II Samuel 12:1-7a (NASB) “Then the Lord sent Nathan to David, And he came to him and said, ‘There were two men in one city, the one rich and the other poor. The rich man had a great many flocks and herds. But the poor man had nothing except one little ewe lamb which he bought and nourished; And it grew up together with him and his children. It would eat of his bread and drink of his cup and lie in his bosom. And was like a daughter to him. Now a traveler came to the rich man, And he was unwilling to take from his own flock or his own herd, to prepare for the wayfarer who had come to him; Rather he took the poor man’s ewe lamb and prepared it for the man who had come to him.’ Then David’s anger burned greatly against the man, and he said to Nathan, ‘As the Lord lives, surely the man who has done this deserves to die. He must make restitution for the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing and had no compassion.’ Nathan then said to David, ‘You are the man!….’”

Matthew 7:1-2 “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.”

Often times I am approached by different people, with different motives, inquiring of me concerning the salvific status of another individual. Usually their tone of voice gives the sense that this is a matter of great concern to them. But the inquiry itself is also usually posed in the form of an accusatory, rhetorical question. The question itself is usually prefaced with details of some indiscretion, which the person in question has either been seen or heard of doing. For example, “Lawrence, I saw/heard so-and-so(fill in any name here) smoking/cursing/gossiping/lying”. Or “Lawrence, (fill in any name here) was caught (fill in any sinful action here)….do you think they’re saved?” 

Now there was a time when I was so offended that the alleged offender was claiming to be a Christian and allowing themselves to be caught doing whatever it was. Then there was also a time when I, without doing my own investigation, would join in the condemnation of this individual and consider myself quite righteous for doing so.

Over the last few years, many different factors have gone into my new outlook on these types of questions. Things such as having really studied grace and its many implications concerning salvation. Or having gone through being confronted with many of my own sins and shortcomings. And even the fact that being so distant theologically from where I was just a year or so ago. All have played a part in  giving me a new perspective, attitude and response to such questions.

Now I’m more inclined to have no judgment at all. No response whatsoever. I feel so relieved to now be able to plead utter ignorance concerning the salvific state of another person. Sure, I can assess the alleged action committed as right or wrong. I can even call a certain position held by the person in question, inconsistent, so far as I understand the scriptures. But what I am not required to do, andI even now find spiritually dangerous, is to decide whether or not an individual is saved. That leaves me free to now pray for them. If I have the opportunity, I can minister to them. Perhaps, I can even hear their side of the story and either sympathize or even excuse their action. Whatever the case may be, I can now be an advocate rather than judge and jury.

But one particular possibility came to mind and it’s shown in the story of Nathan and his testing of David. What if I had done or said something that another individual believed to be inconsistent with my claims of being a Christian? (And trust me, I have!) What if, because of my usually self righteous behavior, the person felt that there was no other way to get me to admit that I was wrong than to project the act upon another person knowing that I could easily find fault with another? How embarassing would that be?! But my Christian brother/sister, we do this all the time. We are quick to judge and condemn. But we are very slow to show mercy, kindness, grace or patience. 

So the next time you feel the urge to jump at the chance to condemn another when you’re being asked “Do you think so-and-so is saved?”, just stop and think to yourself…..

What if the person asking the question, were talking about me?

My father, Harold Gene Dacus Sr., died 5 years ago today from complications due to lung and brain cancer. Ironically, he did bookeeping/tax preparation for a living and he died on “tax” day. For me personally, it was one of the most paradoxical events of my life. 

I don’t have to tell any young man, who has had a great relationship with his dad, how much I admired and revered my dad. He was the smartest, strongest, kindest, most generous man I’ve ever known. To me, he had all the answers and could solve all the problems. He was my best and most trusted friend. His advice was most precious to me and there wasn’t a time when I didn’t trust it, even when I thought he may not fully understand my problem. But for all of these lofty sentiments, there existed a troublesome reality. He was my idol. He was my god or at least the mediator between me and the true God.

It wasn’t merely a boy’s admiration for his dad. This was worship. If my dad requested anything of me, I couldn’t say no. (And I have the damaged credit report to prove it!) If he had an idea about how something should go, I couldn’t disagree. If he said a verse of scripture meant this/that or that a certain religious practice was “biblical”, then I couldn’t disagreee. And if I did, I would be depressed, literally, for weeks on end because I couldn’t fathom in my mind how I could disagree with a man who was, in my opinion at that time, always right.

However, here’s the paradox. When he died, I wasn’t upset with God. I didn’t charge God falsely nor did I question Him as to why He had allowed this tragic event. As a matter of fact, I was fully convinced that this was a part of God’s plan and that it would benefit everyone involved. But where did that come from? Truthfully, I must admit, my dad had taught me that truth and God had enacted it upon my heart/mind so that I could draw upon it at that most emotionally taxing time.

Since my dad was 39 years old when I was born, he spent a great deal of time as I grew up, reminding me that he would not always be there. Whenever I would ask him for money, he would give it to me and say, “Now remember son, I will not always be here to take care of you.”. Whenever I needed advice, he would give it to me and say, “Now son, you’re going to have to learn to figure these things out because I’m not always going to be here.”. In his own way, he was preparing me for his death and so was the Lord.

As a living example, my dad embodied Romans 8:28. Here was a man that I’ve never seen worried. I’ve never seen him overreact to a trying situation. He was always with a kind word and a word of praise on his lips. He had an unshakable confidence that God would cause all things to work together for the good. So when he was low on money, he had an attitude of praise. When people were disappointing him, he had an attitude of praise. When the congregation shrunk, he had an attitude of praise. When his name was dragged through the mud, without reason, he had an attitude of praise. When he was falsely accused, he had an attitude of praise.

After he died, my relationship with the Lord grew by leaps and bounds. No longer did I have a filter. It was me and God. I needed God most at this time and He was there. Truly I drew near to God and He drew near to me. I began to think the thoughts that were in the back of my mind while my father was living, out loud and boldly. Without that unrecognized allegiance to my dad, I have been able to reassess and rethink and even relearn everything that I thought I knew about the Lord, His people and His purpose. Spiritually speaking, I am now truly God’s man and His alone. Now, I owe no allegiance to anyone’s ideas, thoughts, interpretations, etc. of the things of God. Now God is His own revealer. Sure, He yet uses great brothers and sisters as a tool to open my eyes. But in the final analysis, He is now my final authority.

As you can see, for me, my father’s death was both one of the worst and best events of my life. I lost my physical relationship with my earthly father but I gained my spiritual relationship with my Heavenly Father. I yet have my dad’s words and teachings in the reserves of my mind. But now they are subject to the Word and Teaching of my Heavenly Father. And I am the better for it!

Not all of the fallout from my dad’s death has had positive results and for that I solicit your prayers for my family. But at the same time,  I want to encourage you to see that taxing event in your life as an opportunity to trust and rest in the guiding hand of the One who cares for you the most. The One who has Himself suffered a most taxing event, the death of His Son on a Roman cross. The Son who suffered Himself to be physically taxed, greatly, because of the glory that it would bring, our salvation, and the fulfillment of His Father’s ultimate purpose. (Read from “Eternity to Here” by Frank Viola, for a great picture of this purpose)   

“who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame…..”  Hebrews 12:2

Jeremiah 31:33-34 (NASB) – “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” delares the Lord, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying ‘Know the Lord,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares the Lord, “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

Matthew 15:7-9 (NASB) – “You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you: ‘This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men’”

John 16:13a (NASB) – “But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth;…..”

Philippians 3:15 (NASB) - ”Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, have this attitude; and if in anything you have a different attitude, God will reveal that also to you;”

2 Timothy 2:15 (NASB) – “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.”

Why do you react to certain words, phrases, or people the way you do? When you hear someone say that they have received a “revelation”, what is the first thing that comes to mind? Do you immediately feel that “Sola Scriptura” is being attacked?  When you hear the word church or pastor, what image is first in your thoughts? Do you see buildings and quasi-CEO’s? If someone says to you that they just believe that they need to have enough faith that God will answer their prayer for healing or a new job and it will happen, do you react negatively? If someone speaks of the “gifts of the Spirit”, do you start to think of those that you believe have ceased? Do you start to see people “swinging from chandeliers”? (As if that has actually ever happened! But the cessasionist and partial-cessasionist will describe a belief in the continuing of the “sign-gifts”, an unbiblical category by the way, in this manner.)

How would you know that your reaction is being prompted by the Spirit of God in you versus being induced by the teachings of others?

Recently, I challenged a brother-in-Christ, an author, concerning an endorsement that he received for his book from someone who’s very name in conservative circles is synonymous with “false teaching”. At first, he was very defensive. Even downright evasive, so I thought. However, in the final e-mail exchange he offered a very humbling, even downright shame enducing challenge to me. He said, “Feel free to email me your question and I’ll answer as I have time. But before you write out your question, please give me the list of books by brother (name deleted for privacy sake) that you read from cover to cover.”

