Why won’t God heal me? Just one thought.

Why won’t God heal me?

The church I’m at has a number of people who live with chronic illness or chronic pain.  Life is hard for them when pain is constant, energy is low, and God perhaps seems distant.

If God is sovereign and loving why won’t he do something about it and heal me?

I preached on the subject of suffering last year so won’t repeat that, but a couple of posts from the Desiring God blog have helped me see one point more clearly.

“We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him.”  Romans 8:28.  Christians believe it is true even when we don’t understand how God’s purposes are working out.  There are many ways that God can use pain and illness, but one way is to increase our dependence upon Him.

When we are in pain or tired and ill and we feel we can’t cope, where do we turn?  As Christians we can turn to God and know his sustaining grace and love that ‘surpasses knowledge’ (see  http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/the-glory-of-gods-sustaining-grace-when-our-prayers-arent-answered).  As John Knight writes, perhaps God’s sustaining grace is a greater gift than healing ”because we have less temptation to forget how weak we are. We are so utterly dependent on God’s daily, continual help.”

How can we remember this?  We have to repeat God’s word to ourselves on the good days so that it’s a habit and we therefore do the same on a bad day.

How about trying this to encourage yourself to keep going and living for God?  http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/a-i-m-s-a-new-acronym-for-living-my-life

If you’re in pain or exhausted today, I can’t pretend to know all you are going through.  But I pray this helps you live for God’s glory on the good and bad days as we look forward to the time when there will be no more “death or mourning or crying or pain” and we will live with God.

 

 

 

The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God by Don Carson

Does God love you?  And in what ways does he love you?  What does it mean for God to love, and to be a loving being?  That’s the doctrine that Don Carson deals with in this small book (only 88 pages of argument).

The doctrine that “God is love” is widely accepted among people who believe there is a God, and it’s Biblical (1 John 4:8, 16), so why is it difficult?  After all, all Christians agree that God is love.

In the first chapter of his short book, Don Carson gives five reasons why the doctrine of God’s love is difficult in today’s Western culture.  For instance; God’s love is prioritised over other aspects of God’s character, particularly his holiness and justness.  In a pluralistic, post-modern society, it’s fine to believe in God as a loving being, because that’s nice, and no-one is excluded, but don’t mention his anger at sin or hell!

He secondly gives “five distinguishable ways the Bible speaks of the love of God” (page 17).  While I kind of knew these five distinguishable ways, having them listed clearly was one of the most helpful parts of the book for me.  Listing them as briefly as I can:

• The intra – Trinitarian love of God.  The Father loves the Son and the Son loves the Father.  The second chapter expands on this subject drawing from John’s Gospel.  The book is short so some topics have to be excluded, but nothing is said about the Holy Spirit in this discussion.
• The providential love of God for the world.  He created a world which was good (Genesis 1-2) as a loving creator.  His loving providence is demonstrated in Matthew 6:26 and 10:29.
• “God’s salvific stance towards his fallen world” (page 18).  So John 3:16 says “God so loved the world that he gave his Son.”  The world here is the fallen world, all people, and not just the elect.
• “God’s particular, effective, selecting love toward his elect” (page 19).  There is a distinguishable love of God for those he has chosen to save, with no moral, or deserving, basis for those who are chosen.
• God’s love towards his chosen people conditioned on their obedience.  Jude 21 says “Keep yourselves in God’s love”.  When we step out of God’s love in this sense, we may well find that we are disciplined by God, which won’t feel as though we are in God’s love in the same way to when we experience his blessing.  Again, because the book is short there is no discussion of how covenantal

Note that the first three ‘loves’ are universal, but the last two are limited to believers.  Don Carson points out that if any of these ‘loves’ are absolutised to the exclusion of others, the implications are dangerous for Christians.  Trying to think it through, if the third ‘love’ on the list is absolutised, it leads to universalism.  If four is absolutised, it could lead to arrogance or hyper-calvinism.

