The Amalekites are wolves

I want to introduce a thought that I've been having for a while, but haven't quite figured out how to express it. Because the thought is rather deep, I wanted to introduce it in a way that wasn't so deep. I'll first put the thought out, and then we'll go into a further explanation.

Every nation that is mentioned in the Bible is stemmed from Genesis 10. Genesis 10 is called "the Table of Nations." It gives you the lineage of the original three sons of Noah, and each of these patriarchs made a nation. From these nations in Genesis 10 come every other nation. Knowing how they are all linked back gives us a good insight into these nations for multiple reasons:

1) God still holds these nations accountable, even though they are not "technically" still around today.
2) All current nations and past nations stem from those peoples, and God sees a continuum from them to the present day.
3) Each nation has a spirit, or characteristic, that is intrinsic to that people. 

The nations mentioned in Genesis 10 have a certain characteristic about them that distinguishes them from all other nations. It isn't enough to say that they have this or that lineage, and they were named this, and so that is what makes them different. What makes them different is the spirit - the principality or power - that is ruling over that nation. We can be of a certain lineage and act quite contrary. Jesus said to the Jews that were questioning Him in John 8, "If you were Abraham's children, you would act like Abraham." They were technically Abraham's offspring by birth, but that did not count them worthy of that title. If Jesus saw it this way, then God always sees it this way. The two views are the same. 

When we dive into our Bible, we find many times that God will somehow throw out these strange phrases. An example would be when He said, "I brought you up out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. I sent Moses to lead you, also Aaron and Miriam," Micah 6:4. Was the generation that Micah spoke to the same generation that God called out of Egypt? No. This isn't wiped away by playful metaphor or rhetorical language either. God charged the people that Micah spoke to as if they were the very same generation that came out of Egypt. He saw no difference, though it were centuries later and completely different people. He sees an unbroken continuum between these generations according to character, and not according to name.

When we look at the nations in the Bible, we find that certain nations seem to be condemned with no remedy. Why? Because what God is condemning is not the people of Egypt, but the spirit of Egypt. He is condemning the spirit of Babylon. He is condemning the spirit of Tyre. When we lose this understanding, we find it excruciatingly difficult to see how it could be that God would speak such harsh things against these nations. He speaks against what they represent. Any person that would subscribe that that spirit is to receive that judgment, but anyone who subscribes to this spirit will receive of this blessing.

Lets look at the Amalekites. Who were they? We find that the Amalekites are a descendant of Esau. Esau is Jacob's brother. We read in Exodus 17 about how the Amalekites, when Israel came out of Egypt, would stay afar off behind the house of Israel and would slay the weak, the fatigued, the elderly, the children, and anyone else that could not keep up with the majority. They would hunt like wolves. They swarm the sick, the ones that are not able to defend themselves.

Jesus said of such people, "Beware." They come to you in sheep's clothing - pretending to be a descendant of your brother, or in modern language, a part of Christ's Body - but they are inwardly ravenous wolves. A wolf is one that stays away from the strong. They take the weak, the sick, the young, and any who cannot defend themselves. Wolves are cowards. They bite at the leg so that you cannot get away, and then they all come in and swarm around you gnashing their teeth.

This is exactly what the Amalekites did. Saul was charged by God to slay them. But he didn't. He was told to utterly destroy them - don't even allow for the animals to survive. Instead, Saul allowed the king and all of the best of the animals to survive. He took the animals "as an offering" unto the Lord. It was this kind of disobedience that caused the prophet Samuel to weep through the night.

What is so horrible about allowing some animals to survive? After all, they were supposed to be an offering unto the Lord.

Saul did not recognize that he was being called upon to take out the enemy of God. He was being called upon to eradicate an enemy that torments and exterminates the weak and oppressed. God was calling upon Saul to stand up for the weak, stand up for the small, stand up for the child, stand up for the elderly, and stand up for those that cannot stand up themselves. Instead, Saul took it as a bizarre sort of command, and did not take it seriously enough.

That kind of half obedience is not obedience. It caused the prophetic man who understood what they Amalekites represented to weep through the night.

Only a few chapters later we find that Saul completely and utterly destroys Nob. Nob was a town of priests. The very time of extermination that was required of Saul to kill the enemy of God, which he could not perform, was the degree of extermination that Saul was able to slay the priests of God. What would cause him to be able to exterminate the priests, but not the enemies? The priests helped out David, and therefore Saul figured they were not fit to live.