To tell the truth, I passed this off as just this author making an excuse to avoid dealing with what appeared to me to be a serious issue. I even reasoned that he was just another book seller who would use any marketing tool, including using an endorsement from one of the more popular “heretics” to sell his book. I even told this person that I had read all of his books (to that point) and that I didn’t see that as automatic basis upon which to disagree with him. Content is supposed to drive disagreement.  However, later on I reflected on his point. Why did I disagree with this endorser? In fact, if content was supposed to drive disagreement, then why hadn’t I embibed more of the content of this other person’s works. The answer was, because I was told not to.

That’s right, some other well meaning Christian (probably some so-called apologist who considers themself a “guardian of God’s truth)  had already told me that this person’s books and materials should be avoided and were a complete waste of my time. Since this person was in the “Word of Faith” camp, appeared on TBN and, of course, associated with other popular “false teachers”, buying their books or listening to their teachings, was only giving support to the “devil”.

So when I approached this Christian author about the endorsement, the truth was, I had no more actual evidence about the person that I was questioning him about than what was told to me by someone else. It was worse than a secondhand witness because I don’t know where that Christian got their information to tell me.

So what’s the point of me sharing this experience? The point is that when we are dealing with another believer in an area of concern, we need to remember that this person is indwelt by the Spirit of the Most High! This is someone in whom the very Creator of the universe dwells! Therefore, we must keep an open mind and a loving demeanor, even if we believe their error is grave. Perhaps God is using their exposure to teachings that we are not necessarily comfortable with, in order to lead them on the path that He has set for their life. Perhaps we are wrong and simply haven’t done the proper investigation into the matter and are just going off of secondhand information.

Let us remember the words of the Apostle Peter in reference to the danger of false teaching amongst believers, “then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation,…” (2 Peter 2:9a, NASB) And if we have any suspicions or questions about a teaching or doctrine , let us take the example of the Bereans who “examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.”

Sometimes I wish I was a little more computer savvy. Reason being , I would love to play a theme song with this post. My choice? “Crazy” by GnarlesBarkley. I don’t know the actual lyrics to the song, I just remember being somewhere and hearing the chorus, “I might be craze-ay, does that make me craze-ay” and so on. I loved it. It was hilarious. It was one of those songs that I couldn’t get out of my head for a while but I was okay with that. Even my kids started to make fun of me because it seemed like at every opportunity I was letting that chorus fly out of my mouth. Any way….

Acts 26:24 (NASB) ”While Paul was saying this in his defense, Festus said in a loud voice, “Paul, you are out of your mind! Your great learning is driving you mad.”

This isn’t an exposition of the text so pardon my folly a bit. But this is actually the reaction that I’ve been getting lately from many of my own family members. Since, on a broad scale, anti-intellectualism is rampant in the Body of Christ, it really should come as no surprise that people would react this way to what they consider to be “new” information/teaching. But I can’t help being shocked at the reaction that a lot of  them are having. These are the people who forced me to go to church. These are the people who emphatically demanded that the bible had all the answers. These are the people who would be considered “bible thumpers” by most people they met. And in the end, they couldn’t care less about what the bible actually teaches or putting it into practice. Maybe I shouldn’t say it that way. Really, they just believe that their current understanding of the bible and the practices that result are sufficient and don’t need reexamining. Yea, that’s a better way of putting it.

Recently, I was complaining to my wife about the whole thing.

(Really, I was bemoaning the fact that even buying the books and handing them out to my family, without any commentary of my own, was met with suspicion. One family member even refered to one of the books as “demon possessed”! And the question arose, “then what does that say about me?”)

I was telling my wife, “Honey, why didn’t God just let me be ignorant? Why didn’t He allow me to just continue believing and practicing the same old, same old.? Why do I sometimes feel like I must be the one who is off?” Her response was classic. She said, “Honey, would you really want it that way?!”. She was right. There was no way I would exchange the revelation and illumination that God, throught the Holy Spirit, has given me concerning His Son and the Body. NO WAY!

So if that means that I’ll be the outcast and stigmatized, then just play my theme song…….

I MIGHT BE CRAZE-AY! I MIGHT BE CRAZE-AY!……..

(A comment made by Bro. Mike Hutchinson on my other brother’s blog- The Gospel in 3D. Borrowed/used with permission.)

“Does Matthew 5 teach that the Mosaic Law is still in force?

No matter how many NT passages one can turn to that clearly teach the abolition of the law of Moses at the cross–no matter how many passages speak of our freedom from that law–no matter how forcefully the NT makes the case that the law is no longer binding — no matter how logical and scriptural our arguments concerning Jesus and the law — this one passage is the final refuge of those whose other arguments have all been destroyed.

MATTHEW 5:17-19: 17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

I have been confronted with this passage scores of times, and it is always cited as the supposedly clinching proof in the argument that the law of Moses is still in force. In this passage — it is argued — Jesus said that the law would never go away. He said that anyone who broke it and taught others to break it would be least in the kingdom. He said that he did NOT come to destroy it, but to fulfill it.

The argument is: Doesn’t this passage prove that the law is still in force? Doesn’t it say that Jesus came to fulfill the law — and that means to obey it, and to keep it in force — and therefore, so should we? Doesn’t this passage say that the law is unchangeable and still binding? Doesn’t this say that the law is eternal and perpetual and universal? Doesn’t this prove that we are still under the authority of the law? Doesn’t this prove that Jesus did NOT abolish the law at the cross?

Those who argue for the continuing authority of the law of Moses consider this their strongest text in the NT in support of law-keeping. “Jesus came to fulfill the law, and that means obey it and keep it in force — and so should we. He said it would last forever.” But — after carefully studying the passage in context, we see that it teaches no such thing. I am going to show you five solid facts that refute this interpretation of the passage, and that prove that the passage actually is in complete harmony with everything stated in the New Covenant scriptures about the abolition of the law.

FACT #1 = “THE LAW” IS THE WHOLE LAW, NOT JUST THE 10-C, AND NOT JUST THE “MORAL LAW.”

“The law” is the WHOLE law, in all its details. It is not just the 10-C. It is not just the so-called “moral law.” It is the entire law-code of Moses.

If Jesus is saying here that “the law” is still in force, and that we Christians are obligated to obey “the law” — then he is saying that the ENTIRE law is still in force, and that we are obligated to obey the ENTIRE law. And you know what that means, don’t you? That means that we are all UNDER that law, which means that we are all automatically under the CURSE of the law, since the curse is pronounced on everyone UNDER that law who does not perfectly obey the whole thing (JAMES 2:10; GAL. 3:10).

In addition, if Jesus is saying here that the law is still in force for the Christian, then this would be a flat contradiction of all those other passages we have studied that say the exact opposite — that we are free from the law, not under the law, delivered from the law, dead to the law, etc. So — either Jesus contradicts EVERYTHING said about the law by his own spokesmen, the writers of the NT — OR — he is NOT saying that the law is to remain in force, but he is saying something else entirely.

Since the Analogy of Scripture teaches us that the Bible will not contradict itself, we can be sure that one or the other of these two opposing ideas is false. And the analogy of scripture also teaches us that we derive our doctrine from the many clear passages on a topic, and not from a few isolated passages that we can interpret to conflict with the general tenor and the many passages that clearly teach otherwise. We have already shown, in detail, that the NT clearly teaches that the law of Moses was abolished at the cross, and is no longer in force. Therefore, we must discover how and why so many are misinterpreting this passage in MATT. 5 to say the opposite — and we must discover what Jesus was really saying, after all.

In further proof that Jesus was speaking of the whole law — read what he goes on to discuss immediately after this statement. What follows in chapters 5-7 has come to be known as the “Sermon on the Mount.” Notice the various parts of the law that he mentions: murder, animal sacrifices, adultery, divorce, swearing of oaths, eye-for-an-eye, love of enemies, etc.

Are all these things in the 10-C? No — but they are all in “the law.” Are they all in the “moral law”? What about animal sacrifices? What about the swearing of oaths? Would Jesus say NOT to swear oaths if that were a moral law, still binding today?

Some argue that Jesus is here speaking about the 10-C. But that is manifestly absurd. Is he saying that he came to fulfill the 10-C and all the rest of the OT (the Prophets), but NOT the rest of the law of Moses?

If every jot and tittle of the law is still binding now and forever, then we ARE obligated to obey the WHOLE law, in all its minute detail — NOT just the 10-C, and NOT just the “moral law.” This means we must keep the Sabbath, exactly as commanded in the law, and celebrate the feasts and the new moons, and perform animal sacrifices, and burn incense, and obey the food laws, and all the rest of it. Who does all this today? No one — not even the Jews.

FACT #2 = “THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS” MEANS THE ENTIRE OLD TESTAMENT — NOT JUST THE LAW OF MOSES.

The second reason this passage cannot be teaching the continuing authority of the law of Moses is found in the phrase Jesus uses in vs. 17 — “the Law or the Prophets.” This is the term used by the Jews of the time to refer to the totality of what we now call “the Old Testament.”

