist-egalitarian-dispensational-presbyterian (I dare say I've never heard of anyone being all those!), or some other odd mixture thereof can also be a Christian. I hope those who regard me as an even odder theological mixture will extend the same generosity.
So, let's look briefly at each of these and a few related sub-points.
(1) I am a Calvinist (all five points, by the way). I hardly think this needs much explanation, and I refer you to my book, Chosen for Life: The Case for Divine Election (Crossway, 2007). There are several related issues that bear mentioning:
a. On the issue of the order of the divine decrees, I am an Infralapsarian (see Chosen for Life, pp. 213-19).
b. I believe that all those dying in infancy are elect (on my website, http://www.samstorms.com/, a defense can be found in Theological Studies, Controversial Issues).
c. I believe that regeneration, or the new birth, precedes and is the cause/source of saving faith. In other words, we are born again in order that we may believe, not the other way around.
d. In view of the present controversy, it is important that I affirm my belief in the forensic nature of justification in which the righteousness of Christ (often called his active and passive obedience) is imputed to the believer through faith alone.
(2) I am a Charismatic. When asked if I am "charismatic" I typically respond by saying, "Tell me what you mean by the term and I'll tell you if I'm one." More times than not, what people have in mind is far and away different from what I believe. So let me simply identify several relevant issues.
a. I believe that all spiritual gifts are valid today and that nothing in Scripture suggests otherwise. My chapter in the book Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views (Zondervan) is the most extensive answer I've given to this question. Also, my book The Beginner's Guide to Spiritual Gifts (Regal) provides an answer to the question of how such gifts operate in church life today.
b. I believe that baptism in the Spirit occurs at conversion for all Christians (again, check out the two articles on the website in Theological Studies, Controversial Issues). This sets me apart from classical Pentecostalism and much of the contemporary charismatic movement.
c. Although I do pray in tongues (daily), I do not believe that this or any other spiritual gift is designed by God for all Christians. Every Christian has at least one gift while no Christian (at least, none I know) has every gift (nor should they).
d. I believe healing is in the atonement in the same way I believe all spiritual and physical blessings are in the atonement. Were it not for the death and resurrection of Christ we would have nothing but the eternal damnation that we deserve. But not all such blessings are experienced in their fullness until the consummation of all things in the New Heaven and New Earth. This would certainly be true of the healing of the body.
d. Although I do believe God heals today, I do not believe that the so-called "Health and Wealth and/or Prosperity Gospel" is in any sense a "gospel" and I ask all Christians to cease referring to it in such terms. Call it a "movement" or "philosophy" or even a "theology", but stop calling it a gospel! The same applies to what typically is called "The Word of Faith" movement, in much of which I struggle to find the presence of true, biblical "faith".
e. I believe in both (1) the finality, sufficiency, and authority of Scripture, on the one hand, and (2) the validity of revelatory gifts such as prophecy and word of knowledge, on the other. And no, the latter (2) is not a threat to the former (1).
(3) I am a Complementarian. I've written briefly on this issue at my website. The relevant material can be found in Theological Studies. A few words of clarification are in order.
a. If I am to err, I choose to err on the side of flexibility and freedom. In other words, I hesitate to restrict women from any form of ministry that does not have explicit biblical sanction.
b. As I read the New Testament, it appears that Paul and others restrict women from serving in what I call senior governmental authority, which would include the office of Senior Pastor (i.e., that individual or pastoral office responsible for the regular, authoritative exposition of Scripture) and Elder (or Bishop, depending on which term you prefer). Therefore, I believe a woman can serve as a deacon or worship leader or counselor or any other expression of Christian ministry that does not violate Paul's injunction against women exercising authority over men (1 Timothy 2:11-15; 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9).
(4) I am a Christian Hedonist. Simply put, I believe it is impossible for us to desire pleasure too much, and that the pleasure we cannot desire too much is pleasure in God and all that he is for us in Jesus. For more on this, I direct you to my books, Pleasures Evermore: The Life-Changing Power of Enjoying God (NavPress) and One Thing: Developing a Passion for the Beauty of God (Christian Focus). If you want a shorter explanation, visit my website and you will see a brief article on the Home page titled, "What is Christian Hedonism?"
