Scriptures in Question:   ​

“In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil” (Job 1:1).
 “…all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).  


These two scriptures ­­– Job 1:1 and Romans 3:23 – are loved by sceptics as they feel the two verses provide a “perfect” example of biblical contradiction.  How, they ask, could Job be “blameless” (NIV, ESV, etc.) or “perfect” (as translated in the King James Version) –  in other words, sinless –  if, as Paul affirms, all have sinned?

Many Christians realize that when the New Testament uses the word “perfect” (as when Jesus tells his followers to “be perfect” – Matthew 5:48), the Greek word used means “mature” or “complete” (see “Does God Expect us to Be Perfect?” on our sister site, here).  In the Old Testament a similar situation occurs.  The Hebrew word tam translated in Job 1:1 as “blameless” or “perfect” (and again in Job 1:8, 2:3) has several shades of meaning. It comes from a root word meaning to be complete or finished (Genesis 47:18, Deuteronomy 31:24) and in a secondary sense to be morally sound or upright (Job 22:3, Psalm 18:26).  Tam itself can be translated “complete,” “finished,” “blameless,” “innocent,” or “having integrity.” In Proverbs 29:10, for example, the word is used in the phrase “a person of integrity.”

This meaning –  of having moral integrity or “uprightness” –  that lies at the heart of what we are told in Job does not imply perfection as we might think of the word in modern English usage. In fact, the respected Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (Abingdon, 1981) states categorically: “the words which are rendered in English by ‘perfect’ and ‘perfection’ [in the Hebrew Bible] denoted originally something other and less than ideal perfection.” 

So although Job 1:1 records that Job was blameless, and in Job 1:8 and 2:3 God is said to have declared Job to be blameless, the Hebrew word translated “blameless” does not have to mean morally perfect and completely sinless.  This can be seen in that the book itself shows Job’s failings.   In 7:21 Job states “Why do you not pardon my offenses and forgive my sins?” and in 42:6 Job confirms his own sinfulness when he says: “Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes.”   When we take these facts into account, it is clear that being “blameless” or “perfect” before God in Job – and elsewhere in the Old Testament – means being morally upright, but it does not have to refer to some kind of sinless perfection.

Putting the scriptures together, then, there is no contradiction between what the Book of Job tells us and what Paul affirms in Romans.  All humans, including Job, have sinned, as Paul stresses; but Job had attained a level of integrity or moral uprightness that God himself acknowledged as being remarkable – just as the Book of Job states. 

Some five hundred years ago, in 1517, Martin Luther nailed his list of 95 theses to the church door in Wittenberg. It was these “theses” or principles, of course, that triggered the Protestant Reformation, and in so doing changed the history of the modern world.

Most of Luther’s theses had to do with his rejection of the practice of selling “indulgencies” in the Catholic Church of his time – a means of raising money for the church which claimed that people might pay to have the souls of loved ones or others released from “purgatory.”  Although this may seem like ancient history to most of us in the modern world, and most of us may not know what a single one of Luther’s 95 theses was, there are some timeless lessons to be found there.

In his very first thesis –  which formed the basis of those that followed –  Luther (citing Matthew 4:17) wrote: “Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said, ‘Repent’, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.”   This statement was a remarkable one for its time.  The Vulgate –  the Latin version of the Bible used by the Catholic Church –  translated the command to repent in Matthew 4:17 with the words paenitentiam agite, meaning “Go, and do penance.” But Luther found that in the Greek text of the New Testament the word for repentance used by the New Testament writers was metanoia, which has nothing to do with penance and means to change one’s heart and mind –  to be changed or converted.

This deeper and more accurate understanding of the concept of repentance had a direct impact on Luther’s first thesis, for we obviously cannot constantly be doing penance throughout our whole lives; but as Luther stated, our lives as believers should be ones of ongoing repentance in the sense of continual change and ongoing conversion.

The truth that Luther had learned was that all of the Christian life is repentance. Certainly, the Bible speaks of a primary repentance when we first turn to God from our own sinfulness (Acts 2:38, 11:18), and we might call that “Repentance with a capital R.”  But the Scriptures also show that our initial Repentance is followed by an ongoing repentance (here with a small “r”) that is the continual mindset of the Christian. This does not mean constantly dwelling on our mistakes and failures, but continually and immediately repenting when we do find we have come short of God’s way. 

We see this ongoing or additional repentance throughout the Bible.  We see it frequently, for example, in the psalms of David where he expresses repentance on many occasions. We see it in the New Testament in scriptures such as Revelation 2:5 which commands members of the church to repent of errors into which they have fallen, and in 1 John 1:8-9 which tells us that: “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.”
 
This is the ongoing reality that the apostle Paul had in mind when he wrote: “So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in him” (Colossians 2:16). Just as we begin our Christian lives with repentance and faith (Acts 2:38), so Paul says, we must continue – in repentance and faith. 

We know that it is the Spirit of God that leads us to initial repentance (Romans 2:4), and as his Spirit continues to live in us (1 Corinthians 3:16) we are continually guided to repentance from ongoing mistakes and sins. The Scriptures are clear that this ongoing repentance is not done to try to earn salvation, but as a natural result of salvation occurring in our lives and our desire to become more and more like God. In other words, we are forgiven our sins through the occurrence of Repentance at the beginning of our Christian lives –  but we continue to ask God to forgive us and spare us from the consequences of our sins after that point.  Every small “repentance” reaffirms our original “Repentance.”

In reclaiming the concept of ongoing repentance, Luther discovered something that every Christian must discover and act on also: that true repentance is not just an inaugural event in our Christian lives, but it is also the very basis of our life in Christ from that time forward.  

The concept of ongoing lifelong repentance is not a message that is commonly heard in many churches, but it is a message that we need to nail firmly to the doors of our hearts and minds. 

​“Then Jesus, calling out with a loud voice, said, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!" And having said this he breathed his last” (Luke 23:46 ESV).

“When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, "It is finished," and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit” (John 19:30 ESV).

On the surface, the accounts of Luke and John certainly might seem to be at variance with each other regarding the last words of Jesus, but when we look more closely we find little reason to see any contradiction.

First, we should notice that while Luke specifically says “…having said this he breathed his last,” the wording of John’s Gospel “… and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit” does not necessarily preclude intervening words – it could simply mean that moments or minutes after receiving the wine, Jesus died. 

Note that while Luke focuses specifically on Jesus’ last words – and calls them exactly that – John seems to focus on the sour wine event and its resultant “It is finished” as the final prophecies fulfilled by Christ. This is typical of Luke’s frequent focus on the humanity of Jesus and his actual words, as opposed to John’s focus on Jesus’ fulfillment of prophecies relating to the Messiah and details regarding the message of salvation.

But there is no real reason to think that both accounts were not true.  Jesus’ last words may have been a combination of what John and Luke record: “It is finished. Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.”   If these were the actual and full last words of Jesus, then the two Gospel writers simply recorded that part of the expression which was of most importance to their own accounts.

It is also sometimes said that both Luke and John are contradicted by Matthew and Mark, whose Gospels both record Jesus’ expression “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” as his last words.  But both Matthew and Mark write that, soon after this, Jesus gave a loud cry: “And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit” (Matthew 27:50); “With a loud cry, Jesus breathed his last” (Mark 15:37).

But these accounts do not say whether the “loud cry” or “loud voice” contained words or not. If the cry contained words, it was doubtless those recorded by Luke and John.  The reason that the other two Gospels say a “voice” or “cry” was probably because they are based on the account of a witness of the crucifixion who was close enough to hear the cry, but not close enough to make out the exact words.  (Both Matthew and Mark agree that many of the witnesses stood “at a distance” from the cross – Matthew 27:55, Mark 15:40).

When we keep both factors in mind: that Luke and John compiled their Gospels stressing different themes, and that Matthew and Mark may well have drawn their information from different witnesses, there is no need to presume any contradiction between the four Gospels as to the last words of Jesus.

​​We all know the apostle Peter’s admonition that we “grow in grace and knowledge” (2 Peter 3:18), and most of us try to strike a balance in seeking both in our lives. Yet we often tend to gravitate toward one or the other –  focusing on the development of our Christian walk or our biblical understanding.