The Jewish Bible was divided into “the Book of the Law,” which included the five books of Moses, and “the Book of the Prophets,” which included all the books written by the prophets, along with the historical books and the poetry books. Sometimes the poetical books were listed separately under the title “the Psalms.” Every Sabbath day, portions from the book of the law, and also from the prophets, were read in the synagogues. You will find these titles sprinkled throughout the NT to refer to the Jewish Bible. For example:

GAL. 3:10 = the book of the law.
ACTS 7:42 = the book of the prophets.
ACTS 13:15 = after the reading of the law and the prophets.

So “the law and the prophets” became the common term for the entire OT. Here are some more references to check out: MATT. 7:12; 11:13; 22:40; LUKE 16:16,29,31; 24:27,44; JOHN 1:45; ACTS 13:15; 24:14; 26:22; 28:23; ROM. 3:21.

All these passages refer to “the law and the prophets” or to “Moses and the prophets” — meaning: the entire OT. Now — listen to Christ again, in MATT. 5:17:

* Do not think that I have come to destroy THE LAW OR THE PROPHETS; I have not come to destroy, but to fulfill.

And then, after his resurrection, with the two men he met on the road to Emmaus:

* LUKE 24:27: And beginning at MOSES AND ALL THE PROPHETS, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

* LUKE 24:44: Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in THE LAW OF MOSES ADN THE PROPHETS AND THE PSALMS concerning Me.”

It is obvious that he is referring to the entire OT. And so — this is exactly what he means in MATT. 5:17, as well — the entire OT. Surely he wouldn’t be saying that he came to fulfill the “moral law” only. As a matter of fact — those who argue that Jesus fulfilled the “ceremonial” law only, and that he meant to keep the “moral law” in force, have no way to deal with this passage coherently.

They want to have it both ways. They want to have Jesus fulfilling and ending the ceremonial law, while, at the same time, arguing that his statement here about fulfilling the law is a declaration that the moral law is still in force. But — if to “fulfill the law” means to keep it in force, then to fulfill the ceremonial law means to keep the ceremonial law in force. If that were true, we would be required to sacrifice animals today. On the other hand, if to “fulfill the law” means to complete it and end it, then it means to complete and end the WHOLE law, not just the ceremonial law. It won’t do to change definitions IN MID-VERSE to fit the theory!

No — Jesus came to fulfill the entire OT – and that CANNOT mean that he came to keep it in force perpetually, for that would mean the perpetuation of the entire OT – in all its details. I ask when and where in the scripture did God give anyone the right to reinterpret his laws and change the meaning before setting about to obey them? The scripture only gives us two choices: if we are under the authority of a law, either we obey ALL of it EXACTLY as it is commanded to be obeyed, or we are BREAKING it.

FACT #3 = “TO ABOLISH” IS NOT THE SAME AS “TO DESTROY.”

The third reason this passage does not teach the continuation of “the law” is found in the different meanings of the two words “abolish” and destroy.” In the first place, even most of those who argue for the continuance of the “moral law” agree with the rest of us that Jesus fulfilled and abolished all the “ceremonial law.” They declare that Jesus did away with all the rituals and ceremonies of the law at the cross, because his death was the fulfillment of the types and shadows portrayed in those rituals. On this we agree.

Of course, the problem arises, as we have already discussed, when we attempt to determine from the OT just what those ceremonial rules were, and just which of the 613 laws were moral, and, therefore, still binding. For example, some see the Sabbath, the feasts, the tithes, the food laws, and/or circumcision as ceremonial and abolished — while there are others who argue that some or all of these are part of the “moral law” and should be obeyed today.

Leaving that discussion aside — my point is that even those who argue the two-law theory accept the fact that Jesus abolished at least PART of the law at the cross. Well, then — I ask: Did he thereby DESTROY that part of the law? No one would dare say so! And yet — we all agree that he DID abolish it; he DID bring it to an end. So then — it is one thing to DESTROY a law, and it is quite ANOTHER thing to bring it to an end, and abolish it by fulfilling it.

Jesus SAID he came to fulfill the law [MATT. 5:17]. PAUL said that he abolished it [EPH. 2:15]. That should be good enough for us. But to prove my point beyond all doubt, we need to examine the difference in the scripture between “destroy” and “abolish.”

DESTROY = KATALUO

The word “destroy” in MATT. 5:17 is a translation of the Greek word kataluo, which carries several related meanings: to destroy, demolish, overthrow, deprive of success, bring to naught. The word is used fifteen times in this sense in the NT, and it is most often translated as “destroy.” Let’s take a quick look at a few of the uses of the word kataluo:

* MATT. 24:2 [Jesus speaking of the destruction of the temple]: And He said to them, “Do you see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be [THROWN DOWN (KJV); TORN DOWN (NASB)].”

* MATT. 26:61 [The witnesses testifying at Jesus' trial]: “This man stated, ‘I am able to DESTROY the temple of God and to rebuild it in three days.’”

* MATT. 27:40 [The mocking of Christ on the cross]: “You who are going to DESTROY the temple and rebuild it in three days, save yourself!”

* ACTS 5:38-39 [Gamaliel's advice to the Sanhedrin concerning the Christians]: “Stay away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or action is of men, it will [BE OVERTHROWN (NASB); COME TO NAUGHT (KJV)], but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow it.”

* ACTS 6:14 [Accusations against Stephen]: “We have heard him say that this Nazarene, Jesus, will DESTROY this place and alter the customs which Moses handed down to us.”

* ROM. 14:20: Do not [TEAR DOWN (NASB); DESTROY (KJV] the work of God for the sake of food.

* 2 COR. 5:1: We know that if the earthly tent which is our house is [TORN DOWN (NASB); DISSOLVED (KJV)], we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

Based on this survey, that the KJV, in MATT. 5:17, has translated the word kataluo correctly as “destroy.” However, the NASB and the NIV both translate the word as “abolish,” which creates a huge problem, for a couple of reasons. First — there is ANOTHER word that is more consistently translated “abolish” [we will deal with that word below] — AND both the NIV and the NASB have translated that other word as “abolish” in EPH. 2:15, which declares that Christ has “abolished in his flesh what was causing the enmity [between Jew and Gentile] — that is, THE LAW, made up of commandments and decrees.” (NOTE: I am not a KJV only guy, but in this instance the KJV translates it best.)

We have already studied that passage, and it clearly states — in all three of these versions [KJV, NIV, and NASB] — and in the Greek — that Jesus DID abolish the law. So when the NIV and NASB both translate the word kataluo as “abolish” in MATT. 5:17, instead of the more accurate term “destroy,” they create a flat contradiction in the scripture, and open the way for people to misinterpret the intent of the passages.

The second reason for the confusion is that there is a definite difference in the Greek between “destroy” and “abolish.” We have looked at the word translated “destroy” — kataluo. Let’s look now at the word “abolish.”

ABOLISH = KATARGEO

We studied this word back in the lesson that dealt with the abolition of the law. The word “abolish” is a translation of the Greek word katargeo, which carries the following meanings: to render inactive, inoperative, or idle; to cause something to have no further effect; to deprive of force, influence, power, or authority; to cause to cease, put an end to, do away with, annul, abolish; to be severed from, separated from, discharged from, freed from; to terminate all relationship with.

The word is translated five times as “destroy” in the KJV [I will show you those verses, and why I believe they should have been translated differently] — but it is also translated eighteen other ways, including “do away with,” “abolish,” “loose,” “cease,” “deliver,” “nullify,” “make without effect,” “bring to naught, “pass away,” and “bring to an end”. The word katargeo is used no less than TWELVE times in the NT [out of a total of twenty-seven] in discussions about the abolition of the law.

First, take a look at its uses in other contexts — and notice the difference between this word and “destroy”:

* ROM. 3:3: What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not [NULLIFY (NASB); MAKE WITHOUT EFFECT (KJV)] the faithfulness of God, will it?

Notice — this does not mean “to destroy,” but “to nullify” or “render ineffective.”
* ROM. 6:6: Our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be [DONE AWAY WITH (NASB); DESTROYED (KJV)], so that we would no longer be slaves to sin.

Here the idea is that the pull of our sinful nature is “nullified” or “rendered ineffective” — but it is certainly not completely destroyed, and so the KJV makes a poor choice in this case, IMO.

* 1 COR. 1:28: God has chosen the base things of the world and the despised, the things that are not, so that He may [NULLIFY (NASB); BRING TO NAUGHT (KJV)] the things that are.

Again — not “destroy,” but “nullify” or “render inoperative.”

* 1 COR. 2:6: Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature — a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are [PASSING AWAY (NASB); COME TO NAUGHT (KJV)].

* 1 COR. 6:13: Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will [DO AWAY WITH (NASB); DESTROY (KJV] both of them.

In this case, the word “destroy” is not entirely inappropriate, but the idea is that someday God will bring these things to an end. They will no longer have any meaning or purpose.

* 1 COR. 13:8,10,11: Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will [BE DONE AWAY (NASB); FAIL (KJV)]; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will [BE DONE AWAY (NASB); VANISH AWAY (KJV)]. When the perfect comes, the partial will BE DONE AWAY. When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I [DID AWAY WITH (NASB); PUT AWAY (KJV)] childish things.

* 1 COR. 15:24,26: Then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when He has [ABOLISHED (NASB); PUT DOWN (KJV)] all rule and all authority and power…. The last enemy that will be [ABOLISHED (NASB); DESTROYED (KJV)] is death.