(5) I am an Amillennialist. This is a huge topic on which I am currently writing a book. So I'll limit myself here to only a few specifics.
a. One of the primary reasons I am not a Premillennialist (neither Historic nor Dispensational) is because of what I read in the NT concerning the Second Coming of Christ.
To be a Premillennialist of any sort, you must believe that physical death and the curse on the natural creation will continue to exist beyond the time of Christ's return. You must believe that the New Heavens and New Earth will not be introduced until 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ. You must believe that unbelieving men and women will still have the opportunity to come to saving faith in Christ for at least 1,000 years subsequent to his return. To be a Premillennialist, you must believe that unbelievers will not be finally resurrected until at least 1,000 years subsequent to Christ's return and that unbelievers will not be finally judged and cast into eternal punishment until at least 1,000 years subsequent to Christ's return.
But my reading of what happens at the Second Coming of Christ indicates that then, and not 1,000 years later, physical death is swallowed up in the victory of Christ, never again to exert its power; the natural creation is delivered fully and finally from its bondage to sin; the New Heavens and New Earth are inaugurated; all opportunity for salvation of the lost comes to an end; and both the final resurrection and final judgment of all mankind occur.
b. I find no biblical support for a pre-tribulation rapture, Christian Zionism, a distinction between Israel and the Church, or a future seven year period known as the Great Tribulation.
c. I believe Matthew 24:1-35; Mark 13:1-31; and Luke 21:5-33 (otherwise known as the Olivet Discourse) refer to events that transpired in the first century, beginning with the exaltation of Christ and consummating with the destruction in 70 a.d. of both the city of Jerusalem and its Temple.
As I said, I hope to finish a book on eschatology sometime in 2008, but in the meantime you may read several articles in defense of these beliefs, available on my website under Theological Studies, Eschatology.
(6) I am a Baptist (or, "baptistic", as some prefer). If you've recovered from (5), and I suspect many of you haven't, let me turn briefly to another broad subject and focus on several important items (rest assured, of course, that being baptistic would entail far more than simply what I mention below).
a. I believe only those who are able to provide a credible testimony of personal faith in Jesus Christ should be baptized (immersed) in water.
b. I believe that a local church should be governed by a plurality of Elders, of which the Senior Pastor is one. I see no biblical basis for a church being led by a single Elder or Pastor. (No, this does not make me a Presbyterian, although I once served as interim pastor for three years in such a church.)
c. I believe that Jesus Christ is spiritually (and therefore, really, but not physically) present in the elements of the Eucharist and that the elements are more than merely a symbol of his body and blood. They are (one of) the sacramental means by which the sanctifying (but not saving) grace of Christ is mediated to the believer. For more on this, check out the two articles titled, "What Happens in the Eucharist?" on my website, Theological Studies, Miscellaneous Topics.
(7) I am a . . . I needed a seventh point to satisfy those who are obsessed with biblical numerology ("6" will never do, or so they tell me), so here is a brief list of other, often contentious, issues. (You can find articles on each of these issues on my website under Theological Studies, Controversial Issues.)
a. I believe that Open Theism is heretical.
b. I believe that eternal punishment in Hell is conscious and unending.
c. I believe that the NT leaves open the possibility for some form of apostolic ministry today (although without the Scripture-writing authority of the original company).
d. I believe Christians can be demonized (note, I did not say demon-possessed).
e. I do not believe the NT mandates that Christians "tithe" 10% of their income but I do believe in generous, sacrificial, proportionate giving that often times, depending on one's wealth, ought to exceed 10%.
f. While affirming the historicity of Adam and Eve as the first humans and parents of our race, I tentatively embrace the theory of an old earth and old universe. (I've not written anything on this, but may have to.)
I think that's enough to get myself into trouble with just about everyone! I must confess, however, that I'm not in the least bothered by that. My only concern is that these beliefs be grounded in Scripture and not merely experience or personal preference or an emotional wound or ambition or something that I'm required to believe in order to keep my job or because some hero of mine in centuries past happened to believe it. Isn't that something for which we all should strive?
Blessings,
Sam