Ministers, elders, deacons, pastors, and the fathers in the faith are called to this one task: utterly destroy the Amalekites. Those that would purport to be sheep, but are inwardly ravenous wolves: kill them. There is no other option. Those that are wolves in our congregations, in our fellowships, in our friends, in our families, or any other kind of relation where they might attack the weak, we are given the command of God to protect the weak at any cost - even the cost of wolf bashing. You will offend. It takes that kind of offense to ensure the safety of those that God has entrusted to you.

Those that are rams are to guard and protect the flock. Any goat or wolf or fox that acts like a sheep, but is not a sheep, is to be opposed to the uttermost. Don't allow one to continue to stand. That spirit that was in Saul that did not equip him to destroy the Amalekites is alive and well in our leaders today. It took David to destroy them. Nothing less than a David, which is in every point and particular the spirit of Jesus, will suffice. Our leadership needs to lead in the spirit of Jesus, and never in the spirit of our own ability. "Not by strength, nor by might, but by my Spirit, says the Lord."

Every nation has a spirit that they represent. The enemies of God are to be overthrown. Many of us have not come into that Land that God has promised - which is Zion - because we have not yet began to overcome the 7 spirits that are bigger and stronger than you. It takes the power of the Spirit to overcome these nations. Nothing short of the cross and death working in our own lives will deliver them into our hands. One of the biggest battles of the book of Joshua was won because God sent hailstones down from heaven, and God killed more that day than the entire army of Israel.

This is the beginning of my thought. I haven't quite wrestled with all of the implications, but I believe that at the end of the age, Jesus will separate the nations as a Shepherd separates the sheep from the goats (Matthew 25:32). When we have been content to assume that God will judge each man according to his work, maybe the words of Jesus speak a bit more of a truth that we will all be gathered according to the nations that we represent. Each man will be judged accordingly, and I have no doubt that God is able to judge us as individuals, but maybe there is something to this nations thing. I haven't quite gotten my head around it, but I find that even in Revelation 22, when there aren't supposed to be nations, there is a mention of the nations outside of the City of God that must come up to the City and take of the fruit of the Tree of Life. This is supposed to be heaven, and yet there are nations that didn't make it into being the Bride of Christ, and at the same time are present in heaven?

Maybe our understanding is all too Greek, and we need to be taken out from that understanding and brought into a Hebraic view. I don't claim to have it. I just simply mean that what I see in the Bible seems to contradict many of our most precious views about eternity and what it means to be the people of God.

A Summary of Theocracy

It was over the weekend that I hosted a few friends. Within our discussion, we examined a multitude of things. One of the subjects that came up was Israel and the last days. I think that this topic comes up frequently when I have opportunity to talk, because it is probably one of the biggest aspects of my theology. However, As I mused upon it, I realized that it wasn't about Israel and eschatology that is really a big part of my theology, it is the Kingdom of God.

The one topic that it seems as though the entire Bible is devoted to is this subject. God's Kingdom and rule upon this earth is the focal point. It was set up in the beginning that God would rule as God by having fellowship with mankind and teaching us to be priests unto the very creation itself. We were created in His likeness to display Him unto all things - including the angelic beings.

With the fall of mankind, the kingdom of darkness was thus expressed. It had taken captive humanity. It had somehow become the authority over this fallen world, and if it can keep that authority, then it can attempt to overcome the kingdom of light. We have this saga at the heart of the Bible. Everything is a progression forward. Mankind falls, thus sin enters the world. God's promise is that He will one day punish that serpent and rid the world of that sin. We find that as the Bible progresses, the sinfulness of humanity increased. God sent a flood, and only saved 8 people.

Out of those 8 people came all nations of this earth. Some came from Ham, some from Shem, and some from Japheth. Each of these names have different significance, and we can see in the various cultures throughout the world these different names represented. We find in Genesis 10 the "table of nations." That description of where the nations come from and where they settled is referred to throughout the Bible. It is in the next chapter that we find all nations coming together to establish a one-world government system. What was their hopes in doing so? They wanted to make a tower that would ascend up to heaven.