While “destroyed” is not out of the question here, the real intent is to show that Christ will “abolish” all authority but his own, and that he will render death powerless. Death will have no more power over men when Christ has accomplished his final purpose.

* 2 THESS. 2:8: Then that lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth, and [BRING TO AN END (NASB); DESTROY (KJV)] by the appearance of His coming.

Here is another case where “destroy” is not entirely inappropriate, but the idea is that Christ will END the reign of the antichrist when he returns. And Christ will not utterly destroy the antichrist, but rather, he will throw him in the lake of fire — there to suffer eternal punishment.

* 2 TIM. 1:10: …but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who ABOLISHED death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel…

Christ has rendered the power of death obsolete — he has annulled its authority — he has brought its reign to an end.

* HEB. 2:14: Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself also partook of the same, that through death He might [RENDER POWERLESS (NASB); DESTROY (KJV)] him who had the power of death, that is, the devil.

In this case, the NASB translation is superior — IMO — since we know that Christ will NOT destroy the devil completely, but that he WILL render him powerless — he will bring the devil’s rule to an end.

In all these passages that use the word katargeo, we see the basic meanings that we listed above — and while a couple of passages use the word “destroy” appropriately, they clearly carry the meaning of “abolish.” And — most of them should definitely be rendered “abolished,” “annulled,” “rendered powerless,” etc.

Before we go any further, let us make certain that we understand the importance of the distinction I have demonstrated between the words kataluo and katargeo. The first word means “destroy,” and it carries the connotation of violent overthrow and ruin. The second word means “abolish,” and it carries the connotation of annulling the power or authority of something, or of rendering it no longer operable.

With this foundation, we can now look at those passages in the NT that use the word “katargeo” in connection with “the law.” We will do that in the next lesson.

In the last lesson I said I would show you five solid facts that would refute the common interpretation of MATT. 5:17-19 as saying that “the law” is still in authority over the Christian. We were in the middle of the third fact — “To abolish is not the same as to destroy.” We were looking at the difference between the two Greek words “kataluo” and “katargeo.” Now we continue:

We saw in the last lesson that kataluo means “to destroy utterly,” while katargeo means “to render idle; to render obsolete; to annul; to abolish.” Jesus said, in MATT. 5:17, that he had not come to “destroy” [kataluo] the law or the prophets [the entire OT]. But — again and again in the NT, the apostles declare that Jesus DID “abolish” [katargeo] the law of Moses. Unless there IS a very real difference between these two words, we have a flat contradiction in scripture! But since these two words are NOT synonyms, to say that Jesus “abolished” the law of Moses does NOT contradict Jesus’ statement in MATT. 5:17 that he had not come to “destroy” the law — because “to destroy” is not the same as “to abolish.”

So now — as if we have not already covered this territory before — does the NT actually say that Jesus “abolished” [katargeo] the law? If it does, then the entire argument for the continuation of the law, based on MATT. 5:17, is lost — because the meaning of the term katargeo would render that argument null and void. We could say that it — AHEM — “abolishes” that argument.

The word katargeo appears twelve times in the NT in discussions relating to the law of Moses, and we have already discussed most of these passages at length, but let us at least LOOK at them in order to prove my linguistic point, once and for all:

* ROM. 4:14: For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is [NULLIFIED (NASB); (NIV); MADE OF NONE EFFECT (KJV)].

Here Paul argues that law-keeping is NOT included in the gospel of salvation, for law-keeping does not produce HEIRS of the promise to Abraham. Only faith does that — and so he says that IF those under the law are heirs, then that voids faith and renders the promise useless — it abolishes the promise.

* ROM. 7:2,6: For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she [IS RELEASED (NASB); IS LOOSED (KJV)] from the law concerning the husband…. But now we [HAVE BEEN RELEASED (NASB); HAVE BEEN DELIVERED (KJV)] from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

We have already studied this passage. It is absolutely devastating to the argument for the continuation of the authority of the law of Moses, for it clearly states that we have been RELEASED from its authority, just as a woman whose husband has died has been released from the law that bound her to him. That word “released” is translated from the word katargeo. It clearly means that the authority of the law of Moses has been rendered inoperable — that it has been abolished. All connection between us and the law has been severed.

Another passage that we looked at in depth is 1 COR. 3, which discusses the 10-C specifically, and states that the new ministry of the Spirit has annulled and replaced the old ministry of death and condemnation — the 10-C. Go back and read it again to refresh your memory. This is one of the passages we discussed that clearly state the abolition of the 10-C. The word katargeo occurs four times in the passage — in vss. 7, 11, 13, and 14:

* 2 COR. 3:7: But if the ministry of death, engraved in letters on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, [FADING AS IT WAS (NASB); WHICH WAS TO BE DONE AWAY (KJV)]….

Here Paul says that the glory of the shining face of Moses was going to fade away. But then he uses this to declare that the glory of the 10-C was done away in the same way, and was replaced by the greater glory of the ministry of the Spirit:

* 2 COR. 3:11: For if that which [IS FADING AWAY (NASB, NIV); IS DONE AWAY (KJV)] had glory, that which remains has much more glory.

Notice the context — read vss. 9-10. He is clearly contrasting the 10-C — the old ministry of death and condemnation — with the new ministry of the Spirit. He says that the old ministry is fading away — is done away — katargeo — abolished.

* 2 COR. 3:12-14: Therefore having such a hope, we use great boldness in our speech, and are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look at the end of [WHAT WAS FADING AWAY (NASB); THAT WHICH WAS ABOLISHED (KJV)]. But their minds were hardened; for until this very day, at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because only in Christ is it [REMOVED (NASB); DONE AWAY (KJV)].

I don’t see how it could be any clearer. As long as people are focusing on the old covenant — epitomized by the 10-C in this passage, and consisting of the entire law of Moses — there is a veil over their hearts. They cannot see the glories of the gospel of grace. But — just as the glory on the face of Moses was “abolished” — was fading away — in the same way, the glory of the old covenant has been “abolished” — it has faded away.

And how is that old covenant “abolished”? How is it “done away”? It is “taken away” IN CHRIST. I cannot see any way around it. Christ has ABOLISHED that old covenant — the law of Moses — all of it, including the 10-C, which are specified in this passage.

* GAL. 3:17: The Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate the covenant previously ratified by God, so as to [NULLIFY (NASB); MAKE OF NONE EFFECT (KJV)] the promise.

Here again, Paul says that the law cannot abolish the previous covenant that God ratified with Abraham according to faith. Read the whole argument in GAL. 3: the law cannot abolish the covenant of faith which preceded it and is superior to it; rather, the law was designed to oversee the Jews until the coming of ChrIst, and then –- now that we are in Christ -– the law’s authority is abolished.

* GAL. 5:4: [CHRIST HAS BECOME OF NO EFFECT TO YOU (KJV); YOU HAVE BEEN SEVERED FROM CHRIST (NASB)} to you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

To seek to be justified by law "abolishes," or "renders useless" being justified by faith in Christ. Logically -- the converse must also be true: to be justified by faith in Christ is to render completely useless the idea of being justified by law. Remember -- the Judaizers were not seeking to REPLACE faith with law-keeping; they were merely attempting to ADD law-keeping to faith. And Paul says no -- the two principles are mutually exclusive. If you are justified by faith, then law-keeping is useless. If you are justified by law-keeping, then faith is unnecessary.

This is a very important point, for there is no one today, as far as I know, who is saying that we should REPLACE faith with law-keeping. The argument is the same one the Judaizers were making -- that we should COMBINE faith WITH law-keeping. And Paul says NO -- it can't be done. The one negates the other. They are mutually exclusive.

* GAL. 5:11: But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? Then the stumbling block [offense] of the cross [HAS BEEN ABOLISHED (NASB); HAS CEASED (KJV)].

Here we can clearly see the important difference between “destroy” and “abolish”. If Paul were to just agree to add circumcision to the gospel [and remember, this means preaching that Gentiles should submit to the law of Moses], then he would not be persecuted by the Judaizers. But as long as he keeps preaching the cross ONLY — WITHOUT adding law-keeping to the gospel, then the Judaizers will continue to be offended, and will continue to persecute him. Paul says: the offense of the cross would be abolished — rendered null and void — have its power annulled — if he were to include law-keeping as part of the gospel.

The next passage is the final death-blow to all arguments against the abolition of the law:

* EPH. 2:14-16: For He Himself is our peace, who has made both groups [Jews and Gentiles] into one, and has broken down the barrier of the dividing wall, by ABOLISHING in His flesh what was causing the hostility — the law, with its commandments and decrees — so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death what was causing the hostility. >

This is the most powerful passage of all — stating directly that Christ put the law to death. He did it by ABOLISHING [katargeo] it at HIS death ["in his flesh"]. This parallels COL. 2, which says that Christ nailed the law to the cross.

Several of these passages directly state that the law HAS BEEN ABOLISHED. The others state that the preaching of law-keeping would ABOLISH faith. If this isn’t plain enough, then nothing ever will be!

There is one other passage that contains the word katargeo in relation to “the law.” We will discuss it in a future lesson.