Some Christians spend a great deal of time in study of the word and may even fall into the ditch of seeking knowledge at the expense of growing in grace*. Those who make this mistake may become involved in some of the more obscure aspects of the Scriptures such as prophecy, and this becomes their main focus.  On the other hand, there are other Christians who move toward the opposite extreme of neglecting the responsibility of study of God’s word when they fall into the ditch of believing that “all you need is love.” 

Clearly, as Peter tells us, we need both grace and knowledge, and this is a principle we find often in the Scriptures. The apostle Paul elaborated on it when he wrote that our goal should be: “… that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God” (Colossians 1:10). But what we may fail to understand if we tend to gravitate in one direction or the other is how the two areas of spiritual growth interact. Growing in grace can actually increase our spiritual knowledge, and growing in knowledge can increase the fruit of grace in our lives. If that sounds counterintuitive, consider the following scriptures.

“Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ to further the faith of God’s elect and their knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness” (Titus 1:1, emphasis added).  Here, in the very opening of his letter to Titus, Paul stresses that furthering knowledge of the truth leads to godliness.  This concept is simple enough – we cannot please God without knowing what it is that pleases him –  but it is a concept that we should always keep in mind if we are to be truly growth oriented. 
 
Yet knowledge is only half of the equation for spiritual growth. Notice what Paul states in his letter to the Colossians regarding those he taught:

“My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:2-3, emphases added).  In this profound scripture Paul shows the opposite truth to that he stressed to Titus. Here, we see that being united in love forms the basis of knowledge and understanding of Christ.
  
The fact that we can only have true knowledge of God  if we live in love is also repeatedly stressed by the apostle John (1 John 1:10-11, etc.). Notice one example of this teaching: “This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us” (1 John 3:16). It is through knowledge of Christ’s sacrifice that we come to understand and to be able to emulate true love in our lives.  John reiterates the connection between love and knowledge a few verses later: “Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love” (1 John 4:8). 

We need both grace and knowledge, love and truth, or however we might categorize these two primary aspects of Christian growth. And we need to remember that not only are both vital, but also that growth in one often leads to growth in the other. 

Once we understand this principle we gain insights into many biblical stories. In the Old Testament, for example, we see Job, who evidently walked perfectly before God (Job 1:1, 8), yet who still had to learn lessons (Job 42:5).  In the New Testament we see many examples of the religious leaders of Jesus’ day who had knowledge but who needed to grow in love (Luke 11:42, etc.).
​
Our lives need to exhibit both grace and knowledge, but fullness of growth in one of these areas often involves continuing to grow in the other. 
 
* In this context, grace refers to our walk before God (as in John 1:14) rather than the grace he extends to us.

​
​On the surface, the Old Testament books of First and Second Kings and First and Second Chronicles seem very alike. In fact, after reading Kings, Chronicles may appear to be simply a retelling of much of the same material. 

​This feeling is heightened by fifteen statements in Kings that say  “Now the rest of the acts of [king X], and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?” (1 Kings 14:29, etc.).   But this Chronicles of the Kings of Judah is not the biblical Book of Chronicles; it is a different account that was not preserved in the Bible and has not survived. There was another book, the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, mentioned nineteen times in the Bible (1 Kings 14:19, etc.), that also has not survived.

But returning to the books we do have – the biblical books of First and Second Kings and First and Second Chronicles –  are these really just overlapping accounts with no significant  differences?  The answer is not at all!  In reality, Kings and Chronicles have entirely different underlying themes and often carry very different lessons –  as we can see by considering the following facts.

The material in the two books of Kings was composed relatively soon after the events they describe and completed soon after the beginning of Judah’s captivity in Babylon. The material in the two books of Chronicles was brought together later, a good many years after the events it describes, shortly after the return from captivity.  So it is clear that Chronicles was written when Kings was already in existence, and so it must have been felt that it gave additional valuable information or perspectives.

There are, in fact, a number of important differences in the types of material included in these works. At the broader level, Kings deals with the history of both Israel and Judah while Chronicles focuses on the history of the southern kingdom of Judah. In Chronicles, the northern kings of Israel are usually only mentioned when they had some effect on the kings of Judah.
 
While Kings provides an overview of all the royal lines, Chronicles focuses on the Davidic line.  So Kings does not include the reigns of Saul or David and begins with Solomon. Chronicles begins with Adam and includes the reigns of Saul and David.  The different focus is clear in the details each account gives. For example, while Kings gives a detailed description of Solomon building his palace (1 Kings 7:1-12), the construction of Solomon’s palace is only mentioned in passing in Chronicles (1 Chronicles 8:1). Kings details the shortcomings of Solomon at the end of his life, but Chronicles does not mention them.
 
Kings is concerned with Judah’s failure to maintain covenant relationship with God, whereas Chronicles is more concerned with its restoration.  For example, Kings gives a detailed account of King Josiah's purging of the land from idolatry (2 Kings 23:4-20). On the other hand, Chronicles gives a detailed treatment of Josiah's reinstitution of the Passover (2 Chronicles 35:1-9).

But the outlook of both books is also very different. Jewish tradition states that the prophet Jeremiah wrote Kings and that the priest Ezra wrote Chronicles, but in any event, the prophetic versus priestly perspectives of the two works is clear. Consider the fact that the careers of the great prophets Elijah and Elisha are detailed in Kings but not at all in Chronicles. In Kings the priestly Levites only appear twice, whereas they are mentioned about a hundred times in Chronicles.  More importantly, the different perspectives influence what stories are included in the two accounts. We see this, for example, in the fact that Hezekiah’s sickness and the prophet Isaiah’s prediction regarding it are mentioned only in Kings (1 Kings 19:14-34), whereas the same king’s purification of the temple and his actions regarding it are found only in Chronicles (1 Chronicles 29:1-36; 30:1-31:1; 31:2-21).

Because Kings  is written more from the perspective of the prophets who warned Israel and Judah of their sins, its message is primarily one of responsibility and judgment. Chronicles, on the other hand, is written from the perspective of the priests who reinstituted Judah’s religion after the captivity, and its message is one looking at reconciliation and hope –  man’s faithlessness on the one hand and God’s faithfulness on the other.   Kings may thus often seem a more negative account, and Chronicles a more positive one.  This is reflected in various ways. For example, in Kings the sins of many kings are often highlighted, whereas in Chronicles, the good traits of each king are usually given first (except for those kings who apparently had no good traits!).  Both books show the relationship between God and his people, but Kings stresses the political and prophetic aspects of that relationship while Chronicles looks more at the religious and priestly interactions.

So the differences between Kings and Chronicles  are similar to the differences we find among the Four Gospels (see our free e-book Inside the Four Gospels) in the New Testament. Although we may find several versions of the same story in Kings and Chronicles, the differences are important as each book gives different details and has its own unique viewpoint and lessons.   In fact, about half of the material in Chronicles is unique in the Bible – so resist the temptation to skip over that work if you have just read Kings. What at first may seem like a similar account has a great deal more to offer!

Although we cannot properly forgive others without understanding the concept of forgiveness and its importance, that intellectual knowledge is not, of course, forgiveness itself. 

​If we are to move from understanding forgiveness to granting it, we must move from the mind to the “heart” – from simply accepting the idea of forgiveness to embracing it and making it truly a part of us. In other words, we must move beyond an understanding of forgiveness to an attitude of forgiveness.

This is what Jesus meant when he warned that we will not be forgiven “…unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart” (Matthew 18:35).  The Greek expression “from the heart” used in this verse and others (1 Peter 1:22) means exactly what it means in English: to truly and deeply forgive.  But how exactly do we know if we measure up to that standard – how do we know if we really are forgiving someone “from the heart”? 
 
The answer is relatively simple.  Jesus spoke of forgiveness “from the heart” in concluding his parable of the ungrateful servant who did not forgive others as his king forgave him, so his point was obviously that we must forgive as our King forgives us.  The Scriptures contain many verses showing the manner in which God forgives us – far too many to include here – but we will simply look at three examples from the Old Testament prophets.
 