Chapter 3 looks at God’s sovereignty and God’s love.  The issue here relates to open theists who argue that if God genuinely loves, he cannot be sovereign and elect some for salvation (see “No Other God: A Response to Open Theism” by John Frame or “God’s Lesser Glory: The Diminished God of Open Theism” by Bruce Ware for fuller discussions of why open theism is dangerous and unbiblical).  Don Carson helpfully summarises why Calvinistic Christians aren’t fatalists on pages 58-59, but I found a lot of this chapter difficult to follow with its discussion of God’s immutability and impassibility and their relationship to God’s love.

Chapter 4 discusses the relationship between God’s love and God’s wrath and I think is vitally important for Christians to understand.  God is love, but it is not a sentimental, wishy washy, indiscriminate love.  God’s love does not trump God’s holiness or justice; his anger at sin.  Helpfully, Don Carson points out that our perception is actually the problem when we struggle to understand God’s anger at sin alongside his love.  We don’t see angry men or women who are loving, because human anger is almost always sinful.  But God’s anger is fully righteous, completely controlled, entirely justified, and does not compromise his love.

The final section of chapter 4 discusses how the five loves of chapter 1 are expressed towards Christians, and helpfully the response of Christians.  The book is about God’s love, but with his pastor’s heart, Don Carson can’t but finish with our response.  We’ve been amazingly forgiven, so we are called to forgive.  We have experienced God’s love, so we are called to love.

A very helpful read, if challenging at times.  Thank you Professor Carson.

 

Psalm 18:20-24: What does it mean?

These are some notes on Psalm 18:20-24 following questions at our Bible study last Thursday.

Reading these verses in the flow of the Psalm, you get the distinct impression that David is saying: “God saved me because I’m a good man.”  As Christians, our inner heresy buttons are pressed and the red lights start to flash (mine do anyway).  “It can’t say that can it?  We’re all sinners, we’re all unrighteous, unclean, impure.  Is David contradicting John’s words: “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us”?  Has he forgotten what he wrote in Psalm 51 (Psalm  18′s placing in 2 Samuel 22 would imply it is written near the end of David’s life and therefore after his sin with Bathsheba and Uriah)?

We looked at the passage last night at Bible study, and I came home and looked at it more.  Some points which might help us understand the passage better are:

1. Under the Mosaic covenant there were rewards for obedience and punishments for disobedience.  This was always in the context of a gracious relationship however, and was not the means to enter into the relationship with God.
2. David’s moral sin with Bathsheba and Uriah, and no doubt on many occasions which Scripture doesn’t tell us about, did not lead to religious sin, in the sense that David didn’t turn away from God to other gods.  When Nathan confronts him with his sin with Bathsheba, his first reaction is “I have sinned against the Lord” (2 Samuel 12: 13).

Neither of these help though with David’s words in these verses; that he is righteous before God.  And in the commentaries I looked at there wasn’t a lot of help either.

Spurgeon’s Treasury of David was more helpful.  It can be found here: http://www.spurgeon.org/treasury/ps018.htm.

David isn’t claiming sinless perfection, but rather that he is blameless in the face of the accusations from his enemies, and in situations he has found himself in with his enemies (for instance, refraining from killing Saul when he had the chance).  And so, as the blameless (in this case) anointed one (verse 50), God rescues him.  See Psalm 17 for a clearer example of David pleading innocence, and praying for vindication.

What does this mean for us?

Are we blameless in the face of any accusations against us?  We aren’t perfect, but do our lives commend God to those who see how we live (1 Peter 2:11-12, and see 2 Samuel 12:13-14 for the reaction of the Lord’s enemies to David’s sin, holding the Lord in contempt.)?  Are we striving for holiness?

Secondly, there is only one person who could say verses 20-24 about his whole life, the Lord Jesus.  And Christians are graciously given the rewards that the Father bestows on the Son because of his righteousness.  In Christ, “the last enemy to be destroyed is death”.  In Christ, Christians can say verses 16-19 of the psalm, and that is reason to say: “The Lord lives!  Praise be to my Rock!  Exalted be God my Saviour.”

