Daniel over at Doulogos asked the question, "Do you ever wonder why people who don't believe in God still manage to hate Him?"
It does sound rather humorous doesn't it. Kind of like adults saying we don't believe in Santa Claus (sorry Frank) but still spewing nasty words that imply we still think he visits millions of homes every winter.
Haven't you ever heard someone emphatically state, "Oh I don't believe there is a God" and then turn around and say, "If God really loves us why does He allow so much suffering?" There is a big disconnect in their understanding of God's nature, hence they irrationally state their unbelief in His existence. However their persistent abuse of His name and vitriolic speech betray their doubts about athiesm. Romans 1 tells us that man is without excuse because the creation reveals the attributes of God. Incredible! Even His eternal power and Godhead. That is a sobering reality.
Well just as we love to joke about athiest's (there are no athiest's in foxholes, etc) we also have our areas of resistance to God's word. Perhaps it's in the strict interpretation of scirpture, "Well it couldn't possibly mean that, that is impossible to do" or "What God really meant was this". You see we are trying to make the christian life pseuodo-attainable while not utterly denying the need for the Holy Spirit and His power. We deceive ourselves into thinking that God is looking for a set of obligations (pull out your checklist) which if we fulfill will make Him happy. But God is only satisfied with Christ, nothing less and nothing else. If we are not in Christ we are not acceptable to the Father. But this is not only a positional statement, this is also a practical statement.
To walk by the Spirit requires the denial of self and it's lustful desires. We read that the flesh lusts against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh. They are contrary as contrary gets towards one another. You cannot have a 50/50 relationship. It must be all of Christ and none of self.
Well this seems to be where the Christian chooses to forget a very unconvenient truth. Paul tells us that we (the believers) must all stand before the judgement seat (Bema) of Christ to give an account of our lives. Everything we have done will be tested by fire. If anything remains we will receive a reward, but if not we will suffer loss.
I know of no judgement seat where there is not the possibility of punitive damages being awarded the losing party.
How will you fare at the judgement? If every thought, word, and deed was placed on a big screen for all to see; every motive, intention of your heart, act of Christian service you did. Would it all be out of a love for Christ and by the power of His Spirit or would there be fleshly efforts? God cannot reward our own works of the flesh, no matter how "good" they appear. Only what is accomplished in and through the anointing of the Spirit of Christ will have lasting value and eternal rewards.
4 comments:
Jim said, Well this seems to be where the Christian chooses to forget a very inconvenient truth. Paul tells us that we (the believers) must all stand before the judgment seat (Bema) of Christ to give an account of our lives. Everything we have done will be tested by fire. If anything remains we will receive a reward, but if not we will suffer loss.
Consider, if you will, that in the context Paul is correcting those in the congregation who are dividing themselves according to teachers (Apollos, Cephas, Paul, etc.) Examine carefully how Paul addresses their error. He doesn't simply say - stop doing that. Rather he identifies what is wrong with that kind of thinking.
Paul begins by explaining that the congregation is like a field, and that those who have ministered to the Corinthians (Apollos, Paul, etc.) are like workers in the same field. It isn't their field, nor is it that each has his own field - but rather they are all workers under the same master. First century readers would have understood, I think, the agricultural imagery, but it may help for us to remember the story of Ruth - how she came to work in the field of Boaz. The field belonged to Boaz, and all the workers in Boaz's field were not working for their own crop, but for the crop of Boaz. The one who sowed was as much a servant as the one who gleaned and the one who gathered. So too when Paul speaks of himself and the other who ministered at Corinth, he wanted them to understand that each man was a worker under the same master.
Paul shifts the imagery at that point from agriculture to construction. Christ is like the foundation, and those who minister to the church are building it up. It is the ministry of each man in the congregation that Paul describes as either gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or stubble, and it is their work (the end results of their ministry) that is going to have to pass through the fire. Not how they built themselves up - No, no, no! It is how they built up the church that is going to be tested by fire.
Any work that passes through the fire (judgment), that is, any ministry that is spiritual and not carnal will pass into eternity with us - will not be destroyed in Christ on Calvary, will not be "burned up" if you will; but any ministry that is done in our own strength or for our own glory is sin, and it will not pass through judgment - that is, being founded on self, and ultimately sinful, it will be dealt with in Christ on Calvary.
When Paul asks in verse sixteen Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? - the personal pronoun "you" is in the plural for all of them - that is, Paul is saying, Don't all of you know that you are all the temple of God and that the spirit of God dwells in all of you? Now, you might miss the significance of it, but the word temple is singular. You all (plural) are the temple (singular) of God. Not each of you is -a- temple of God.
The temple, if it is to agree with the context, is not speaking of the individual, but of the congregation - of the church. Paul has not been speaking of ministering to ourselves to build ourselves up with gold, silver, etc. He has been speaking of those who are ministering to the body to build the body up. So when Paul says, don't you all know that you are the temple of god - I don't conclude, contrary to the context, and the grammar that Paul is speaking of individuals - rather I think Paul is continuing what he has begun - he is saying, don't you know that the congregation is the temple of God? - a point he makes clear in verse seventeen - "or the temple (singular) of God is holy, which temple (singular) you (plural) are."
Whatever ministry was genuine, spiritual, - born of God - that will pass from this life into the next, whatever is of man will not. I will receive reward for that ministry which was spiritual - but in every area where God has set a good work before me and instead of ministering in the strength the Lord provides, I instead minister in my own strength, for my own glory - then I will suffer the loss of the reward I would have had, had I worked in the Spirit - that is, had my work been gold, silver, or precious stones.
It is difficult for me to interpret this passage in any other way - especially shifting from the various figurative imageries (agriculture, construction, and a refiner's fire) to suddenly latch onto the last picture - that of the refinery - and insist that it means that I am going to be punished at the Bema seat.
Did Christ bear the full punishment of my sin or not?
Paul in Phillipians 3:8 "suffered the loss of all things" for Christ. The same word is used in the Greek there as is used in this passage in 1 Corinthians - Do I do well to insinuate from it that Paul went through some sort of punitive experience? Was Paul's suffering of loss here a torturous divine purging - or was it in fact just the setting aside forever of things that are worthless?
I would be interested in your opinions.
Daniel:
You are either a very fast typer or this took you some significant time to produce. I agree with what you have written here, it is well articulated and thought out.
Perhaps I have given the wrong impression by using the word "punitive". It is true that our condemnation was fully meted out and atoned for in Christ's death on Calvary.
So instead just as the Lord chastens every son that is His, perhaps at the judgement some of us will receive a chastening as it were instead of rewards and the joy of hearing "Well done thou good and faithful servant".
There is a warning here to the believer individually and corporately to the church to be careful how we build.
Much of what we accomplish can in fact appear godly and spiritual, however only God can truly discern our motives and that day will reveal all by the testing of fire.
Perhaps this is where your latest post on purifying came from?
If I missed your emphasis please let me know.
Jim, I think you understood my emphasis. My post on purity was not connected to this post though. The post on purity was directed more at myself - I am know that I am serious about what the church is supposed to be, and we all need encouragement to see it through - but we must be ready for the dross to come out when we do.
It is the ministry of each man in the congregation that Paul describes as either gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or stubble, and it is their work (the end results of their ministry) that is going to have to pass through the fire. Not how they built themselves up - No, no, no! It is how they built up the church that is going to be tested by fire.
I believe this is the clear meaning as Daniel says. Is there another view?
Post a Comment