The Book of Micah contains some wonderful words revealing God’s attitude in forgiving: “Who is a God like you, who pardons sin and forgives the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance? You do not stay angry forever but delight to show mercy” (Micah 7:18, emphasis added).  This is the very opposite of reluctant forgiveness. We delight to do something we enjoy, that we love to do, and although humanly we may not look at forgiving as an enjoyable activity, this is exactly the attitude we need to have if we are to forgive from the heart.

The prophet Isaiah helps us to expand on this understanding: “let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon” (Isaiah 55:7 ESV, emphasis added). Other translations convey the word Isaiah used of God’s forgiveness with “freely,” “generously,” “richly,” and “bountifully.” This is clearly the opposite of forgiveness that is limited in any way. 

Another prophet, Hosea, recorded a prayer God commanded ancient Israel to pray that claims a specific attribute of God’s forgiveness:  “Take words with you and return to the Lord. Say to him: ‘Forgive all our sins and receive us graciously’…” (Hosea 14:2, emphasis added). God invites us to receive his gracious pardon and this is the opposite of grudging forgiveness. Humanly it is all too possible to reach “surface forgiveness,” but because it is not from the heart it is expressed ungraciously and sometimes even unkindly.  Hosea shows us that God does not do that, and if we want to forgive from the heart, neither must we.

These three passages only begin to cover the many ways in which God expresses his forgiveness, and it can make for an extensive and very profitable study to look at other examples found in the Scriptures.  Even without in-depth study of such verses, it is worthwhile to keep the principle in mind and look for the key descriptive word whenever we read biblical verses that speak of God forgiving or pardoning. 
​
However, the three examples given above make the point.  God delights to forgive and he forgives abundantly and graciously. These qualities, and many more, show us what it means to “forgive from the heart.” Combined with Jesus’ statement in Matthew 18:35, they show that just as God himself forgives from the heart, he expects us to do no less!

* Excerpted from our new free e-book How to Forgive. You can download a copy here.

You may not know at this moment when you will need to exercise forgiveness, but you can be certain that sooner or later you will have to forgive someone for something. Perhaps right now there is an old hurt that you have never been able to completely forgive, or perhaps the necessity will not arise until tomorrow or next week, but whenever the need to forgive comes up or to prepare you for when it does, our latest free e-book is designed to help you.

Our new book, How to Forgive, looks at this vitally important subject from a practical perspective, showing what the Bible actually teaches about this topic and how we can best apply the guidance it gives us.  As with all our e-books, this new title is absolutely free and does not require any kind of registration or giving an email address. The book is available in three formats –  so you can download a copy to read on your computer, phone, kindle or other e-book reader. Simply click on the version you want on our sister website here.  ​​

“Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength” (Deuteronomy 6:5).
 
The biblical command to love God “with all your heart…” given in Deuteronomy and quoted by Jesus as the most important of all commandments (Matthew 22:37) lies at the very center of the Christian Faith.  But knowing exactly what loving God with our “heart” means is not as simple as many people presume.   Love is so fully equated with the emotions and the heart in modern society that it is easy to think that the command simply means  to love God “dearly” or “from the heart.”

The many biblical passages that speak about the heart can easily be misunderstood if we are unfamiliar with the way the term was understood and used in the world in which the Bible was written. Both the Hebrew word lebab (or leb) and the Greek word kardia that we find translated “heart” in our English Bibles had a very different meaning from our modern idea.
When these biblical words are used metaphorically –  as opposed to talking about the physical organ we call the heart –  they rarely have anything to do with emotions. In the Old Testament, for example, lebab primarily refers to thought, understanding, or memory, and even things such as awareness or courage. 

In other words, “heart” in the Old Testament usually refers to things of the mind rather than the emotions.  That is why we find biblical verses such as “As [a person] thinks in his heart, so is he” (Proverbs 23:7),  or “…the Lord has not given you a heart to understand …” (Deuteronomy 29:4), and why Solomon prayed “… give your servant a discerning heart to govern your people and to distinguish between right and wrong…” (1 Kings 3:9).  That is also why many modern Bible versions translate the word “heart” in these verses as “mind” (NIV, Holman, etc.).

Although on the surface some uses of “heart” in the Old Testament may seem to relate to emotions, the essential idea is almost always one of thought rather than feeling.  In fact, when biblical writers wanted to refer to “feelings,” they usually spoke of them as being located not in the heart, but in the lower organs – the intestines (1 Kings 3:26, etc.)! 

In the New Testament we find the word “heart” (kardia) has the same metaphorical usage as lebab – most frequently meaning  “mind” –  as when we are told “Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, ‘Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts?’” (Matthew 9:4) and “For out of the heart come evil thoughts” (Matthew 15:19).  In fact, when the New Testament writers seem to be speaking of the heart and mind as two separate things –  as in the verse “All the believers were one in heart and mind” (Acts 4:32) –  they are usually using a common Jewish expression which was literally “one heart and one soul” – meaning they were completely unified (Jeremiah 32:39, etc.).

As we saw with the use of the Hebrew, when New Testament writers wanted to speak of the emotions they usually used a term for the lower organs, just as the apostle Paul wrote that we should put on “bowels of mercies” (Colossians 3:12 KJV), meaning we should have compassionate feelings toward others.  
 
When we understand this background, we realize that modern versions of the Bible may actually confuse us somewhat by translating “intestines” as “feelings” and “heart” as “mind.” While these translations give us the actual sense of a verse in most cases, when they do translate “heart” as “heart” (as in “Love the Lord your God with all your heart”), we may miss the point that it is really talking about loving God with all our mind.

In other words, when the English Bible speaks of the heart, we must be careful to determine whether we are reading a verse giving the modern meaning of “emotions” or the ancient meaning of “mind.”  This can be important in many cases.  When the Old Testament tells us that David was “a man after [God's] own heart” (1 Samuel 13:14) and this is repeated in the New Testament as “a man after my heart” (Acts 13:22), we must realize that God’s “heart” means his thoughts and attitudes rather than his feelings. 

This fact is especially important in understanding the greatest commandment of all –  that we must love God with all our “heart.”  Easy as it may be to see this command in modern terms as referring to deep feelings and emotions for God –  good as such feelings may be –  the Bible actually means that we must love God with all our mind.  Loving God with all our “heart” means not leaving the slightest part of our minds separate from the rule and influence of God.  This is what Paul was speaking of when he tells us we must “… take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ” (2 Corinthians 10:5).
​
There is no place for any kind of divided affection in the command to love God with all our heart.  Just as Jesus stressed that “No one can serve two masters” because we will invariably love one and “hate” or love the other so much less by comparison (Matthew 6:24), loving God with our whole heart means having a love that includes nothing short of total and complete dedication of mind.  Only when we give our minds – our very selves –  completely to God are we loving him with all our heart. 

 
“Imitation is not just the sincerest form of flattery - it's the sincerest form of learning.”
― George Bernard Shaw
 
 
The word “imitation” often has a negative connotation – we can think of imitation designer clothes that don’t look as good as the real items,  imitation coffee or milk that doesn’t taste as good as the real thing, and many other examples.  Usually, the imitation is just not as good as the thing imitated – the real thing.
 
But there is one type of imitation that is perfectly acceptable  - in fact desirable:  when God himself is involved in the process of imitation.  The first chapter of Genesis  clearly tells us that God made an imitation when he made the first human.  “Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness…. So God created mankind in his own image,  in the image of God he created them…” (Genesis 1:26-27).  And, of course, when God had done this,  God looked at the imitation he had made and “God saw… it was very good” (vs. 31).
 
Naturally, the imitation God made of himself was not endowed with the power, wisdom, goodness and countless other qualities that God has, but it had a small measure of these qualities – just enough to show the family likeness – and  it was good, but it wasn’t as like the original as might be possible.
 