FACT #4 = “TO STAND UNTIL FULFILLED” IS NOT THE SAME AS “TO STAY IN
FORCE FOREVER.”

The fourth reason that MATT. 5:17-20 is not teaching the continuation of the law of Moses is the fact that “to stand until fulfilled” is NOT the same as “to stay in force forever.” Those who preach the law from this passage are taking Jesus’ words here to mean that the law of Moses will always and ever be in force — that it is unchangeable and therefore binding, today and forever.

But the passage says nothing of the kind. Nor does it say that every jot and tittle of the law will stand till heaven and earth pass away. Read the passage carefully, and you will see that it says that the law will endure UNTIL something ELSE happens — NOT that it will endure forever. Jesus clearly states that every tiny detail of the law will remain UNTIL it is all FULFILLED. He has just stated that he came to fulfill it, and he further states that, UNTIL he DOES completely fulfill it, it will remain.

But this just as clearly states that when he DOES fulfill it completely, it WILL pass away! Look at it again:

“Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to destroy them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not one jot or one tittle will by any means disappear from the Law UNTIL everything is accomplished.”

His point is very clear: none of the law will pass away UNTIL he fulfills it. This teaches that at some point it WILL all be fulfilled — and THEN IT WILL PASS AWAY! The idea is NOT that the law will last until heaven and earth pass away — but that SOONER would heaven and earth pass away than that one letter of the law would fail to be fulfilled. Luke’s words make this matter very clear in his version of this statement:

* LUKE 16:17: It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fail.

Here we cannot mistake the meaning. The idea is not how long the law is to last, but the certainty that it will be fulfilled — no matter how long that takes. And so, contrary to the usual interpretation of this passage, it is NOT teaching the perpetuity of the law of Moses, but rather, that there will come a time that it WILL pass away — when it has been completely fulfilled by the Messiah. Whatever “fulfilled” means – THAT is what will cause the law to pass away. Which leads to the next point:

FACT #5 = “TO FULFILL” IS NOT THE SAME AS “TO KEEP IN FORCE.”

The fifth reason — and the clinching one — that MATT. 5:17-20 is NOT teaching the perpetuity of the law of Moses is that there is a clear distinction between what it means to “fulfill the law” and what it means to “keep the law in force.” The key to understanding what Jesus is talking about here is to understand what he means when he says that he came to “fulfill” the law and the prophets [the entire OT].

The English word “fulfill” is derived from the words “fill” and “full” -– and its original meaning was to fill something completely. It has since come to mean: to make complete; to accomplish or carry into effect, as an intention, promise, or prophecy; to complete by performance; to answer the requirements of; to bring to pass, as a purpose or design; to effectuate.

If I ask you to do something for me, and then later I ask if you “fulfilled” that task, I am asking if you completed it, accomplished it, or performed it. I know this SOUNDS like “obedience,” but there is a crucial difference. The word fulfill is sometimes used in that sense, but it is most often used to refer to the completion of a predicted or expected event. If I predict a future event, and then later ask if that event has been fulfilled, I am NOT asking if anyone has “obeyed” me; I am asking if the event I predicted actually came to pass — if it occurred as I had said it would.

The Greek word in MATT. 5 that is translated “to fulfill” is the word plerosai, the infinitive form of the verb pleroo. It carries the same basic meanings as the English word “fulfill.” It is derived from the word for “fill,” and it is often used in the NT to mean, simply, “fill.” For example, see the following passages, all of which use forms of pleroo to mean “fill”: MATT. 13:48; 23:32; LUKE 2:40; 3:5; JOHN 12:3; 16:6,24; ACTS 2:2; 5:3,28; ROM. 1: 29; 15:14; 2 COR. 7:4; EPH. 1:23; 3:19; 5:18; PHIL. 1;11; 4:18; COL. 1:9; 2 TIM. 1:4.

In other contexts the word pleroo is used consistently to refer to completing, accomplishing, and bringing to pass predicted events. This is the primary use of the word in the gospels. The four gospels use the word pleroo forty-six times, and at least THIRTY of those uses clearly refer to the “fulfillment” of scriptural predictions and foreshadowings.

For example, Matthew uses pleroo seventeen times, FOURTEEN of which clearly refer to the fulfillment of prophecy. In fact, in EVERY case in which the word pleroo is used in relation to the scriptures, it carries this meaning of the fulfillment of predicted events — NOT obedience. Notice the following passages – ALL of which use pleroo to refer to the fulfillment of OT scriptures:MATT. 1:22; 2:15,17,23; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 13:15; 21:4; 2:54,56; 27:9.MARK 1:15; 14:49.LUKE 4:21; 21:22; 24:44.JOHN 12:38; 13:18; 15:25; 17:12; 18:9,32; 19:24,36.ACTS 1:16; 3:18; 13:27.

This is THE KEY to understanding what Jesus is really saying in MATT. 5:17. He refers to the entire OT, claiming that he came to FULFILL it. The meaning is obvious, isn’t it? Yes, of course, he obeyed the law, but that is NOT primarily what he is talking about. He came to ACCOMPLISH everything the OT said about the Messiah. He came to BRING TO COMPLETION all the predictions, all the shadows, all the “types” in the scriptures that pointed forward to the coming Messiah and his sacrifice for our sins.

So Jesus did not come to DESTROY the law or the prophets — but he DID come to complete them, to fulfill them, to bring them to their long-anticipated conclusion. We have already seen that the law was NOT given to make the Jews righteous. It was given for several other important reasons, among which were the setting apart of the Jews as a special people, the revelation of God’s holy character, and the proof that no one can actually live up to God’s standards.

But – there was another purpose in those OT scriptures – and that was to foreshadow, typify, and predict the arrival, the deeds, and the atoning death of the Messiah. THAT is what Jesus came to do -– to fulfill all those predictions, shadows, and types that are scattered all throughout the entire law and the rest of the OT. And when he finally fulfilled everything that the OT had predicted concerning him, he nailed that old law to the cross and abolished it. He did not destroy it; he fulfilled it, and then he abolished it.

Why did he abolish it? Because its purpose was now completed. It never was meant to produce righteousness, anyway. It was meant to reveal unrighteousness and drive us to the savior. And when we have come to faith in the savior that was predicted and typified in that law –- we have passed from under the jurisdiction of that law forever. Jesus fulfilled “every jot and tittle” of the law that referred to him by way of anticipation -– and by doing so, he brought it to its logical and predetermined end.

Here at the beginning of his ministry, Jesus declared that he had come to FULFILL the entire OT. The gospel writers went to great lengths to show exactly HOW he did so. For example, when Jesus went to Nazareth, and read from the scroll of Isaiah in the synagogue, he read a passage that all the rabbis agreed was a reference to the Messiah. What did he say when he finished his reading?

LUKE 4:16-21:
16.He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. And he stood up to read. 17. The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written: 18. “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, 19. to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” 20.Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him, 21. and he began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is FULFILLED [pleroo] in your hearing.”

After his resurrection, Jesus met up with two men on the road to Emmaus, and when he heard their doubts, he upbraided them:

* LUKE 24:25-27: Then He said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?” And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

Later that same day, he said to the disciples:

* LUKE 24:44-45: “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be FULFILLED [pleroo] which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.” And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures. Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day.

This is an obvious reference to his own statement back in MATT. 5:17 about fulfilling the law and the prophets. He says right here that he DID fulfill them all in his death, burial, and resurrection.

And then we have the words of Paul:

* ACTS 13:29: Now when they had FULFILLED [pleroo] everything that had been written about him, they took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb.

So – when and where was it all finally completed and fulfilled? At the cross. This is why Paul goes on to explain that it was at the cross that Jesus ABOLISHED the law:

* COL. 2:14: He took it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.
* EPH. 2:15: He abolished in his flesh the law of commandments and decrees.
* ROM. 10:4: Christ is the end of the law for everyone who believes.
* GAL. 3:24-25: The law was our guardian until Christ, so that we would be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under the guardian.

What could be plainer? Jesus came — not to destroy [kataluo] the law — but to fulfill [pleroo] it, no matter how long that took. And he did fulfill it; he was the complete fulfillment of all those OT predictions, foreshadowings, and types concerning a complete and final atonement for sin. And then — once he finally and completely fulfilled it all — at the cross — he then and there abolished [katargeo] it and replaced it with the new and better covenant ratified in his own blood.

BUT WHAT ABOUT VERSE 19?

In response to all these facts, I have often been challenged by someone referencing verse 19. The claim is that verse 19 contradicts everything I have said — that verse 19 preaches the continuation of the law of Moses. But this is a weak argument and easily dealt with.

The answer is easy: The statement in verse 19 was a warning to those who were under that law at that time — the Jews he was speaking to. UNTIL it was all fulfilled, it was still in force. We have already seen that the law remained in force until the cross. So Jesus upheld the law as long as he lived. But — after Jesus fulfilled it, it passed away, just as he said it would. Since it has now passed away, NO ONE is required to keep it. So I am NOT disobeying the warning in verse 19, because that warning was not given to me, nor could it ever apply to me — a Gentile Christian under grace, who was never under that law in the first place.