Where does such a thought come from? If we think that mankind in their sinful state would promote such an idea, we have deceived ourselves. There is an entire kingdom behind the scenes. It promotes selfishness and exultation. The rule of this kingdom of darkness is self. For them to build a tower that would rival the heavens is a statement of deifying humanity. And this deification of humanity is not from depravity, but ultimately from the pit of hell. Satan has influenced and manipulated the whole thing. He has sway over any kind of institution, and that sway is what caused for humanity to have such antichrist thoughts.

The question that the Bible promotes is this: who will rule over this cosmos? Will God rule, or will Satan rule? It is the plan of the devil to manipulate mankind for his own devices. We are merely tools being jerked and forced into establishing his kingdom. There is no remedy from this outside of Christ. But God confused the languages of these nations, and in so doing foiled the plans of the enemy.

Now, thousands of years later, we're back at the same scenario. We have mankind coming together and striving to promote a one-world government that will somehow rival the heavens. It is the same plan that was used at the beginning. And what was God's answer to that plan at the beginning? God's answer was a man named Abram. God called Abram out of the nations to become a nation. While Satan has his own kingdom at work in the world, God has established a kingdom as well. We trace through the Bible this man Abram to the nation Israel. We find prophecies concerning that people at a specific point in time where God Himself will come to earth and rule over them, thus defeating the kingdom of darkness and promoting everlasting righteousness.

Though I agree with the theology that teaches of "the Kingdom of God within you," at least to a degree, this mentality has actually caused us to forsake the understanding of our fathers. Because we are under the impression that God's Kingdom is already established invisibly on the earth, we are not seeking for a future time that God will rule and reign. He has established very specific places where He has chosen for His government. If we do not know, or do not examine, such claims made by God, then can we truly say that we are seeking first His Kingdom?

Many times it is that we simply don't know. This isn't a question about salvation or even somehow being eternally secure. The question that I promote is whether we are truly living in a way that would expect and fully believe that there is a time coming - and soon coming - that God will rule and reign, and He will call on His people to rule and reign with Him?

This is important because the whole of the Bible, from Genesis through Revelation, seeks to establish the answer to one question: How and why is God now able to dwell on the earth? God walked with Adam in the Garden, but there was no sin. How is it that God will somehow come down and manifest Himself on this earth with sin still present? The answer, of course, is found in the man Jesus Christ. But we mustn't stop there. Yes, He came 2000 years ago, but there are still prophecies and promises that have been stated to happen that are yet to come to fruition.

The problem of eschatology (the study of the end) is to seek an understanding of how God can come, Israel can be redeemed, the Church can be united with Israel under the same Head, and we can rule and reign from Jerusalem together. That is the question at hand when studying the Kingdom of God. We know that God will rule over this earth, but how? What must take place for His Government to be established? What must happen for the cosmos to be able to embrace His coming?

In a few days, I will be joining some brethren to discuss such a topic as this. Pray for me, and pray for us all, that we might be given the understanding that God has decreed from the beginning.

Why I left Church - a follow up

In my post about why I have left church, I addressed some of the issues that I have faced personally. But I haven't left it at that. My goal was to try and also give some sort of remedy. In the last few days since I posted that, I have had people asking me a lot of questions. Some of them are easy to address, and some of them are very difficult to address. Ultimately, when you ask a question about something that seems like the whole Bible has something to say about, I'm not sure I can give a quick 1-sentence answer. But this is something that I have noticed is lacking in the questions: a reality of eternity.

Many of the questions have to do with what church would look like outside of church. Some are asking about the performance, but not everyone. A lot of the questions are more geared toward: if you don't meet together weekly, how do you function? This isn't so much a performance question as it is pertaining to questions about lifestyle, submission to authority, confession, sharing faith, evangelism, and all of the important aspects of Christian life that are difficult to understand outside of the church building context.

Let me expand a bit of what I see missing in these questions. The first century church seems to speak unwaveringly about a soon coming return of Christ. That actually might even be their most prominent topic of discussion in the New Testament epistles. There were a lot of questions in regards to church service and how we live out our lives daily, but all of the answers to those questions seem to be a way in which the writer refers back to Jesus is coming back.