In most cases, if you have an imitation of something, that’s what you are stuck with.  It’s always going to be a kind of second-class item.  But the interesting thing about the imitation that God made is that it was upgradable.  God made the imitation of himself with the ability for countless ongoing upgrades – with the potential to make the imitation ever more like the original.  In one sense, that’s what life is – or should be – all about: taking the opportunity to fulfill that potential .
 
So this kind of imitation is not wrong – or in any way second class.  It’s something we should all be doing in our lives – seeking to be a better imitation of God.  You may not have thought about it this way, but  that was what Jesus himself was doing, on a daily basis, during His physical life.  Notice what he said in this regard:  “… the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does” (John 5:19).   Jesus plainly says that even though he was the Son of God, his focus was on imitating God.  He knew the Father and constantly imitated him in his actions and thoughts.
 
How do we do this?  Although we do not have the unique knowledge of God that Jesus had, fortunately God has made available clear templates and instructions for us to follow to continuously “upgrade” ourselves to become increasingly better imitations.
 
First, we can imitate the original by getting to know God better through in-depth study of his word, not just in looking to see what it says, but looking to see what it says about him.  It’s a different approach when we don’t just read the story, but read the story like we would read the instructions for updating the software on our computers – carefully, and  focusing on what the words are showing us that we should do to successfully make the upgrade.
 
Second, we can imitate good copies.  God has given us the examples of his trained and trusted servants who closely imitate him. This is why the apostle Paul repeatedly stresses that we need  to look at his example and that of others to the extent that they imitate Christ.  Look at these instances of what Paul says about this: 
 
“Therefore I urge you to imitate me. For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord. He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus …”  (1 Corinthians 4:16).
 
“We did this… in order to offer ourselves as a model for you to imitate” (2 Thessalonians 3:9).
 
These words of Paul dovetail with those found in the Book of Hebrews:
 
 “… imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised” (Hebrews 6:12).
 
“Remember your leaders, who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith” (Hebrews 13:7).
 
Third, we can pray specifically for help in becoming a better imitation.   Notice in Philippians Paul tells us something about imitating. He says we should “… have the same mindset as Christ Jesus” (Philippians 2:5), and after discussing this he then goes on to say “…continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose” (vs. 12).  If we are praying for God’s will in our lives, we should be getting his help to better imitate him and those he has changed – and we can pray for this specifically.
 
We need to remember that humans are actually programmed to imitate. That’s how we learn language, social skills, and countless other things.  It’s in our natures to imitate, and God put that there for a reason.  As a result, we must be careful, as John says, that we “do not imitate what is evil, but what is good” (3 John 1:11a).  If we are diligently studying, watching and praying to better imitate the model we have been given, God will continue his work in us and our spiritual imitation of his nature  will truly be “very good.”

By Kevin DeYoung *

Everyone who knows anything about the gospels—and even those who don’t—knows that Jesus was a friend of sinners. He often drew the ire of the scribes and Pharisees for eating with sinners (Luke 15:2). Jesus clearly recognized that one of the insults hurled against him was that he was “a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!” (Luke 7:34). As Christians we love to sing of this Pharisaical put-down because it means that Jesus is a friend to sinners like us. We also find ourselves challenged by Jesus’ example to make sure we do not turn away outsiders in a way that Jesus never would.

As precious as this truth is—that Jesus is a friend of sinners—it, like every other precious truth in the Bible, needs to be safeguarded against doctrinal and ethical error. It is all too easy, and amazingly common, for Christians (or non-Christians) to take the general truth that Jesus was a friend of sinners and twist it all out of biblical recognition. So “Jesus ate with sinners” becomes “Jesus loved a good party,” which becomes “Jesus was more interested in showing love than taking sides,” which becomes “Jesus always sided with religious outsiders,” which becomes “Jesus would blow bubbles for violations of the Torah.”

Here we have an example of a whole truth being used for a half truth in the service of a lie. Once, as a younger man in ministry, I made an offhanded comment about how Jesus “hung out with drunks.” I was gently and wisely corrected by an older Christian who had himself overcome alcohol addiction. He challenged me to find anywhere in Scripture where Jesus was just “hanging out” with people in a state of drunkenness. In an effort to accentuate the grace of Christ, I stepped beyond (around, over, and away) from the biblical text and made it sound like Jesus loved nothing more than to yuck it up with John Belushi in Animal House.

If we are to celebrate that the Lord Jesus is a glorious friend of sinners—and we should—we must pay careful attention to the ways in which Jesus actually was a friend to sinners. Omitting the story of the woman caught in adultery (for reasons of textual criticism), I count five main passages in the gospels where Jesus is chastised for getting too close to sinners.
​

1. Matthew 9:9-13; Mark 2:13-17; Luke 5:27-32 – This is the story of Jesus calling Matthew the tax collector to be his disciple. We find Jesus reclining at table with many tax collectors and sinners, “for there were many who followed him” (Mark 2:15). When the scribes and Pharisees grumble about the company he keeps, Jesus tells them that he has “not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:32).
2. Matthew 11:16-19; Luke 7:31-35 – Here Jesus rebukes the “people of this generation” because they rejected John the Baptist for being too tight and reject the Son of Man for being too loose. It’s from this incident that we get the phrase “friend of sinners.” We should note that it was an insult heaped upon Jesus by his enemies. This doesn’t mean Christ didn’t own it and we shouldn’t sing it, but it suggests he may not have owned it in every way. If Jesus was not a “glutton and drunkard” as his opponents thoughts, so he may not have been “a friend of tax collectors and sinners” in exactly the way they imagined either.
3. Luke 7:36-50 – Right on the heels of this story comes another one like it in Luke. A sinful woman anoints Jesus with expensive ointment and wipes Jesus’ feet with her tears and the hair of her head. When Jesus is corrected for letting this “sinner” touch him, he reminds Simon that those who are forgiven much love much. In the end, Jesus forgives the woman her sin and announces “Your faith has saved you; go in peace” (Luke 7:50).
4. Luke 15:1-2 – The setting for the parables of the lost sheep, lost coin, and lost son of Luke 15 is found in the first two verses of that chapter. As the tax collectors and sinners “were all drawing near” to Jesus, the Pharisees and scribes grumbled that Jesus was receiving them to eat with them. The three parables that follow demonstrate how God seeks out the lost (15:3, 8, 20) and how pleased God is when sinners repent (15:7, 10, 21-24).
5. Luke 19:1-10 – Again, the Jewish leaders grumble because Jesus “has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner” (Luke 19:7) Though Zacchaeus repents and is a changed man (19:8), the Jews simply cannot accept that the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost (19:10) and that this notorious tax collector has been saved (19:9).

​So what lessons can we draw from these episodes? In what way was Jesus a friend of sinners? Did he have a grand strategy for reaching tax collectors? Did he indiscriminately “hang out” with drunks and prostitutes? Was he an easy going live-and-let-live kind of Messiah? What we see from the composite of these passages is that sinners were drawn to Jesus, that Jesus gladly spent time with sinners who were open to his teaching, that Jesus forgave repentant sinners, and that Jesus embraced sinners who believed in him.
​
Jesus was a friend of sinners not because he winked at sin, ignored sin, or enjoyed light-hearted revelry with those engaged in immorality. Jesus was a friend of sinners in that he came to save sinners and was very pleased to welcome sinners who were open to the gospel, sorry for their sins, and on their way to putting their faith in Him.

*Republished with permission from The Gospel Coalition website.

​​
When the expression “a life of prayer” comes to mind, people usually think of a devout figure whose life is characterized by frequent and extended prayer.

But there is another very different possible meaning that we should always remember is contained in this expression.  In a very real sense our lives are part of our prayers: we pray what we live, not just what we say.

Although we may not find a biblical verse that makes this statement in exactly those words, we find many scriptures that make the principle clear.  For example, the apostle Paul wrote: “Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters … to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship” (Romans 12:1).  When we remember the many biblical verses that equate prayer with sacrifice (Psalm 141:2, etc.), what Paul writes takes on even clearer meaning –  that just as our prayers are given as offerings or sacrifices to God (Revelation 8:4), the sacrifice of our “bodies” –  our lives –  is also part of our worship.   Paul urges us to make our lives  just as much a pleasing offering to God as our verbal prayers.