There are five important reasons that MATT. 5:17-20 does NOT teach that the law of Moses is to remain in force for the Christian:

1) “The law” is the whole law, not just the 10-C, and not just the “moral law.”

2) “The law and the prophets” means “the entire OT,” not just the law of Moses.

3) “To abolish” is not the same as “to destroy.”

4) “To stand until fulfilled” is not the same as “to remain in force
forever.”

5) “To fulfill” is not the same as “to keep in force.”

MATT. 5:17-20 perfectly harmonizes with everything else we have studied about the law. It states that the law was to pass away when it was all fulfilled by Christ. Christ did fulfill it, and by doing so, he brought it to its logical and predetermined end. He did not destroy it, but the NT states clearly and repeatedly that he did fulfill it, thereby abolishing it.”

Nuff said!

I’ve heard certain evangelical ministers decry the “Dare to be Like Daniel” applications of the Old Testament. I understand their concern (that it boils down to moralistic teaching and hardly lifts up the Lord Jesus Christ) but I will risk going against their grain in this post. (Though I do intend to present Christ!)

The story of Joseph has been my favorite story in the bible since the Sunday School classes of my youth. I always identified with him because he was a “dreamer”. I have always, and I mean always, had very vivid dreams in my sleep. As I got older, more and more details of Joseph’s story came clear to me and I saw many more parallels between he and I. But the one’s that were most important I didn’t see. I mean this man had a character and tenaciousness in his devotion to God, that I can only yet hope to attain. But now I’m starting to realize why the Lord had me to identify with Joseph. And also why, in a greater since,  the demeanor of the Lord Jesus Himself is my goal. Let me explain…….

1. Like Joseph, I am the son of my father’s old age. (39) My dad didn’t love me more than my brothers, or my sisters for that matter, but I am the only one that he raised from birth to high-school graduation. I think that this is by God’s design because my dad became a Christian shortly before I was born. Therefore, he was saved while he was raising me. Seeing him study the bible constantly, and believing him to be the smartest man in the world, it caused me to develop a love for studying the word of God.

2. Jesus was His Father’s only begotten Son. He was special to His Father in ways that cannot be exhaustively explained. However,  He had the testimony, that “I always do the things that are pleasing to Him.” (John 8:29) Though I have definitely not reached a point to be able to make such a claim, nor could I ever truly make it, I do desire to have the dedication to God the Father that our Lord had. Even if it means I lose family relationships. 

3. Like Joseph, God has decided to show me many things in that study for which, not just my brothers, but my mother and many others despise me. I have issued challenges to them all at different times to show me where I was wrong. They either copped out by saying, “I don’t won’t to argue” or “I’ll get back to you”. Well, I’m still waiting.

4. Jesus was rejected by His brothers until after His death and resurrection. He was truly despised and rejected of many men.  (Isaiah 53:3) According to Hebrews 12:3 he “endured such hostility by sinners against Himself”. And there is no doubt that at times this included His family. But His attitude was ”whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother.” Again, I desire to take this attitude as my own in regards to my allegiance to Christ and Him alone. (I request that those of you who are reading this pray for me in this area.) I desire to “go out to Him outside the camp, bearing His reproach.” (Hebrews 13:13)

5. Like Joseph was by Potiphar’s wife, many of my family members are falsely accusing me of many horrible things. I’m even having my motives and intentions for breaking with my father’s church and the entire COGIC organization questioned. They all believe that I am following men instead of God. And none of them would admit that if that man that I was following was them, then they wouldn’t have a problem. Like Potiphar’s wife, I believe that they may be convicted and embarassed by the progress in biblical knowledge that I’ve made so their only course is to invent and harbor false accusations and false assumptions. In the case of Joseph, we never see him pleading his innocence. (Though we can imagine he may of.) But we do see him enduring while receiving undeserved punishment. Trust me, this is a major area of struggle and failure for me. So another prayer request comes in here.

6. We all recognize that our Lord was falsely accused many times. He was falsely accused of speaking against the temple, threatening to destroy it (Matthew 26:61). He was falsely accused of falsely claiming to be the Son of God. (John 19:7) But according to Isaiah 53:7, “He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth.” (see also Matthew 27:13-14) The very One who when rightly judged was found without fault (Luke 23:13-15) said nothing nor did anything to defend Himself that He might fulfill all righteousness before the Father, on behalf of all those who would believe on Him. (Again, I must insert yet another prayer request here. I’ve already asked several brothers personally for their prayers in regards to this. I chafe at false accusations. I practice self-defense all the time. But I won’t to be more like Christ in this regards.)

7. After all that Joseph suffered, right at the time that he had the upper hand on his brothers and in the many subsequent opportunities that he had where he could have exacted revenge, he had this to say: “”As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive. So therefore, do not be afraid; I will provide for you and your little ones.’ So he comforted them and spoke kindly to them.” (Genesis 50:20-21)

8. And here’s what the scripture declares concerning our Lord’s attitude toward His suffering, “fixing our eyes on Jesus, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame,… (Hebrews 12:2) He suffered greatly for the joy that was set before Him. And He refused to feel the shame that so easily overtakes me when I believe that I’m suffering wrongfully.

I want to close with a few texts of scripture:

Matthew 16:24-27

“Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny Himself, and take up His cross and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it. For what will it  profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?”

Luke 14:26-27,33

“If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes; and even his own life, HE CANNOT BE MY DISCIPLE. Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after Me CANNOT BE MY DISCIPLE…..So then, none of you can be my disciple who does not give up all his own possessions.”

I ask that you pray with me that the Lord would apply all the correct attitudes demonstrated in all these verses to my heart so that I will willingly desolve any and all relationships that keep me from being the Lord’s disciple. Whether it be family, friends, mentors, etc. I want to have one-heart devotion to my Lord and Savior.

No matter the cost!

Matthew 11:25-27 (emphasis mine, also see Luke 10:21-22)  “At that time Jesus said, ‘I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have REVEALED them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight. All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to REVEAL Him.’”

Luke 24:13-16;30-32 “And behold, two of them were going that very day to a village named Emmaus, which was about seven miles from Jerusalem. And they were talking with each other about all these things which had taken place. While they were talking and discussing, Jesus Himself approached and began traveling with them. BUT THEIR EYES WERE PREVENTED FROM RECOGNIZING HIM…..When He had reclined at the table with them, He took the bread and blessed it, and breaking it, He began giving it to them. THEN THEIR EYES WERE OPENED AND THEY RECOGNIZED HIM; and He vanished from their sight.”

Don’t worry, this isn’t another attempt to beat Arminians over the head with the Sovereignty of God in salvation. If anything, I could spend paragraphs and cite hundreds of examples of the need for Calvinist to put into practice their professed beliefs. Rather, this post is to advertise the solution to a problem that seems to escape well meaning believers (that’s us) at times.

I have come to notice a trend in our day. Whether it be in the area of evangelism, preaching, or apologetics, many well meaning Christians have forgotten one major thing, IT TAKES A SUPERNATURAL WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IN ORDER FOR ANY MAN OR WOMAN TO COME TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH, INCLUDING YOU AND I!

Take a personal survey of the latest or most popular evangelism method. Or how about the last sermon you heard on false converts. Or how about the last apologetic discussion you heard on the existence of God. How much emphasis was put on dependence in the Holy Spirit to take the method or information and apply it to the heart of the one who needed it? Can you confidently say that the “4-step method” of evangelism, the “exegesis/exposition” of the text, or the logical argument, were not themselves the feature star of each presentation? Wasn’t the attitude more in the line of ”trust me this method works” or “faithful, accurate preaching is only sure fire way to ensure the church is pure” or “trust me, the atheists have no answer for this”?

Or what about the last theological debate you had with another Christian? How much were your emotions affected by the discussion? Was there any moment where you had distain for your brother or sister? Was there any moment where you judged them in your heart as possibly being unsaved? Was there a moment where the Spirit said to end the discussion but you had to get in another point? And once the discussion was over, did you mine your bible for prooftexts to use as belittling weapons against that person the next time the subject came up?

Now, while I definitely love the zeal of anyone who goes out and evangelizes (with just about any method) and I love exegetical/expositional sermons, and my personality just fits right into apologetics, (which sometimes leads to very unbecoming confrontations with other believers) none of these bear any fruit without the Spirit. How do I know? Well, it should seem obvious that since each of these is employed by us as fallible, sinful men and women, on our best day, we can no more be effective at changing the hearts/minds of men than we can at changing the rotation of the sun. But unfortunately it is not so obvious.  Even the apostle Paul had to remind the Corinthians, “So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth. (I Corinthians 3:7)”

Sometime ago, I wrote an article entitled,  ”Is my Ipod causing me to sin?”. But it wasn’t my Ipod. It was pride. It was arrogance. It was having a suspicious and judgmental heart. It was not recognizing that the Spirit was at work in me to come to the knowledge of the truth. It was folly. You see, the only thing that helped me to see that Albert Mohler, Matt Slick, John MacArthur, Paul Washer, etc. were wrong in the areas with which I disagreed with them, was the kindness of God giving me revelation. And guess what!? I yet have many blind spots! So therefore, my grace and mercy for these men should have been as vast as that that I desire and expect from Our Lord Jesus. Because again, it takes REVELATION and ILLUMINATION to make Christ and the things of Christ known to any of us.

