Salvation

Caleb's comment the other day brings up the question of salvation. I've talked about this before, but I think it's a point that bears repeating. So let's repeat it.

There is a tendency (certainly in North America) for Christians to use them term "saved" as a synonym for conversion. That is, when someone believes on the Lord Jesus, they say they "got saved".  This causes some confusion, because Scripture doesn't generally use the word "saved" that way.  In my short experience, I've learned that it's best to use the language of Scripture--- I'm not very good at it, but I find it clears up a lot of problems simply to use the language Scripture uses.

So let's examine what Scripture says about salvation.

We'll start in Romans 5, because it's probably the clearest passage on salvation:

9 Much rather therefore, having been now justified in the power of his blood, we shall be saved by him from wrath.

 10 For if, being enemies, we have been reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much rather, having been reconciled, we shall be saved in the power of his life.

 11 And not only that, but we are making our boast in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom now we have received the reconciliation. (Romans 5:9--11, JND)

Verse 9 says we "have been justified", and as a result we "shall be saved".  Verse 10 says we "have been reconciled", and we "shall be saved".  So we see that there is a difference between justification and salvation: justification is the start of the path, salvation is the end. The Christian life starts with reconciliation and ends with salvation.

In fact, the book of Romans never speaks about salvation in the past tense, in Romans salvation is always future, with no exceptions.  We might go so far as to say that in Romans, the Christian life is the period between justification and salvation. In fact, the Apostle makes the remarkable statement:

This also, knowing the time, that it is already time that *we* should be aroused out of sleep; for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. (Romans 13:11, JND)

Paul, an Apostle, wasn't saved yet. He was still looking forward to a salvation, which was growing closer.

So certainly in the context of Romans, the believer is both justified and reconciled, but he isn't yet saved. If we limit our discussion to Romans, it's incorrect ever to refer to a believer as "saved" until he or she is perfected with Christ.

We might notice that Ephesians views the Christian as saved already:

 8 For ye are saved by grace, through faith; and this not of yourselves; it is God’s gift:

 9 not on the principle of works, that no one might boast. (Ephesians 2:8 & 9, JND)

So there is a sense where a believer is already saved. But Ephesians isn't using the word "saved" as a synonym for conversion either. We notice the passage that says we have been saved by grace begins with the remarkable statements (vv. 4--7) that we have been quickened with Christ, raised with Him, and seated with Him "in the heavenlies". So although Ephesians puts the believer as already saved, it doesn't use the term "saved" to mean merely that a believer has eternal life, but that the believer has gotten to the end of the path: the believer who is "saved" is raised with Christ, ascended into Heaven with Him, and is sitting with Him in Heaven.

In fact, whatever tense is used, Scripture always (with no exceptions that I can find) uses the term "saved" to mean much more than justification. We're not saved just because we have eternal life, nor because we've been justified from our sins, nor because our sins have been forgiven. We're saved when God's work in us is seen as complete.

Salvation isn't the forgiveness of sins, it's not eternal life, it's not justification, it's not redemption, it's not reconciliation. Salvation is the end result of God's work in us: it's what God is working towards. 1 Peter 1:9 uses an amazing expression:

receiving the end of your faith, the salvation of your souls (JND)

Salvation is the end of our faith. It's what we're looking forward to.

Notice Titus uses it the same way:

 5 not on the principle of works which have been done in righteousness which *we* had done, but according to his own mercy he saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, (Titus 3:5, JND)

There are two parts to salvation, according to Titus. The first is regeneration, the second is renewal. Regeneration is Romans 3--8, renewal is Romans 12--15. Again, it's the complete package: not merely that we have been forgiven of sins, but salvation includes God's work in us.


Whenever we mention this fact, there's someone who responds with: "Salvation is in all three tenses in Scripture." That's a true statement, but the people who have quoted it to me seem to miss its implications. It seems we like to come up with these short little one-liners to shield our consciences from the truth. I'm not trying to point any fingers here: I do it too! But let's try and see past the pat answer to what the Scripture actually teaches.

First, it's wrong to think of salvation merely as a synonym for redemption, justification, new birth, or eternal life. Salvation is always presented as a the complete package: salvation is coming into the fullness of what God has for me. Where Scripture says we "have been saved", it's looking to God's eternal purpose in me. Ephesians isn't saying I've been saved because I've been born again: Ephesians says I "have been saved" because God sees me as already there. Eventually, I'll see that He's right. Eventually I'll see it too. Then I'll agree with Him that I've been saved.