The Christian writer and preacher A. W. Tozer referred to this principle when he wrote: "We cannot pray in love and live in hate and still think we are worshiping God."  Tozer’s comment is well known, but he followed it up with an analogy that is not so often quoted and which summarizes the broader principle:

Let us suppose we are back in the old days of the high priest, who took incense into the [temple sanctuary] and went behind the veil and offered it there. And let us suppose that rubber—the worst-smelling thing I can think of when it burns—had been available in those days. Let us suppose that chips of rubber had been mixed with the incense, so that instead of the pure smoke of the spices filling the temple with sweet perfume, there had been the black, angry, rancid smell of rubber mixed with it. How could a priest worship God by mixing with the sweet-smelling ingredients some foul ingredient that would be a stench in the nostrils of priest and people?

Tozer’s  analogy is a good one, and we might well contrast it with what Paul instructs us in Ephesians:  “Follow God’s example, therefore, as dearly loved children and walk in the way of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God” (Ephesians 5:1-2).   Paul shows here that our walk – if it is in the way of love –  is equivalent to a fragrant offering or sacrifice, just as that of Christ was. 

But the principle of our lives being prayers is not just an analogy that we can dismiss or overlook. The relationship between our lives and our prayer “offerings” is as important as it is direct. We see this from the beginning of the biblical record with the story of Cain whose offering was rejected by God:

The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast?  If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it” (Genesis 4:4-7).

In Cain’s case God rejected a physical offering because of his not doing right, but the New Testament makes it clear that the same applies to our verbal prayers: “We know that God does not listen to sinners. He listens to the godly person who does his will” (John 9:31). The Book of Hebrews gives a clear example of this interaction between our everyday and prayer lives: “Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit of lips that openly profess his name.  And do not forget to do good and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God is pleased” (Hebrews 13:15-16).  Our sacrifice of prayer and praise is directly linked, Hebrews says, to our walk, our behavior and our deeds.

The Bible’s teaching is clear, then:  our everyday life is part of our “prayer” life and God “hears” what we do just as much as what we say.  It is often said that our private lives must match our public prayers, but our everyday lives must match our private prayers, too. One of the greatest ways we can improve our prayer lives is to bring our everyday lives into alignment with them. It’s a fact that gives new meaning to the old question, “How’s your prayer life?”

*Download our free ebook on prayer,  YOUR CALL:  USING THE DIRECT PRIVATE LINE OF PRAYER here.

​ 


“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).
 



For many Christians John 3:16 is their best known and most loved verse in the Bible. It has been called the “golden verse” of Scripture, one of the Bible’s most succinct summaries of the gospel, and the ultimate single-verse summary of God’s plan for humanity.   But many do not realize just how much meaning is packed into this one short verse –  its very familiarity often obscures its richness –  and it can be profitable to look at each part of the verse more closely:

“For…” The word “For” with which this verse begins points back to John’s previous statement that: “Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him” (John 3:14-15). This refers, of course, to the bronze image of a serpent that God instructed Moses to place on a high pole for the healing of the Israelites who acknowledged their sin in the wilderness (Numbers 21:4-9). In that story, everyone who “looked at” the serpent was granted life, and in John’s Gospel we see Christ made it clear that in the same way whoever “believes” on him is granted eternal life (John 3:16).  Looking and believing are equal in these accounts of the same story –  faith is “looking” without the eyes, or beyond what the physical eyes see, to a reality that saves (see our article “Seeing Is Believing: The Serpent on the Stake” here).  That is the background to John 3:16 – that our belief is not just the acceptance of an abstract idea about God and what he has done, but an active looking to the Person who is salvation.

“God so loved…” We should also realize that when this verse tells us that God “so” loved the world, it does not mean God loved the world “so much.”  Instead, the Greek in which the verse was written clearly means God loved the world “in this way.” In other words, “God loved the world in this way – he gave his only son …” It’s an important difference.  The Old Testament often stresses God’s love (Isaiah 63:9; Hosea 11:1-4, etc.), but John 3:16 shows the way in which that love was expressed.

“the world…” The Greek word translated “world” is kosmos which can mean not just the physical world or universe, but also –  as in this case –  all the inhabitants of the world. Rather than just telling us that God loved people in general, “the world” emphasizes the all-inclusive and universal love that God displayed – love of everyone without exception.

“that he gave…” Giving is, of course, characteristic of the nature of God –  it is one of the things that most clearly defines him –  and the gift of his son is his greatest gift, eclipsing all others (Romans 8:32).  The gift was foreshadowed in the prophets, as Isaiah wrote: “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given…” (Isaiah 9:6).  

“his one and only son...” In this phrase John stresses that God’s love extended to giving his “one and only" son – a sacrifice that reminds us of the story of Abraham’s willingness to give up Isaac (Hebrews 11:17).  Here the expression marks the unique nature of the gift that God was willing to give (1 John 4:9).

“that whoever believes on him…” The word “whoever” signifies “everyone” and stresses again the universal nature of God’s gift and its availability to anyone who will accept it. John reiterates this truth a little later in the same chapter: “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life …” (John 3:36).  Unseen in our English translations is the fact that the word “believes” is a “present participle” in the Greek of the New Testament – a verbal form that stresses continuity of action. The required belief is not just associated with a one-time emotional occurrence – it is ongoing, and it only those who continue to believe who receive the gift (Matthew 24:13).

 “shall not perish but have eternal life.” Here we see as much stress on God’s desire that we do not perish (2 Peter 3:9) as on his desire to grant us life. The specific words “eternal life” are typical of the teaching of the apostle John, who uses them more than twice as many times as all the other Gospel writers combined. John here uses the expression in the present tense to stress that the life God offers us is not just life that we “shall” have at some future time, but spiritual life that begins now, in the present, and continues eternally from now.

The total message of this great verse is echoed by John in his first epistle: “This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him” (1 John 4:9). But it is only in John 3:16, the verse we all know but do not always appreciate to the full, that the great message is so clearly and thoroughly explained.

 The Gospel of Luke records a group of parables in which Jesus gave three examples of the concept of lost and found: the story of the lost sheep, the parable of the lost coin, and the parable of the lost son (Luke 15:1-31).  

​We know these are not just three similar stories that were grouped together thematically as Luke specifically shows they were given at the same time (vss. 3, 8, 11) in response to the Pharisees’ criticism that Jesus ate with “sinners” (vss. 1-2). 

In the first parable, Jesus said: “Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Doesn’t he leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it?” (vs. 4). In the second, he continued: “Or suppose a woman has ten silver coins and loses one. Doesn’t she light a lamp, sweep the house and search carefully until she finds it?” (vs. 8). And in the third and best known parable we are told that Jesus continued: “There was a man who had two sons. The younger one said to his father, ‘Father, give me my share of the estate.’ So he divided his property between them. Not long after that, the younger son got together all he had and set off for a distant country (vss. 11-13). This parable also tells us that when the prodigal son finally returned:  “…while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him” (vs. 20), showing that the father had been waiting and looking for his son.

In all three of these parables we are told that when that which was lost was found there was great rejoicing (vss. 6, 9, 32), and the moral of each is clearly that God rejoices in “finding” the lost soul. But these are not just a group of similar parables.  Not only were they given at the same time in response to the same situation, with a clear connection between the stories, but also if we look closely, there is another important  aspect of what is said.
 
In the first parable we are told specifically that the sheep that was lost was one in a hundred; in the second parable the coin that was lost was one in ten; in the third parable the son who was lost was one of two.   Although each parable makes the same point, there is an additional message in the complete sequence – in all three taken together. 
 
Jesus began by showing that even one of many (one in a hundred) has great value.  One hundred  sheep would have been a very large flock in ancient Palestine, and one missing sheep might hardly be noticed.  Spiritually, the message is clear: God values everyone who is lost –  even if they are “only one” of the vast number of humans who have lived.  The sequence continues, however, in showing the relative worth of the one of ten coins that was lost. The fact that the woman called on her friends to rejoice with her when the coin was found shows that its value must have been significant to her – probably a tenth of all her savings. In the final parable, the sequence concludes by showing the tremendous value to his father of the one of two sons who had been “lost.”  The father in the story is shown as perhaps having been searching the distant road continually, hoping for his son’s return.
 