So the next time you’re involved in a potentially contentious discussion with another believer or the next time you hear another believer (yes even a famous theologian or apologist) say something that you know to be wrong, instead of reacting with contempt, take a moment and ask God to be merciful to us all and open our eyes.

By far, my favorite attribute of God is His faithfulness. Now I don’t mean to start a debate. Nor do I expect anyone to one-up me on this one. This isn’t a matter of right and wrong but simply one of personal opinion. For me, God’s faithfulness is key.

Because God’s faithfulness is something that I personally experience, I am able to put full confidence in every other attribute that the bible tells me describes His character and nature. Again, for me, when it comes to trusting in God’s omnipresence, omnipotence, omnicience, love, righteousness, graciousness and holiness, everything is  dependent upon His faithfulness.

When God is faithfully present, powerful, knowing, loving, righteous, gracious, and holy (as He always is), then I can rest assured that I am in great care. I can rest assured that my decision (as influenced by Him as it was) to wager all my chips on His promises was not really a gamble at all.

And to be sure, I could rattle of many, many, many instances where God has truly been faithful to me. From birth till now, there is not one instance where God has ever failed me. Sure, things haven’t always been rosey. I haven’t gotten everything that I’ve asked for in prayer. And no doubt I’ve been disappointed at times with His decisions for my life. But it hasn’t ever taken very long for me to see that He knew exactly what was best for me. I can now think of so many of those prayer requests that I’m glad He didn’t grant. I can think of so many of those decisions He made that I’m glad weren’t made in the direction I wanted them to go in.

But the greatest token of God faithfulness to me has been in regards to salvation. And although I’m a New Covenant believer, I can say like Moses in Deuteronomy 7:9; 

“Know therefore that the Lord your God, He is God, the faithful God, who keeps His covenant and His lovingkindness to a thousandth generation with those who love Him and keep His commandments;”

And the apostle Paul picks up on the truth of God’s faithfulness in relation to salvation in I Corinthians 1:9;

“God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Paul also founds the strength to endure temptation in God’s faithfulness in I Corinthians 10:13;

“No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of excape also, so that you will be able to endure it.”

And in I Thessalonians 5:23-4 Paul prays for the believers confidently because of God’s faithfulness:

“Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely, and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Faithful is He who calls you, and He also will bring it to pass.”

In II Thessalonians 3:3 Paul makes a promise to the believers there confidently because of God’s faithfulness. He writes:

“But the Lord is faithful, and He will strengthen and protect you from the evil one.”

Because of the faithfulness of God the writer of Hebrews (I vote for Apollos, sorry Big L, LOL)  admonishes and encourages those believers against apostasy by writing:

“Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful;”

I could go on and on. The bible is full of instances where God is both described as being faithful and the believers hope is assured by God’s faithfulness.

Now rather this is also your favorite attribute of God or not, it doesn’t really matter. All I want you to do is that you would take a moment out of your day just to think about God’s faithfulness to you. Let your mind go back and forth over the many experiences you’ve had where you know for sure it was the faithfulness of God that got you through. If you get a chance, share that with another believer who you know is going through something. Maybe it will remind them of times in their own lives and encourage them in their present situation. Better still, share it with a non-believer. Maybe even one with whom you have already shared the gospel. Give testimony to the faithfulness of the One to whom you have entrusted your soul.

Who knows, by the end of today, you may also regard His faithfulness as your favorite attribute too!

I love you all! Be blessed!

This post is just meant to recount for you my experience in going to pray for the daughter of my co-worker.

I wanted to name this post “Trust in God Kills Impotence” or “Impotent Christian, yes, Impotent God, NO!” But I decided not to. The reason why is that I didn’t want to give the impression that I went to pray for the girl and subsequently took part in a book of Acts, entire household repentance, Holy Spirit falling experience. The fact is, most of what was accomplished there was probably most immediately visible in me instead of in the girl or her family.

The brother in the Lord (Bro. Jun) who went with me and I arrived at my co-workers home to find her gone and no sight of her daughter. My co-worker’s mother let us in and then proceeded to offer us some refreshments. Even though her English was not very good and heavily accented, she communicated to us that my co-worker would be back shortly. A few minutes later my co-worker called and I was able to speak with her. She let me know that she was about 25 minutes away and was sorry for the inconvenience. I let her know that it was okay and that we were glad to wait for such a serious situation. Soon after we got off of the phone, her sister arrived. She also offered us refreshments and then proceded to make small talk. We found out that she had recently left her job but that she was overall doing well. We also found out that she knew as much or as little as we did about her niece’s condition. In fact she had actually spent time with her niece over Christmas break and they had apparently had a good time. She told us that her niece “loved” scary movies and that upon her request she rented one for her. But the problems with the girl started after she returned home. (That piece of information, by the way, raised Brother Jun’s eyebrows and he was eager to consider it as possibly related to the girl’s condition. I myself was rather unconvinced. I guess figuring out how things got started was less urgent to me.)  The aunt said that when she heard what was going on she just figured that the girl had had to much excitement in their visit and was having trouble calming down. However, my co-worker assured her that things were more serious. Somehow praying or faith came up and I asked if she was a Sikh like her sister. She said yes. I asked how she felt about her sister inviting two Christians to come and pray for her niece. She said that because of her belief that all religions lead to the same God (which is consistent with Sikhism) it did not bother her at all. It was her view, and the view of my co-worker, that whatever would work they would try. I let her know that I would be speaking with her niece about Jesus Christ being the only Way and exclusively God. I told her that I was n0t intentionally offending her with this claim but that it was what I believed and that it was the only way out of this dilemna for her niece. She assured me that she would not be offended. At this time, Brother Jun excused himself to the restroom.

Just before I could continue any dialogue with the aunt about the exclusivity of Christ, my co-worker walks into the house. But she is not alone. With her are two men. Both are barefoot and dressed in robes and shawls. They were carrying what seemed to be a stool or an altar. I couldn’ t tell. Now my eyebrows were raising! I immediately wondered to myself, “what is going on?”! My co-worker came to me and apologize for the delay. I immediately asked her if there was going to be some type of ceremony. To my surprise. and chagrin I must admit, she said yes. I said to her that maybe the brother and I should leave and that in fact we were going to leave. She begged me to stay. She said that the men were priest from her temple there to bless the house and that they would only be there for a few minutes. At this time Brother Jun returned and she began to ask him, “What’s wrong? What’s wrong?”. Of course, he was confused by her questions. Then he saw the men and the look on my face. I told him what the men were there for and he seemed caught off guard but undetered. I told him that we should go to the car and then we excused ourselves. Outside I told him that I didn’t believe that God would work in this setting. It seemed completely antithetical for Him to do anything while the men were upstairs chanting away. The brother said that though it was odd we should not leave. So we stayed.

When we got back inside the grandmother and aunt were busy in the kitchen preparing a meal for the ceremony and other things. At this time, my co-worker went to get her daughter. In walks this girl who looks like she hasn’t slept or has only slept for days. She looked completely drained of strength. The mother sat her down on the love seat next to the couch we were sitting on. I asked how to pronounce her name. Then I began to speak with her. I wanted to let her know that I was not there to hurt her and that she should consider me a friend. I asked her what she knew about Jesus Christ. She said “I know that He killed Himself to save everybody.”. I responded, “He killed Himself?” To which she said, “I mean He was killed to save everybody.” I asked her if she believed that. She said yes. I asked her if she knew He was God. She said no. I told her “Yes, He is!” I then told her that He was her only way out of this situation and that He would help her if she asked. I then asked her if she wanted to ask Him to help her. She said yes. I asked her what it was that she wanted to ask Him and she said that she didn’t want to feel this way anymore. I asked, “Do you want to ask Him now?”. And then suddenly she said, “Jesus, I don’t want to feel like this anymore.” I immediately told her to bow her head and I bowed mine and began to pray for her. When I finished praying for her, I asked her how she felt. She said, “I feel light.” And the brother and I began to praise the Lord. Her mother and aunt both began to command her to say “Thank you Jesus!”. I was very surprised.

But suddenly one of the men from her temple descended halfway down the staircase and said something in their language. The aunt said to them that they must all go upstairs to participate in this part of the house blessing ceremony (which I found out actuallylast 3 days). I immediately wanted to protest. This little girl had just been touched by God’s Spirit. I’m not saying that she was saved. But whatever had been accomplished, I knew, was about to be ruined. They got up and proceeded to the staircase. The little girl protested but they ignored her. While they were upstairs, I voiced my concerns to Brother Jun and he concured but he knew there was nothing we could do. They came back down and I began to speak with the little girl again. Suddenly she fainted and all my fears came true. She came to a few minutes later and I asked her how she felt. She said that she felt good before she went upstairs but that she now felt the same as before we prayed. She even began to shake all over. I asked if she was cold. She said no. I asked if she was nervous. She said no. I asked then, if she felt that something else was controlling her body. To my disappointment, she said yes. She also said that while she was passed out she saw a face with an evil smile and no other features.