I am reading a book with my wife called "True Fellowship." The author in the sixth chapter has taken up the question of apostolic lifestyle. What kind of lifestyle did the apostles have, and what was their reason for having such a lifestyle? He links their reason to their full expectation of a soon returning Jesus in order to establish His Kingdom on earth, in which we will then be partakers. Some will be found worthy of ruling over 10 cities, some over 5, and some over 2. Eternal rewards and the understanding that Jesus returns directly after great suffering and tribulation seemed to dictate the way that these people lived.

The chapter started with a statement that declares apostolic poverty is a necessity. Where do we hear such things? Why would poverty be a necessity? He later addresses that the first century Church sold their possessions and gave to the poor. Why? It was because they knew that Jesus was coming back soon, so why do we need these things? The chapter then continued in expressing all of the ways that we have been all too casual and living in luxurious manner. Our retirement funds, pension plans, "eating out," needing coffee in the morning, church budgets, hopes of building the ministry, million dollar building projects, etc are all connected to a "scoffing" at the Lord's coming. We can scoff without using words.

In our daily lives, how much is lived in an expectation that the end is soon coming? How many of our choices are predicated upon a belief that I might not live to old age? The answer to those questions should be quite revealing. If we put trust in our retirement and desire to build for ourselves a "good life," are we really believing that Jesus will return? We might subscribe to the doctrine, but how much are we truly believing that if we aren't living like we believe that?

This was a challenge for me. It caught me off guard. In a sense, I am living like I expect Jesus to return, but in another sense, I'm one of those people writing up articles about why I left church. Is that even important? Are there more important things to be occupied with?

When being asked about what it would mean to be Christian outside of church, and how are we supposed to meet together, and what about all of the details, I find that the reality of Jesus' second advent is not present. Of course, I don't expect people to ask what we're doing to prepare, but I would at least expect that if this was a living reality in our confession that the questions would be phrased and posted in a different manner. How many of the questions that come to mind are truly important, and how many are simply being asked because we want to perpetuate our Sunday culture?

This isn't an in depth blog post or even an indictment. As I've been reflecting, I just wanted to share some of my thoughts. I do have answers to the questions raised, but so many times I feel like to address the question is to somehow cheapen my stance. When asked "What is truth," Jesus said nothing in response to Pilate. That moment of silence answered the question better than any exposition could. Pilate is standing before the very man that said, "I am the Truth," and if Pilate cannot see it before his eyes, then he cannot see it at all. In the same way, I almost feel as though some of these questions and statements are merely ploys to say that there is no answer, or there is some sort of faulty ground, so that the questioner can then justify every point that I brought up.

I could be wrong, and I know that some are honestly asking. I just hope that this is not one of those times where truth is standing right in front of people, and they are so despising toward it that they look for any out they can take. The road that I have chosen to promote and strive toward is a difficult road. Jesus prayed that we would be one as He and the Father are one. Is that a reality that we can truly obtain? Can we truly be one in that same kind of relationship together? If so, I want it. Enough with our talk, enough with our egos, enough with everything that hinders us from achieving so great a calling. If it is even possible to live as Christ as lived, then I want that. If it is not possible, then the Bible is a lie. I see no way of obtaining this without community.

By community, I mean a group of believers that meet together frequently - if not daily - to share life together and pour into one another the reality of Christ that has been manifest to us. What does that look like? I can't give a formula. All I can say is that it is predicated upon the blessed hope of a soon coming Jesus to restore all things. Every aspect of life and interaction is first sought out with His Kingdom in mind. If my location is too far away to be able to frequently meet with other believers, then I'll move. If employment (which I don't have, but just to make the point) takes up much of my daily life so that I can't spend time with the brethren, then I either cut back my hours or quit my job. The focus is upon His soon coming, and His Kingdom - never upon this life and how do I survive?

Why I Have Left "Church"

Dear "Church,"

With all of the recent articles and blog posts describing why "youth" are leaving the church, I thought it necessary for me to put down my own ideas. To be entirely honest, it was my wife who wanted to write out why it is that we have decided to leave "church" and never go back. After reading many of these related articles, she has decided that she doesn't want to write & address this 'nonsense' (in her own words), and so I'm taking the task.

In all honesty, I want to give reason to why I have left without giving any kind of hook or rude/offensive statement about church. There is absolutely nothing in me that desires to be mean or vicious, even though there have been many vicious articles written about me - since I am one of those "youth" that has left. This journey started a long time ago. I went to church, and I got burned. I think that this is true for many people that leave. Unlike many, however, I didn't leave because I got burned. I left because I realized that the system will only use and abuse, and will never allow someone like me to flourish.