In this parable we often concentrate on the uncharitable reluctance of the elder of the two sons to rejoice when the younger one returned.  Although that is an important part of the story, we should not forget that the discussion between the father and the elder brother also serves another purpose – to show the great value of the lost brother who was found.  The elder brother’s argument is essentially that the father was placing as much value on the young brother as on the one who had stayed faithful –  and that argument was in fact accurate. 

The parable makes it clear that the elder brother would receive his due reward (vs. 31), but the father replies to him that: “… we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found” (vs. 32).
​
The three “lost and found” parables Jesus gave were not just repetition for effect. The interlinked stories show successively  the value to God of the one who is lost. The sequence demonstrates at its beginning God’s personal attentiveness towards all of humanity and at its end his deeply focused love for each individual. Together, the parables show that no one is too small or insignificant to be viewed as of great value to God, and that every individual who returns to God, whatever their sins of the past, is of immense value – as valuable in God’s sight as any other.  The three parables show as clearly as anything in the New Testament not only the joy of the lost being found, but also the loving acceptance with which God views the one who is found.
 
* For more about the parables of Jesus, download our free e-book The City on a Hill.

 The two unmistakable themes of the Gospel of John are belief and love.*  Although John sometimes stresses these concepts separately, he also frequently connects them, as we see in verses such as John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (emphases added here and in the following scriptures). John also shows how the two great themes of love and belief were tied together in the words of Jesus himself: “… the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God” (John 16:27).

When we move beyond John’s Gospel to his epistles, we find the same two themes are also linked there. For example, the connection between belief and love is perfectly summarized in a single verse in the apostle’s first letter: “And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us” (1 John 3:23).
 
But although these two themes are clear enough in John’s writing, we do not always notice that he is teaching us an important lesson regarding them: that the one spiritual quality affects the other.

Belief Increases Love

Notice what John says regarding the first aspect of this interaction – that of belief affecting love.  In 1 John 4:19 the apostle tells us: “We love because he first loved us.” Although the word belief does not appear directly in this verse, the concept is obviously implied – we come to love God because we believe God first loved us.
   
John connects belief with love in many other verses in this letter –  such as 1 John 5:1 where he tells us: “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well.” 

But John evidently did not feel the necessity to elaborate on the connection between belief and love, as it is not a difficult one to see for ourselves in our own personal experience: the more we come to see and understand God and believe in him and his nature, the more we come to love him.   Put simply, the more we come to know God, the more we come to love him.

Love Increases Belief

But John also shows this principle is reciprocal: the more we love God, the more our belief is strengthened. Consider the following verses.

“Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love” (1 John 4: 7B).

In this case, love is mentioned first and then knowing God – our belief in him –  comes as a result. It is easy to read over this verse without seeing the connection John is making, but it is clear once we focus on it.   The apostle makes the same connection in other verses. For example:

“No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us” (1 John 4:12).

What proof do we have of God? John asks. His answer is straightforward –  if we truly love one another, then God is living in us and we experience him in our lives in this way.  John looks at the other side of this situation a few verses later:

“… whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen” (1 John 4:20).

This obviously has vital relevance for Christian life and belief.  As we come to love, John tells us, we come to experience God –  and so to believe in him.  Near the end of his letter, John unites the two principles of love and belief once again:

“In fact, this is love for God: to keep his commands… This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith” (1 John 5:3).

John is not alone in making this connection. The New Testament shows on many occasions that spiritual qualities, such as belief and love, do not exist in a vacuum.  The apostle Paul, for example, wrote on how belief interacts with love: “…The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love” (Galatians 5:6). John’s epistles show the same truth from both directions –  the more we come to truly believe, the more we will also love; and vice versa, the more we truly love, the more we will come to truly believe.

Ultimately, for John, love and belief cannot be separated. We cannot develop the kind of love God exhibits without believing, or truly know and believe God without loving.  As has been wisely said, “Belief is the eye of love, love is the heart of belief.” Both are necessary for the eternal life that, John tells us, God has desired to give us from the beginning (1 John 2:24).
 
 * See the chapter on these two themes in our free e-book Inside the Four Gospels. 

During the course of this past year we published well over a hundred blog posts here and on our sister site.

The list below gives the 12 posts that were most popular on this site, so check out the list to see how it compares with your own favorites and to see if you missed any of these posts ...



Being Encouraged by our Discouragement

Puah and Shiprah:  The Sanctity of Life

The Message behind the Message in Jude

The Three Things that Matter Most

Sowing and Reaping in Galatians 6

The Gifts and Fruit of the Spirit

The Priest, the Plot, and the Parable

What We Love and What We Don’t

Four Ways to Please God

Putting a Price on Forgiveness 

Growing the Two Directions of Love

Peace of Mind in the First Epistle of John
 
You might also like to see the parallel list of most popular posts this year on our sister site: 
www.TacticalChristianity.org .
​

The star that appeared to the wise men in the East announcing the birth of Christ and which led them to him (Matthew 2:1-9) shone brightly till its purpose was fulfilled, then it disappeared from view.  In a similar manner, John the Baptist, who was called the “greatest of those born of women” (Matthew 11:11), accomplished a short intense ministry aimed also at announcing and pointing to the Christ, then likewise faded from view.  

The star that heralded Jesus’ birth, bright as it appeared, was to be obscured by the one to whom it pointed – the Messiah himself.  Here we also see a parallel with John the Baptist.  As Christ affirmed, “He was a burning and shining lamp” (John 5:35), but John nevertheless  came only as a witness because “The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world” (John 1:8-9). Once Jesus’ ministry began,  John’s  “light” was dimmed by the rising of his successor.  As John himself said using this very analogy, “He must wax, but I must wane” (John 3:30).  But like the heavenly star that also preceded the Messiah’s birth,  John the Baptist’s job was fully accomplished in the short but intense work which God intended for him. Both were powerful witnesses to the coming of the Messiah.

How does this apply to us?  Although we may not live in the age which saw a heavenly light or a great prophetic “light” like John the Baptist pointing to Christ, the apostle Peter reminds us that “We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts” (2 Peter 1:19).  That “morning star”  is Christ himself (Revelation 22:16); and the “prophetic message” is not so much all of prophecy as it is the prophetic message regarding the meaning and purpose of the coming of Christ.

The star of the nativity, the “lamp” of John the Baptist, and the “light shining in a dark place” were different announcements made available to different groups of people: the first to only a select few, the second to all who heard John, the third to all who come in contact with the word of God throughout the whole world.    The three forms of announcement also increased in the level of understanding they provided those to whom they were given.  Bright as the heavenly star may have appeared, powerful as John’s testimony may have been, we can be thankful that the announcement that has come to us is the fullest, clearest and most profound light of all. ​

​The Prophet Elijah was certainly one of the greatest figures of the Old Testament. When Christ appeared in the Transfiguration before his key disciples, the vision they experienced involved Jesus speaking with Moses and Elijah – doubtless representing the very personifications of the Law and the Prophets of Old Testament revelation (Matthew 7:1-13).

Yet Elijah was just as subject to human problems and the need to learn as you and I are (James 5:17). The Old Testament records many stories about the prophet, and one is particularly fascinating regarding lessons that Elijah perhaps needed to learn and from which we certainly can profit. The book of 1 Kings tells us that after Elijah delivered an unwelcome message to Ahab, king of Israel:
 
Then the word of the Lord came to Elijah: “Leave here, turn eastward and hide in the Kerith Ravine, east of the Jordan. You will drink from the brook, and I have directed the ravens to supply you with food there.” So he did what the Lord had told him. He went to the Kerith Ravine, east of the Jordan, and stayed there. The ravens brought him bread and meat in the morning and bread and meat in the evening, and he drank from the brook.  Some time later the brook dried up because there had been no rain in the land. Then the word of the Lord came to him: “Go at once to Zarephath in the region of Sidon and stay there. I have directed a widow there to supply you with food.” So he went to Zarephath (1 Kings 17:2-10).