At this point I was honestly clueless as to what to do. I then opened my bible to Psalm 23 and had her read it. I asked her if she understood what it said. I explained to her the confidence that David showed in God and that she must show that same confidence in Christ for her salvation and for her deliverance from this affliction. I told her that each time she felt afraid that she should read this passage. I asked her mom if she had a bible in the house. She said no, so I asked if she had a pair of scissors. She got them from the kitchen. Brother Jun told me that I didn’t need to cut it out of my bible because he had one to give her in his car. He retrieved it and we marked out the passage for her. He added another passage for her from Philippians. I again began to speak with her about Christ when she suddenly fainted again. This time she continued to shake but she would not come to. Then Brother Jun began to give the mom and aunt his testimony and explain to them that they needed to call on Jesus themselves as he had as an atheist who was desperate for the healing of his wife from a brain aneurysm. He them prayed for the little girl himself.

We then got up to leave and as we approached the door the aunt began to exclaim, “Look at her face. Look at her face.”. We turned around to see the little girl snarling like a mean dog. Her face was really contorted. I asked the mom and aunt to move and I sat down and held the girl in my arms. I prayed to God to have mercy on her and then, in what seemed like a reversion to my Pentecostal days, I informed the evil spirit that it must leave her because she belonged to Christ. I know fellas but I was desperate. Suddenly, her body relaxed and she appeared to be sleep rather than faint. I told the mom and aunt to let her rest and to call me when she awoke. Brother Jun and I said our goodbyes and proceeded to leave. The grandmother came into the living room and grabbed me in a tight hug and said, “Thank you son, thank you.”. It was a very sweet moment.

We went outside and I just prayed again that despite the ceremony, which was still going on upstairs, that God would have mercy on the little girl.

That was Wednesday. I didn’t hear from the mother until last night at work. She informed me that the girl is doing a lot better but that she is still having fainting episodes and the evil spirit is still manifesting. I reminded her of our previous discussions of having one-heart devotion to Christ alone. I told her that she needed to consider it because it was the only thing that would help her daughter. I reminded her that her daughter felt “light” and that she didn’t want to participate in the ceremony. I let her know that I wasn’t trying to blackmail her but that unless she made a committment to Christ as God alone in her own life, things would most likely continue as they are with her daughter. I even told her that she should consider if God was allowing this with her daughter as a means to break the pride in her and cause her to “bow the knee” to Him. She actually agreed that it was a possibility. She even said to me that she knows that my prayers to Him worked. 

Even though I left out a few details of the entire experience, I think you get the overall picture of what went down. Personally, I learned a great deal about where I am in the Lord. I learned that I really need to be filled more with the Spirit and that I need to be doing the scriptures as much as knowing them. I learned that when it came down to it, I trusted the Lord to protect me against any dangers. I learned that it’s not about my abilities but His. I learned that even if I thought that I was “up to it”, I must always depend solely on the Holy Spirit for my strength. I also learned that God works in mysterious ways, His wonders to perform.

Pray for the little girl and her entire family. Pray that a seed was planted in her that will one day grow into her being a witness in her family, for Christ. And also pray for me that the next time an opportunity to bring the light of Christ into anyone’s life, I will be better prepared and more eager to go.

The title of this post describes what I feel like today. Let me explain.

I have found the following to be a common experience amongst most Christians. From time to time, we believers suffer from feelings of inadequacy. We fall into the mode of feeling as though we just don’t measure up. Sometimes this feeling is brought on by hearing a spiritually scorching sermon by someone like Paul Washer or Pastor John MacArthur. Sometimes it is brought on by seeing the activities of another believer and their zeal for good works. Sometimes it is brought on by reading a passage of scripture. Sometimes it is simply brought on by taking personal inventory of our lives in regards to “religious” or “spiritual” activity. We feel we don’t pray enough; fast enough; read/study the bible enough; witness enough; etc. Finally, we may resolve that there is, in fact, no “enough”. But that resolve does nothing for our feelings of inadequacy.

There is another dimention of this problem of the feelings of inadequacy. It is found when we look at the whole of the Christian faith and life experience and wonder if there is more. We look at the activities of those who followed the Lord from Genesis to Revelation. No matter what our “Cessasionist” brothers tell us about the rarity of such activity, we yet desire at some level at least taste of the power that was exhibited in them at times. Therefore, even if we come to the conclusion that there is more to being a Christian than what we are experiencing, then often times we have no alternative than to believe the problem to be ourselves. Sure, we read books like “Pagan Christianity” and agree with the author Frank Viola that the structure and place of our “gathering together” may well serve to add to our living below our privileges. Yet and still, the most honest of us are not willing to only look outwardly to find blame for our condition. We desire to know if there is really something that we are personally doing or not doing that is at the root.

So you may be asking, “Brother Lawrence D., what brought this feeling on today? And what do you think is wrong with you that is causing it?” Well I’m glad you asked.

Last night at work, I was approached by a lady that I work with who is a member of the Sikh religion. She told me that since she knows that I am a priest (pastor, preacher, priest is all the same in her mind) she felt that I was the one to talk to about her problem. In a nutshell, she felt that her daughter was plagued by an evil spirit. The little 12 year old girl was fainting at odd times, speaking with a different voice, hearing voices, seeing visions, dreaming prophetically, eating ravenously and even spirit writing in other languages.  The evil spirit even gave a name. To top it off the little girl could not remember any of the episodes. The mother was obviously very troubled.  She showed me videos taken on her camera phone of the girl in several of these states. She even showed me the writing that the daughter had done. To tell you the truth, I was convinced, as was the mother, that this was more than the “panic attack” diagnosed by the doctor.

You may not believe this but I was at a loss for words. Yep, Brother Lawrence D. couldn’t come up with words to comfort this poor mother. You see, when the girl’s mother and I first began to work together 3 years ago, we had a conversation about Christ being the only way. This was a proposition which she didn’t believe because as a Sikh, Jesus is a god amongst gods. They call them gurus. At the time I went all “apologetic” on her but in her mind, I was just another uneducated westerner who hadn’t studied enough. We didn’t discuss it much after that, however, a few times over the years she has come to me to request prayer for a sick relative or even herself. I remember asking her the first time she requested prayer if she would accept Christ as God alone if He healed her. She said no. She said that since He was one of the gods, she would just continue to “respect” Him and pray to all of the gods. 

But this time was different. To me, this wasn’t a time to put on my “James White” or “Matt Slick” Super Apologist hat and argue with her about the truth of Christianity. This little girl was in bad shape spiritually and her mother was still in the mode of considering Jesus as just another option. She had went to her “priest” and he couldn’t do anything so she decided she would come to me.

I explained to her that as a “priest” (as she understood it), I had no special power with God to guarantee her daughter’s well-being. I told her that power with God comes through a relationship with Him thru Jesus Christ. But she couldn’t understand or see that I was elevating Christ above all. In other words, she could affirm what I was saying and still be a Sikh. And she did affirm it. And since I professed to have this relationship myself, she felt she only needed to get me and things would be fixed. Now comes the part when I began to feel bad….

Years ago, as a Pentecostal, I would have immediately been eager to go to this lady’s house, slap some olive oil on her daughter’s forehead (and probably the walls of the house too) and start pleading the blood of Jesus. I would have seen the mother seeking me out for help as a clear sign that this is what God wanted me to do. I would have felt totally confident that God was going to move in a miracul0us way and that this lady was going to fall on her knees and cry out to God f0r salvation. The whole house was going to be saved. I would have went in there and commanded Satan to take his hand off of this child in the name of Jesus. With child like faith and ignorance, I would have proclaimed the victory from sun-up to sundown, if necessary. I wouldn’t have been prepared for defeat because, in my mind, it wasn’t an option.

But after hearing this mother’s sad predicament, I knew that that Lawrence was gone. Theology had killed him. Theology had told him that he had no such authority or power. Theology had told him to be logical and to consider that even if God did deliver the girl, she would be left in the same enviroment. Theology had told him that if he couldn’t find it in scripture, then it wasn’t proper to do. Theology had told him that he needed an apologetic argument not “mustard seed” faith. Theology had told him that no matter what compassion he may have felt for the girl, God was sovereign and that this must be the way He wants it. Sure I could pray but unless it lined up with God’s “perfect will”, I would just be wasting words. Yep, that Lawrence was dead and was killed by Theology.

Needless to say, I am heartbroken for this little girl. I want so desperately to go to that little girl and release her from the power she is obviously under. I want to be confident that God will be with me. Confident that I will not be like the sons of Sceva and be beaten back. Confident that I am operating in faith and not in emotion. Confident instead of fearful. I mean, here I am someone who claims to be intimately connected with the Creator of the universe and Ruler of everything in existence. I see one of His creations, a child even,  suffering under cruel torment, and yet I feel powerless to do anything about it. And worse of all, knowing I didn’t always feel this way.

Two things I ask of those of you who read this to pray; 1. Pray to God that He would direct me, even if through you, in what to do. And, 2.  Also pray, that I won’t become just another impotent Christian.