How about I start with some basic thoughts? 

For someone that grows up in youth group, they are taught the same truth that they learned in the nursery. By the age of 13, they have exhausted the faith. By 16, they can lead Bible studies. By the time they are 20, they are probably youth leaders. Is this all that Christianity has to offer? When you have figured everything out, you go to seminary to learn original languages, what others have written, and maybe relearn everything that you already know? Is Christian life about relearning over and over again because humanity is too stupid to learn the first time?

But the truth is that this isn't even necessarily the reason that we are leaving. The whole thing is cheap, and it seems like what others are offering is so much more authentic... That isn’t to say that we need something more intellectually stimulating. The show must go on, but we aren't here for a show. We came to your "church" to hear reality. We came to hear the words of God. We came to hear what it is that God might be saying to this generation, but all that seems to protrude from the pulpits are "we can worship our way into heaven." Other times, we only hear a pre-packaged message. I have yet to be to one church that gives reality instead of falsity. By reality I mean a reiteration of the resurrection life. Falsity, therefore, is a life lived out of our own ability.

Generally, the objections that are being raised in these articles are fallacious. “Kids are just liberal. We didn't really let them "go to church." All they got were nursery and youth group hours. They think we're hypocritical, judgmental, and insincere. They think we're shallow. We're antagonistic to science.” The list goes on of things that really are surface issues.

These issues that people are writing only go to show the true problem. The real problem is that the articles describing how they out there who are leaving just don’t understand us who are here. It is completely the attitude. It is as though there is no problem with church as we know it, and the entire problem and blame lies on they youth. They are perverts and desire materialism and carnal pleasures. They want their gay friends to come and feel comfortable. They want to live like hellions and still have heaven. They want, they want, they want.

The real issue is the very core of what we call church. The system itself does not allow for truth. There is a remnant Church that has ever and always been present, but the vast majority of Christian "fellowship" is really only there as religious exercise. We don't need "hipper" worship, or more powerful sermons, or to be able to answer difficult questions. We need reality. We lack honesty and truth. The Church at the beginning met daily, going from house to house breaking bread. They lived according to their convictions. By and large, we "put faith" in our convictions, but we do not live from them.

You didn't need to tell the people in the first century to sell their possessions; they did that naturally. You didn't need to tell the people in the first century to meet daily; they did that naturally. You didn't need to tell the people in the first century to lay down their lives for their brethren; they did that naturally. The law of love that was shed abroad in their hearts caused for them to live and move and have their being in a very unique manner. Their lives were transparent before one another. Truth reigned supreme. And they engaged the culture by the reality of their lives. 

Why are the "millennials" leaving? It can only be because the "church" is seeing them go, and telling them, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out." I cannot tell you how many people I have spoken with where they start by saying, "I would love to believe, but..." Too many of these articles only seem to talk about how great we are, and how those rotten kids don't understand. They call it a "lost" generation, and they really believe it. There is no point in trying to save them, they're a lost cause. The problem is not that we need to be more relevant. We need to be more authentic.

Paul said that he was crucified with Christ - it is no longer he that lives, but Christ that lives in him. The extent that we say that this is only rhetoric and playful word games is the extent that we have forfeited the faith. We have an entire Christianity that is based off of applauding Paul for his faith, but then rejecting that anyone today can possibly achieve such a state in God today. Perhaps there are simply too few who have witnessed or seen the reality of the crucified life. 

The whole of the Christian life is to be lived out of the life of God. We do not perform out of our own ability, but instead lean not on our own understanding. The beauty of Christianity is that when we lose self (Luke 17:33), we actually obtain it. The paradox is that when we forfeit self, we find self. True humanity is the marriage of spirit and flesh, male and female, Jew and Gentile, black and white, slave and free - that they be one as God is one. 

Christianity has nothing to do with "doing," and everything to do with "being." Ultimately, the reason that I have left "church" is because there is the lack of "being." All of the things that are applauded and accepted as truth are typically displayed as symbols, metaphor, and sometimes sentiment. Sometimes you can find a "church" that tries to put these things into practice, but even in these circumstances they fall short for reasons that I'll address later. 