It's a small story, but one packed with lessons and reminders that apply in our own lives. Here are just five that are immediately clear:

1) The first thing we learn from this story is that sometimes God protects us, and sometimes he encourages us to flee. God protected Elijah on numerous occasions, but on this occasion he specifically informed the prophet to flee and “hide” (vs. 3) until God was ready to have him speak truth to power again.  This is an important principle found throughout the Bible (see our article, “Should Christians Flee?”), and Elijah was either taught the lesson or given it as one of many examples recorded in Scripture for our benefit.

2) Sometimes God lets us look for what we need, and sometimes he brings it to us.  God did not instruct Elijah to try to forage for food or to miraculously replace the same food, as he did on another occasion (1 Kings 17:13-16). Rather, God sent what Elijah needed directly to him by means of birds – ravens. Sometimes we have to learn to let God provide, also. Interestingly, Jesus used ravens as a means of teaching this very lesson (Luke 12:24).

3) God provides, but often not more than we need.  The story tells us that twice a day the ravens brought enough food for a half day.  It is clear that God sent a number of ravens, and we know that these large birds can carry quite large objects and weights with ease – but God only had them deliver food for Elijah’s immediate need.  This is similar to the way in which God provided manna to the Israelites on a daily basis, and it is clear that he was teaching them lessons in that situation, also (Exodus 16:4-27).

4) Sometimes God lets things happen to move us on. The story ends by telling us that the small stream that provided water for Elijah dried up.  This was God’s way of preparing Elijah for the news that it was time to move on, and it’s a reminder we can all remember.  Sometimes God ends something good to give us something better – in Elijah’s case, it was a better opportunity to serve others who needed help and that may sometimes be our situation, too.

5)  Perhaps the most important lesson or reminder we can take from this story is one that applies to all the points we have considered above.    In each aspect of this story, God acted in an unexpected way.  In every case we are reminded that God’s way of doing things is often not what we would have expected.  It may not be what we would have done or even chosen. Humanly, we could question every aspect of this small story.  Why didn’t God just protect Elijah – why did he have to flee?  Why did God send Elijah to an area with no food within many miles and then force him to just sit and wait to be fed?  Why did God not provide at least a whole day's food at one time?  Why did God have the stream dry up – why not just tell Elijah it was time to go back? 

Whatever the answers may be to some of the questions that are raised by this story, we see that things worked out –  God looked after Elijah and Elijah was able to fulfil God’s purposes. Our own lives are really no different.  The greatest lesson we can learn from this small story is that, like Elijah, we can always accept on faith what God commands or does (1 Kings 17:5, 10).  It is a story that reminds us even if we do not always know why God does what he does in our lives, we can be sure he has a purpose and that he always knows what he is doing. 

The first epistle of John displays a unique writing style. One of the most characteristic aspects of this apostle’s letters is the way in which he frequently compares or contrasts spiritual situations.

​In 1 John 1:9-10, for example, he contrasts “If we confess our sins” with “If we claim we have not sinned.”  As we continue through his letter we find that he compares “Whoever loves his brother” with “whoever hates his brother” (1 John 2:10-11); “The one who does what is right” with “The one who does what is sinful” (1 John 3:7-8); “Every spirit that acknowledges … Jesus …” with “every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus” (1 John 4:2-3), and so on.

This frequent use of comparison or contrast lends a dynamic force to what John writes –  it is straightforward, to the point, and unequivocal.  But sometimes the lesson behind the comparison is not quite as easy to see, and we may miss it if we do not keep an eye open for occurrences of the pattern. A good example of this is found in the third chapter of John’s letter:

This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: If our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God … (1 John 3:19-21).

The immediate contrast between “If our hearts condemn us” and “if our hearts do not condemn us” is clear enough, but the lesson John points to here is perhaps not as obvious.  At face value it might seem that John is simply saying if our hearts or “consciences” condemn us, God is greater than our hearts (vs. 20); but what does that mean?
 
To understand the contrast John is making, we must widen our view to look at the context in which these verses appear.  Beginning in verse 10 of chapter 3, all the way up to verse 19 where John begins to talk about our consciences condemning or not condemning us, John speaks continually about whether we love one another or not: “This is how we know who the children of God are … Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister. For this is the message you heard from the beginning: We should love one another….  We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love each other… Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth” (1 John 3:10-18).

John then states that “This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: if our hearts condemn us …” (vs. 19-20).  Knowing that “we belong to the truth,” as John puts it, is not a result of what he says next –  our hearts condemning or not condemning us – because we cannot always trust our own conscience to be a judge of our behavior (Jeremiah 17:9). Rather, John refers to what he has just said:  that we love others in our behavior and in truth (vs. 18); and to what he says after this verse, that we have confidence before God because we keep his commands “… to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us” (vs. 23).  

The theme of love is really the main point of the third chapter and of John’s entire letter, and this immediate context allows us to paraphrase the point of 1 John 3:19-20 something like this:

“… because we demonstrate our love for one another in actions and in truth, we know that we are the children of God and this sets our conscience at rest… Even if our conscience sometimes causes us to doubt our standing before God, we know our conscience is not the final judge and that God, who sees the love he has placed within us, accepts us and hears us – for ongoing love of others in our lives is the proof that God does not reject or condemn us, and that he hears us.”
​
We all occasionally groan under the weight of conscience and in our most discouraged moments we may wonder if we are really a child of God, or if God hears us.  But John’s message shows us that the outgoing and ongoing love God places in us through his Spirit is the proof that we are indeed his children.  It's a tremendously encouraging lesson, but –  like many of John’s lessons –  it is one we can only see properly when we consider what he wrote in its full context. 

​The four Gospels – Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John – lie at the very heart of Christianity, recording its most essential teachings and providing us with most of what we know about the person of Jesus Christ, his fulfillments of Old Testament prophecies, his message, and his true identity. Without them the rest of the New Testament would not make any sense, and we would have no idea of the true significance of a great deal of what is written in the Old Testament.  

Yet many Christians do not know why there are four Gospels, exactly how they differ, or what their unique lessons are. This book answers those questions by looking at the “stage,” the “actors,” and the “story” of the Gospels and by providing background and perspective that can greatly increase your understanding of their message. The four Gospels are certainly among the most important books of the Bible. Isn’t it time you got to know them better?  

​Our free new book Inside The Four Gospels is available in formats for computer, e-book reader and smart phone.  Download a copy here.

​

​Many Bible verses affirm the importance of giving thanks. Here are ten scriptures that can remind us of that fact, and what Thanksgiving is all about:
 

​
 
Leviticus 22:29
When you sacrifice a thank offering to the Lord, sacrifice it in such a way that it will be accepted on your behalf.
 
1 Chronicles 16:34
Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good; his love endures forever.
 
Psalm 50:23
Those who sacrifice thank offerings honor me, and to the blameless I will show my salvation.
 
Psalm 100:4
Enter his gates with thanksgiving, and his courts with praise. Give thanks to him; bless his name.
 
Ephesians 5:20
Always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
 
Colossians 2:7
Rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness.
 
Colossians 3:15-17
And be thankful… with thankfulness in your hearts to God. 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.
 
1 Thessalonians 5:18
Give thanks in all circumstances; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.
 
1 Timothy 2:1
I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people ...
 
Hebrews 12:28-29
Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably …

It might seem strange to talk of putting a price on forgiveness, yet that is exactly what Jesus did in his parable* of the unmerciful servant (Matthew 18:21-35).   In that parable Jesus painted a detailed word picture of a king’s servant who owed the ruler ten thousand “talents” (vs. 24).

A talent was not a unit of currency, but a unit of weight. The NIV translates this verse “ten thousand bags of gold,” but it is far more likely that silver would have been the precious metal involved in the transaction, as even ten thousand talents of silver would represent an almost unimaginably large amount.  In fact, ten thousand talents of silver would be too large to have normally been a personal debt.  The word “servant” Matthew uses could refer to a king’s high-ranking servant who had control of massive amounts of money as part of his work.