Second, there are some "problem" passages that aren't problems at all, if we get rid of our wrong ideas of salvation. Let's take an example: Are we saved by baptism? Yes, yes we are. Scripture teaches it plainly:

 16 He that believes and is baptised shall be saved, and he that disbelieves shall be condemned. (Mark 16:16, JND)

18 ¶ for Christ indeed has once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God; being put to death in flesh, but made alive in the Spirit,

 19 in which also going he preached to the spirits which are in prison,

 20 heretofore disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah while the ark was preparing, into which few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water:

 21 ¶ which figure also now saves you, even baptism, not a putting away of the filth of flesh, but the demand as before God of a good conscience, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, (1 Peter 3:18--21, JND)

Scripture plainly and unequivocally teaches that we are saved by baptism.  It's amusing to hear people try and explain away these passages. We ought simply bow to Scripture. We are saved by baptism, but we're not redeemed by baptism, or justified by baptism, or born again by baptism, or regenerated by baptism. Salvation is the end of our path, and one step on that path is baptism. Baptism isn't about having life in Christ: baptism is about severing my ties with this wicked world. And salvation's intimately tied up with that.

The plain fact is that we're always best off bowing to Scripture.  We do no one any favours when we start using the language of Scripture in a way it doesn't. Scripture doesn't use the term "saved" in the way we tend use it.


I understand we need to be careful not to make a man (or a woman) a transgressor for a word. It's not Christ-like for us to go around splitting hairs. So most of the time, I just ignore it when someone uses the term "saved" when they really mean "justified" or "regenerated".  It's not worth stumbling someone over a word.

But I admit I question my judgment when people make clearly anti-Scriptural statements like "baptism doesn't save". That's just plain wrong: Scripture clearly teaches it does.

And it's not just the "problem" verses: when we're not careful to understand what we say before we say it, we miss out on what Scripture is actually teaching. Ephesians 2:8--9 isn't just saying we have forgiveness of sins by grace through faith, it's saying the whole package is by grace through faith. God doesn't justify us by grace through faith and then wait for us to work out the rest ourselves: He saves us by grace through faith. It's the whole Christian life, from justification to the end. All of it is by grace through faith. When we finally see what God sees: when we're finally seated in the Heavenlies and we see what God has seen all along; then we'll see that all of it was purely God's grace through faith.

How much is enough?

We had some special meetings at the meeting hall this last weekend, and there were quite a few people there.  We ended the weekend with a final "Q&A" session, where people were encouraged to ask questions. My buddy Caleb facilitated it: he didn't necessarily answer every question, his job was more to chair the meeting and ensure there was a clear order.

The first question was, "If all we have to do to be justified is believe, how much do we have to believe?" This is a non-trivial question, and it carries an enormous weight. From an abstract theological perspective, it's a question of some interest. From the perspective of a person who is desperate to know that his sins are forgiven, it's a whole different question. I took a stab at answering it, but I thought it would be worthwhile to answer that question here.

The most careful discussion of justification by faith in Scripture is found in Romans 4. There is an answer for us in the first five verses:

 1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father according to flesh has found?

 2 For if Abraham has been justified on the principle of works, he has whereof to boast: but not before God;

 3 for what does the scripture say? And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.

 4 Now to him that works the reward is not reckoned as of grace, but of debt:

 5 but to him who does not work, but believes on him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness. (Romans 4:1--5, JND)

It's interesting to note that the whole of the Apostle's argument on justification in Romans is based on the Old Testament. That's because justification by faith alone (Romans 5:1) is Old Testament truth. The Old Testament saints were justified when they believed God, and so are we.

The principle of Scripture is "two witnesses" (Matthew 18:16). And so the Apostle takes two Old Testament witnesses to the truth of justification by faith: Abraham and David. The true genius of taking these witnesses is only understood when we see them in relation to the Law. Abraham was before the Mosaic Law (Galatians 3:15--18), David was under the Law. Both were justified by faith. And so we see that the Law does not annul the principle on which God justifies: both those under Law and those not under Law are justified by faith.