The majority of church-ianity has only allowed and applauded far too often the religion performed out of our own ability. We have not truly died, and therefore we have not been brought to a place of resurrection. To defer to myself instead of trusting in God - in any moment - is to fall short of the glory of God. The glory of God is eminently and always a resurrection phenomenon. 

Speaking for myself, it is the lack of that glory that has caused me to leave. When we are starving for truth, and all that is given are cheap cliches and forgeries of truth, it is time to leave. 

In conclusion, I want to say that I have not left God. I have left "church" to find God. I have left "church" to find The Church. What is desired is reality. Our lack of reality and conviction in what we say we believe is true has driven the youth away. They see through our false identity. They watch as we say that we believe the Bible, but then live lives completely contrary to that Bible. It doesn't have to be something abominable. When we set up church services so that we can be done in time to go home and watch sports, we have lied to God.

God desires that we be progressing toward an ultimate end. There is a time that He desires to call upon us, as His Church, for ultimate purposes. We cannot fulfill those ultimate purposes if we are busy playing games and singing songs. If our Christianity is known by our Sunday services, then we have become apostate. But there is a reality that the youth are searching for, and I don’t believe that the fat woman has started singing yet.

In love, wishing you grace and peace,

Tommy Comer

The Book of Romans pt 13

It is at this point that Paul starts to expound true and false religion. From chapters 4-8, Paul seems to only have one thing in mind: separate the precious from the vile. We've looked upon how all are under sin, whether Jew or otherwise, and thus all are in need of salvation. Toward the end of Romans 3, Paul has stated the mechanism by which salvation is obtained - namely, the blood of Jesus Christ. Through faith in Him, we have received our eternal reward.

If salvation is obtained by faith, then what does faith look like? And so we pick up in Romans 4 as Paul starts to expound the great man of faith: Abraham.

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. 3 What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”

4 Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. 5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. 6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

7 “Blessed are those
    whose transgressions are forgiven,
    whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the one
    whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”

Note that the main point that Paul presses right from the get-go is that righteousness and faith are intertwined. Why is this so?

Lets first consider our faith in God. Then we'll move to God's righteousness. Then we'll talk about the consequence this has for community.

Our righteousness is not constituted by our deeds. It is solely constituted upon one thing: our faith in Christ. We'll discuss what this faith looks like as we continue through Romans 4 and 5. At this moment, we'll focus upon why our righteousness is only constituted upon faith in Christ.

To put faith in something is not to simply trust it. I can trust that the chair I am sitting in has enough strength to hold me up. But that doesn't necessarily mean I have faith in the chair. Faith constitutes a change in the individual. The person moves from unrighteous to righteous, and thus faith cannot be mere trust. I can trust that God will provide, but that does not mean that I have faith. I can know the principles and subscribe the to truth that God provides without ever coming to full acceptance and being changed by the belief that God provides.

Faith takes more than belief. It takes more than trust. It is only faith when the inner most fabric of our being fully subscribes to it. To have faith in Christ is to have complete and utter surrender to the character of God. It is more than trusting God that you will make it to heaven. You have complete trust that every experience that comes is from the hand of God. He is sovereign, even through the free-will of men. Nothing comes apart from God. This statement is made by Paul, who suffered lashes at the hands of the Jews 5 times, 3 times he was beaten with rods, once pelted with stones, shipwrecked 3 times, spent a day and a night in the open sea, had been constantly on the move, had been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from his fellow Jews, in danger from Gentiles, in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea, in danger from false believers, had gone without sleep, had known hunger and thirst - often going without food, and has been cold and naked.

This man who has suffered more than anyone else that I know - save Christ - was able to then stand on Mars Hill and tell them about the "God who gives all things."

Does your faith look like that? Do you have that kind of faith in God that you can bear such a suffering and still not attack the character of God?

Righteousness is indeed constituted upon faith. We forfeit our glory for the glory of another. We lay down our lives for the life of another. Our comfort and convenience doesn't matter. What matters is the glory of God forever. Anything that we say, do, think, or teach that is separate from the glory of God is brought under question and immediately repented of. We all have blind spots and we have all temptation. It is how ruthless we are to be converted to the image of God and how desperate we are to display the glory of God that speaks louder than our failures.

In this sense, I can understand why it would be that righteousness and faith are intertwined. But how is God righteous? Does God have faith in Himself?