If there is a possibility that a Christian’s children might go to hell, why would a Christian want to have children?

Last year I asked people in the Church to write down questions that they would want to ask God.  A number related to suffering and evil, and I preached on that subject during the year.  I have dealt with other questions through sermons or children’s talks, but am left with the final question of the heading.

I have found very little written about this: only one thread on an amazon website which had little that was helpful.

To start with, let’s think about why Christians should have children?  In Genesis 1:27-28 we read (using the NIV):

“So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them.

God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” ”

The command to “be fruitful and increase in number” is repeated to Noah in Genesis 9:1.  Later in Genesis God promises Abraham (17:2, 20) that he will “greatly increase your numbers”.  This promise or blessing is repeated in later generations.

So the command to have children is made to succeeding generations of the people of God, with no evidence in Scripture that this has been rescinded today.

Some other thoughts relating to children.

• In the Psalms children are counted as a blessing from God (Psalms 127:3): it is a good thing for Christians to have children.
• Parents are continually told to teach their children about God: his character and works in both the Old and New Testaments (see as examples Deuteronomy 6:4-9 and Ephesians 6:4).
• We are saved by God’s grace alone, so there is no automatic way of ensuring the salvation of our children.

As Christians the focus of our life should be to bring glory to God, and that means obeying him, which means having children if we are able to.  The precise number will differ according to our circumstances, but should be determined by what glorifies God most rather than our personal preferences [It is interesting to note that moslems have more children per family than other families in the UK, and this is one reason why the percentage of moslems in the country is growing.].

None of this deals with the sentiment behind the question but hopefully puts it into some context.  Christians are to obey God, and therefore will “be fruitful and multiply”.

To address the concern of the question though, we can say this.  There does seem to be scriptural support for the view that children brought up in a Christian home with parents praying for their children, teaching their children the Christian faith AND modelling it are likely to follow in their parents’ faith.  [note the importance in Scripture of parents, not Sunday school teachers or any others (not to downplay their importance, but to place the emphasis where Scripture does!), teaching their children]  I take this to be the implication of Titus 1:6 where an elder must have children who believe.

Finally, we obey God, and acknowledge that he is merciful and compassionate and we leave our children in his hands.  “Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” Genesis 18:25.

The importance of prayer

Just preparing for next Sunday evening when we’ll be looking at Matthew 9:37-10:16.  Don Carson’s little book “When Jesus confronts the world” is a great help.

Jesus is preparing his disciples for their first mission, and tells them that “The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few”.  What is our first response when an opportunity or need arises in Church life?  When there is a decision we have to take at work or home?  What should the disciples do presented with a field ripe for the harvest?

Pray!

I like a little phrase Don Carson writes: “This does not mean that we should do nothing but pray; it does mean that we should do nothing without praying.”

Genesis 6:1-4 What does it mean?

When we looked through Genesis 1-11 before Christmas, I said I would put some brief notes on the blog about this passage.

Genesis 5 is the genealogy from Adam to Noah, emphasising the entrance of death into the world.  Each time we read “and then he died”, our minds are meant to be drawn back to Adam and Eve’s sin.  Enoch, who walked with God, is an exception, as is Noah whose entry ends the genealogy.

Noah is re-introduced in 6:8, again as an exception. God will wipe out mankind from the earth, other than Noah (and his family) who walked with God.

Chapter 5 and chapter 6:5-8 are about death because of mankind’s rebellion against God.  It makes sense to see chapter 6:1-4 in this context and adding to this theme.