By contrast, the second servant in the parable who owed the king’s servant money was doubtless a far less powerful individual who had borrowed “one hundred denarii” (KJV “a hundred pennies,” NIV “a hundred silver coins”).  We read in the parable that the servant who owed a huge amount that was forgiven was himself unwilling to forgive the individual who owed him a much smaller debt.

To get a true sense of the relative amounts Jesus spoke of, notice that in another parable –  that of the men working in the vineyard (Matthew 20:1-16) –  Matthew specifically tells us that an acceptable rate of pay for a laboring man was one denarius per day (vs. 1, etc.).  So, the debt of the minor servant who owed the king’s servant 100 denarii was the equivalent of a hundred days pay – some four months of wages calculated on a regular workweek – and certainly not a small amount.

But to get a sense of the debt for which the king’s servant was responsible, we must realize that a “talent” was equal to approximately 6,000 denarii in value, so that debt equaled ten thousand times about six thousand days pay for an average laborer –  some 60 million days or 200 thousand years pay at 300 workdays per year – based on talents of silver, not gold.
  
So the price of the forgiveness given by the king to his servant in Christ’s parable was an astronomically high one –  far beyond the realm of any possibility of being repaid.  But it is easy to think that this parable was simply teaching that our neighbor’s spiritual debts to us are far less than what we “owe” God as a debt of forgiveness, but while that is true, the parable has greater depth than that.

Clearly, the king in the parable represents God, and the king’s servant represents us as debtors to God through our sin, while the minor servant represents those who are “indebted” to us through sins against us. But we should remember that the amount owed by the minor servant –  a hundred days’ pay –  was not a trivial amount. It is important to realize that Christ was not downplaying the “debts” or sins of others against us –  rather his parable admits that those who sin against us may indeed sin to a substantial degree, leaving us significantly hurt.
  
But the parable also puts that hurt in perspective by showing that the astronomically high debt we have incurred through our own cumulative sins far outweighs whatever sin may have been committed against us – no matter how bad it was.  As it is given in Christ’s example, the story shows a ratio of one million to one – the sins of others against us represent one millionth of our own sins against God.  That is why Jesus ended his parable by saying that the unmerciful servant was severely punished by the king, and   by saying “This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart” (vs. 35).  
  
Ultimately, however, Jesus’ parable is not about numbers or balance sheets.  Its primary message, of course, is that we ought to forgive as our King has forgiven us. And we should not forget the context in which the parable was given.  Matthew makes it clear that Jesus told this story in response to Peter asking how many times we should forgive those who sin against us: “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?” Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times. Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king… (Matthew 18:21-23, emphasis added).

According to Jesus’ answer to Peter’s question, the forgiveness given to us is extravagant both in amount and in repetition, and finally it is extravagant in terms of the attitude with which the forgiveness is given.  True forgiveness, Jesus tells us, is so extravagant that it cannot be repaid; it is so extensive that it does not run out in our lifetime; and it is so truly meant from the heart that no price can really be placed on it. ​

*Download our free e-book on the Parables of Jesus from this website, here.

There is an old story, I am not aware of its origin, that each day as we go into the world we pass through one of three doors.  The first door is the dark way, the door of evil intentions, which leads to harm for ourselves and  others. The second door leads to neither good nor bad intentions, and the third door leads to the good intentions of serving and helping others.  The interesting thing about the story is that it continues by telling  us that most people go out into the world each day by way of  the door of no intentions – intending neither bad nor good -  but when we do so, we invariably return by way of the dark door. 

There is certainly some truth to this simple little story.  How many times have we gone out into the day not intending anything in particular only to sooner or later run into traffic, coworkers, messages or  whatever that rouse us to frustration, anger, fear, doubt, or other negative feelings or actions.  According to the story, it is only as we go out into the day through the light door – the door of intending to do good – that we will return by way of the middle door, or, if our intentions are maintained, through the door of good intentions.

The story has a point, but its weakness is clear. We all know that “the road to hell is paved with good intentions" (as first stated by Bernard of Clairvaux), and that of themselves even the best of intentions usually are not enough.  Simply put, the door of our own good intentions really only leads to a partial solution to the problem of how our lives will really play out. 

But the old story can remind us, of course, of the words of Jesus which carry a much more profound lesson.  The Gospel of John records Christ's words: “I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture”  (John 10:9).  This was part of the parable Jesus told of the sheepfold with the sheep and the door they entered in and out of.  But the words fit our old story well, too.

It is only as we go out into the world through the power of Christ – the true door – that our good intentions will be more fully realized and maintained.  That takes conscious thought and determination, but if we remind ourselves daily of  the door through which we need to walk, we will be much less likely to go out through the door of wrong intentions or that of no intentions at all.  ​

 
Reading the Bible, it’s easy to think of God only speaking to people in miraculous and stunning ways – from burning bushes, by a voice from the heavens and in great theophanies where the earth shakes. But it’s harder to see those events in perspective viewed from our own lives today.

Although the Scriptures do contain many examples of God speaking audibly to humans, we have to remember that those examples occurred over a relatively vast period of time – thousands of years.  They were not “everyday” occurrences even in biblical times. We do not find God routinely talking audibly to his servants all the time. The instances that are recorded are almost all at pivotal times when God desired to confirm that he was moving his plan forward in some new or different manner.  Often, God simply spoke to individuals in such a way that they somehow “heard,” but others did not (1 Samuel 3:1-11).

When we understand these things, we can see the error in thinking that God spoke audibly in biblical times but now only speaks to us in other ways (an understanding that many skeptics rightly claim is neither indicative of God’s existence or the historical veracity of the Bible).  Rather, God usually speaks to us in ways that he has always used.

Primarily, God speaks to us through his written word (2 Timothy 3:16–17). This is something we should think about. There is no indication in the Bible that God audibly dictated the words to be recorded in the biblical writings, so we should not be surprised that he speaks to our minds through them just as he spoke to the minds of those who wrote under his inspiration.

God also often speaks to our minds directly through urgings that we may call an “inner voice” or our “conscience” (Acts 2:37). Once again, no audible voice is involved, but if you have ever felt the prodding of conscience, you know how real the experience can be.  God can work through the Holy Spirit in our minds in just this way – we are convicted of what we do wrong and urged to do what we know is right by this “quiet inner voice.”

Sometimes, God may speak to us through others –  especially those who have his Spirit (Acts 21:4-14, etc.). God may use a friend, a pastor or teacher or anyone else to convey a message to us in this way.  Naturally, we must use wisdom in assessing input from others, and we should always be sure that the advice or suggestions they give are in harmony with what is revealed in God’s word; but we should never presume that God would not speak to us in this way.

Finally, God can also “speak” to us through events that he allows to happen or that he may even bring about. The Old Testament shows that at a national level the captivities of Israel and Judah were just such events through which God spoke in biblical times.  In our own lives events that occur may sometimes be corrective (Hebrews 12:5–11) or perhaps encouraging, but it does become clear that God is teaching us – and thus “speaking” to us – in this way.

While none of these ways in which God speaks to us may seem as earth shaking as many instances in the biblical stories appear, even there we find the same quiet methods of communication.  The story of God speaking to Elijah is a wonderful example of this:

The Lord said, “Go out and stand on the mountain in the presence of the Lord, for the Lord is about to pass by.” Then a great and powerful wind tore the mountains apart and shattered the rocks before the Lord, but the Lord was not in the wind. After the wind there was an earthquake, but the Lord was not in the earthquake. After the earthquake came a fire, but the Lord was not in the fire. And after the fire came a gentle whisper… ”  (1 Kings 19:11-13).

In the ancient world people believed the gods were speaking in lightning (fire), windstorms, and earthquakes –  the very three things 1 Kings mentions –  but Elijah found God was not speaking in such a dramatic way. It was in a quiet, barely perceptible manner that God’s communication began.  Just as in biblical times, today God usually speaks to us not with great signs, but with the stillness of a quiet whisper.  We just need to be listening for the whisper.