Don't forget that God is 3 persons.

Jesus was always about glorifying the Father and proclaimed that His words were Spirit. He never did anything that He hadn't seen His Father do, and never spoke anything that the Spirit didn't first give utterance. In this way, He laid aside His own glory for the glory of the other two persons in the Godhead. He cast Himself aside for the sake of His Father and the Holy Spirit.

God the Father was about glorifying the Son. The way that He spoke to Jesus and the way He speaks to us is through the Holy Spirit. He does nothing of His own, but continues to display Himself through His Son and through the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit does not speak anything to us that has not been spoken by the Father. The Holy Spirit doesn't have its own words, but is only the messenger from the Father to us. In this way, the Spirit has denied herself (the Hebrew word ruach is feminine) in order to promote the Father. But the Spirit also has the passion to glorify the Son. She speaks concerning Him and leads us into all truth.

Thus because God defers to the other two parts of the Godhead, He both places faith in the other two by giving them all glory and honor and is credited as righteous for it. One of the most challenging aspects to understand is that in deferring glory to the Son and the Holy Spirit, the Father gains a greater glory. So it is with the Son and the Holy Spirit as well. In forfeiting our glory to glorify God, we find that we are all the more glorious.

Don't think that I am speaking of humanity as being gods. Any glory that we receive can only be a reflection of God's glory; for apart from God there is no glory. Apart from God there is no righteousness. We can only truly understand righteousness in the context of God's righteousness.

And how does this pertain to community?

When we are willing to give up our names and reputations for the sake of promoting our brothers and sisters, then we have obtained to righteousness beyond the conventional dimensions. It is amazing to me how unwilling many are to give up their own names and honor. They have worked so hard for so long, why would they allow all their toil to be in vain?

It is such a worldly way of perceiving. The heavenly perception reasons that in honestly giving up our names and reputations for the sake of others - and not in hope of regaining that reputation and honor - that we find deeper manifestations of honor and glory. If there is any other reason for our humility than to honor and promote and respect those brothers and sisters around - out of our love for them - then we are the greatest deceivers. It is manipulation and deception - which are both of the devil - to try and use people so that we might gain honor and respect.

God knows our secret hearts. I haven't yet obtained to this calling. It is something altogether more pure than I have become. By God's grace, I pray that I might be able to match this one day - maybe even today - but for now I continue to fall short.

I think we ought to all be humiliated and cut to the quick whenever we read the book of Acts. Our Christianity is utterly anemic and does not even bear comparison. These men - fishermen and louts - turned the world upside down. Our Christianity doesn't come close. And I think it all comes down to this one point that Paul is making: our faith is not a faith unto righteousness.

We might be able to put faith in God, but to put faith in another believer that we only see once a week is absurd. We have not been made on as He is one, and the result is that we officially have been made into a Christian culture instead of a Church. We have a Sunday Club. Some places around the world there are people that are required to meet more than Sunday and a midweek Bible Study. In those communities, God has wrought a likeness that our Western Culture cannot comprehend.

What is it that would cause such men - as unlearned as they were - to be so equipped by God to even debate against the most pristine that religion has to offer? The Holy Spirit had its own logic and law. The law of Grace compelled them to love one another. That love was not cheap. It cost everything. It cost honor and reputation for the sake of a higher one's honor and reputation; namely, the honor and reputation of God, but secondly the honor and reputation of those believers that you are with daily.

This is what we're called to.

Do you have faith for that?

The Book of Romans pt 12

21 But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26 he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.


I have heard people say that this passage is possibly the most important passage of all Scripture. I happen to disagree, but not because I think there are other more important passages. I believe that unless we have the context of the whole Bible story, this passage doesn't make sense. The freedom we have in Christ isn't an issue that we find strictly in the New Testament. From the very beginning God stirred the creation into more and more manifestation of order and light.

It is from the foundations of the Earth that we find a God who is not content to simply speak over the creation in order to bring it into fullness. He gets down into the nitty-gritty. He isn't satisfied with being afar off; God comes into the darkness and chaos. So it is in the sinner. God isn't content to speak over the sinful heart, "Be clean." God comes into that unclean heart to purify and to make new. Jesus had a similar experience with a leper. The leper approached our Lord and said, "You can heal me if you are willing..." Jesus wasn't going to allow that mentality to last another minute. He didn't only say, "I am willing." Jesus actually reached out His hand and touched the unclean thing.