Verse 1 perhaps summarises chapter 5, but the emphasis now is on the daughters.  The first question is who are the sons of God.  Wenham (Genesis 1-15, Word Biblical Commentary) describes three views:

1. They are angelic beings.  This is the oldest and still a common view.  Psalm 29.1 and Job 1:6 provide support for “sons of God” being angels.  The sin being described is the breaking of the boundaries between heaven and earth (note the tower of babel episode) as angelic beings take human daughters as wives.  2 Peter 2:4-6 would perhaps also support this view, as well as Jude 6 (and perhaps the desire of demons to take over a physical body).
2. They are superior men, rulers or kings.  Sometimes a king is given a divine title.  The argument runs that if the judgement is on mankind, it can only be just if the sin is committed by mankind, rather than  angels (but nothing in the text hints at coercion, so the daughters are compliant and therefore sin, as do their fathers who must have allowed the union).  The sin is the taking of many women.
3. Godly men, from the line of Seth, as opposed to daughters from the line of Cain.  The sin is the inter-marriage between godly men and ungodly women, and perhaps the inferred polygamy.  This has been a common interpretation among Christian commentators because it avoids the angelic – human intercourse which some find incredible.  However there is no hint in the passage that sons of God means the Sethites, and its more normal usage is for angelic beings.

A fourth view that I haven’t seen described is that “sons of God” and “daughters of men” refers to all men and women and the naming relates to the order of creation.  The sin is the same as in interpretation 2 above; that men took women from whom they chose, polygamy.

The sin of the sons of God is portrayed in similar terms to Eve’s sin (3:6).  They “saw … good … took”; the same words in Hebrew as used in describing Eve’s sin.  The result of the sin also uses similar terms (compare 3:22 and 6:3).  Eve’s sin was in part to break the boundaries between the heavenly and earthly realms, so this would point to the first interpretation.

The Nephilim seem to be the offspring of the unions described in verses 1-2.  They occur again in Numbers 13:33 as the giants in the land of Canaan who scare most of Israel’s exploring men (unless the term Nephilim is a descriptive term of size, or of being fallen – a possible Hebrew root).  Heroes is literally the mighty or strong of old, not necessarily a positive description as heroes might make us think.

However we understand the passage, the point is that the sin of mankind is increasing and God’s patience is running out.  It therefore sadly leads to the devastating flood of Noah’s time.

The warning is that sin will be judged by God.  Life on this earth is finite, so we need to be prepared for the next, and that involves the faith in God which Noah exhibits.  Today, that is faith in His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.  He is the ark who can carry us safely to our new home if we trust in him.

Genesis 3 and how we can preach grace and hope from the fall

In Genesis 3, the fall of Adam and Eve into sin is described, and then the judgment upon them and the curses upon the serpent and the ground are also detailed.

It is a sad chapter about mankind’s rebellion against God, repeated in each of our lives as we reject God’s goodness and truthfulness.

Where do we find hope and God’s grace from this chapter?  Genesis 3:15 points to the
defeat of satan at the cross when Jesus died.  The seed of the woman was struck, but the ultimate crushing of the serpent was guaranteed as Jesus died and rose again.  Death and sin were defeated, and so was satan.

But there is another way that Genesis 3 points to the cross that I hadn’t understood before (apologies if this is well-known, it was new to me).  In verse 24, God placed cherubim and a flaming sword at the entrance to the Garden of Eden so that mankind could not re-enter and eat from the tree of life and so live forever in their fallen state.

Similarities between the Garden of Eden and the Tabernacle and the Temple are noted by Gordon Wenham in his Genesis commentary.  It isn’t therefore a surprise to find that cherubim are stitched onto the curtains of the tabernacle and the temple, and in particular the curtain separating the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place (Exodus 26:31-34 and 2 Chronicles 3:14).

When Jesus died on the cross, the curtain in the temple with cherubim stitched in was torn in two from top to bottom.  The way into God’s presence had been opened through Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross.  The way into eternal life in God’s presence that the cherubim were to protect is now open for those who trust in Jesus.

Genesis 3 points forward to God’s grace in more than one way.  Jesus has won the victory over sin, death and satan.  The way into God’s presence is open.  Praise God!