The Gospel isn't so much about the cross and resurrection as it is what these things symbolize. The Gospel is the proclamation of a God who came into His creation to rescue it from the darkness and death that binds it. The cross and resurrection are the medium by which God brings deliverance. It is not a one time moment in history, but an epoch of all God's moments in history. This is the crux of God's character. He has always been one who suffers for the betterment of His creation. It is not sufficient to say that God died upon the cross and that is it. He is the Lamb slain from the foundations of the Earth, and indeed God's character is and always has been to live in the reality of the cross and resurrection with His people.

It is by this that we are justified freely by grace. It is all about the blood of Jesus, and it is not limited to the one time event. Jesus' blood is eternal. From the beginning, all the saints have pleaded upon the mercy of God. God could only have justified them by the blood of Christ that had not yet come. It was through their faith in the character of God that saved them. Jesus hadn't died for forgiveness to come to David after he sinned. How can God forgive him?

So please understand that I don't mean to diminish the cross and it's importance. On quite the contrary, I'm trying to establish the importance. It is in the context of understanding that God is and always has been the Lamb slain before the foundations of the world that we can fully embrace the cross of Jesus and plead His blood for the redemption and remission of sins. God's plan of salvation has been established from the very first.

I think this is why Jesus rebuked the two saints on the road  to Emmaus. It has always been the character and pattern of God to suffer before the glory. The cross was laid out in the prophets, but also in the stories of the Torah and historical books. It has always been God's character to embrace suffering and not reject it. God isn't a coward to flee from suffering. He embraces it.

And so we can approach the cross of calvary as an event that effects all of history because it is a culmination of all of God's events in history. Every time God interacts with humanity is a cross and resurrection. His character is displayed through every word, action, reaction, judgment, and mercy.

Thus we conclude that it is upon that cross that God was able to be both just and the justifier of the wicked. But why is this a problem?

How can God forgive the wicked and appease justice?

Those who break the law demand the punishment required. This is the set up for the next few chapters. We'll dive into further detail, but for now let us consider a general overview to chew on.

When we ask God to forgive us of sin, we are asking that He would break the law. The law demands punishment. How can God both exact punishment and give grace to the repentant heart? God took upon Himself that punishment of death. He took upon Himself the full wrath and punishment that deserved to go to we that call upon Christ Jesus' name. It is by grace that we have salvation, and of works lest any man should boast.

But the requirement of repentance is not simply a prayer of forgiveness. Repentance requires that we have a change in mindset and heart. It takes a death. Jesus is our sacrifice of atonement, but the wages of sin is still death. There must be a death in the believer in order for there to be freedom from sin. Anyone who has tasted of death and come out victorious by the same power that raised Jesus from the dead is now free from sin (examine Romans 6). Christ is our atonement, and we willingly go to death with Him that we might also be raised with Him to life eternal.

This is how God is able to be both just and the justifier of the wicked. All wickedness is put to death so that resurrection life might come to wholeness within the believer. Little wonder, then, as to why the next statement out of Paul is about the Law and how there is no boasting:

27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. Because of what law? The law that requires works? No, because of the law that requires faith. 28 For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30 since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 31 Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

We are freed from the Law in the same sense that the married man is free from the law that tells us to remain obstinate. While I were single, it would be sin for me to have sexual intercourse. But now that I am married, this no longer applies. It is still sin, however, to commit adultery. So the Law hasn't been abolished, but has been transformed. It is all the more imperative now that we have been made new. Law hasn't been nullified nor made an object of ridicule. Law is now inescapable - for the law has been written on our hearts by the Holy Spirit.

So then we conclude that all who are free from Law are free from death and sin. There can be no death nor sin where there is no Law. But this statement doesn't mean that we no longer have to hold up to a moral standard as some in the hypergrace movement have claimed. Should we continue in sin now that we are free from it? No - if you have died to sin, then how can you live in it any longer? Our very conduct has changed to that of us no longer desiring sin. If we no longer desire to perform wickedness, then why bind ourselves to unnatural habits?

As we continue through Romans, we'll continue to deepen this mentality of freedom and faith and how to walk it out. And we'll also start to look at some practical implications this has as we get into some of the later chapters in Romans.