In the spirit of "two witnesses", let's just establish the principle of justification by faith. Romans 4:5 and 5:1 are unequivocal statements that justification comes from faith alone: in fact, faith in contrast to works. Acts 13:38 & 39 is another witness:

38 Be it known unto you, therefore, brethren, that through this man remission of sins is preached to you,

 39 and from all things from which ye could not be justified in the law of Moses, in him every one that believes is justified. (JND)

But this is still Paul preaching, so let's find another witness. How about the Lord Jesus?

 24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that he that hears my word, and believes him that has sent me, has life eternal, and does not come into judgment, but is passed out of death into life. (John 5:24, JND)

Or the Apostle John?

 31 but these are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life in his name. (John 20:31, JND)

 The truth of Scripture, from start to finish, is the God justifies the one who believes. There is nothing to do, only Someone to believe.


But the question was, "How much do I need to believe?"

There is a simple answer, and some not-so-simple answers. Let's start with the simple: Romans 4:1--5 establishes justification by faith on the history of Abraham, specifically on Genesis 15. The verse it quotes (v. 3) is Genesis 15:6

6 And he believed Jehovah; and he reckoned it to him as righteousness. (JND)

If we examine the verse in it's context, we find that God promised Abraham a son. Abraham believed Him, and so God counted that faith as righteousness. As far as I can tell, that's all Abraham believed. He didn't have a very thorough theology, he sure didn't have a creed or a confession. Romans 4 comments on his belief:

 17 (according as it is written, I have made thee father of many nations,) before the God whom he believed, who quickens the dead, and calls the things which be not as being;

 18 who against hope believed in hope to his becoming father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be:

 19 and not being weak in faith, he considered not his own body already become dead, being about a hundred years old, and the deadening of Sarah’s womb,

 20 and hesitated not at the promise of God through unbelief; but found strength in faith, giving glory to God;

 21 and being fully persuaded that what he has promised he is able also to do;

 22 wherefore also it was reckoned to him as righteousness. (Romans 4:17--22, JND)

Abraham didn't believe in a complicated theology: he believed God when God told him he'd have a son. He believed God despite what he could see. He knew he was too old for children, he knew his wife was too old for children, but he believed God when it didn't make sense.

As an aside, I've heard people try and put a Gospel message into Genesis 15. Like, they think God somehow showed Abraham that Christ would die for him. But that's not what Genesis 15 says, and it's not what Romans 4 says. God promised Abraham a son, and Abraham believed him. That's as far as Scripture goes.

So let's ask the question: how much do you have to believe? Abraham believed a lot less than the Gospel, but God justified him. Let's be clear: the issue is not what you believe, but Whom you believe. When you believe God, He counts it as righteousness.

Now, it's clear that an outright rejection of what God says isn't faith. If someone presents the truth of Scripture and you scoff at it, you're not believing. That seems obvious.

But the good news for the troubled soul is, "God doesn't want you to believe enough, He wants you to believe Him."

See (and this is the not-so-simple answer), this is the question of someone who's turning faith into a work.  Scripture presents faith as the opposite of works: "to him who does not work, but believes" (Romans 4:5). Believing is the opposite of work.

If you're worried that you don't believe enough, then you're viewing belief as a work. You're taking the attitude of, "Just tell me what to do and I'll get right on it." But that's not faith, it's doing. There's nothing to do, only Someone to believe.

Here's the thing: faith in and of itself has no worth. It's not like faith is the one good thing we can present to God. God's not impressed by your faith: not by its size nor its intensity. The value of faith lies in its object. God is looking for faith in Himself, not faith as some abstract quantity. So there's no sense where you can believe enough,  God is looking at what you have faith in. Abraham said, "If Jehovah said it, it must be true." That's all God is looking for.

The fact is that Scripture unequivocally teaches the God justifies the one who does not work, but believes. There is no condition added to it. There's no requirement for tears or contrition or penance or penitence. There's simply taking God at His word. Saving faith is, "God said it, so it must be true."

Ezekiel 8

I gave a talk on Ezekiel 8 the other day. It didn't come out at all like I had thought: I had a lot of trouble expressing what I was thinking. So I thought I'd give it another try here.

The book of Ezekiel starts with Ezekiel standing on the banks of the Chebar, in Babylon. There he sees a vision of the glory of the Lord. He sees what looks like a man made of burning brass on a throne, with four "living creatures" under the throne, and four "wheels within wheels" with the living creatures. He describes this vision in some detail in the first two chapters. Ezekiel sees this same vision three more times, or four times in total. He sees it again seven days later "in the valley" in chapter 3, then in Jerusalem in chapters 8--11. Finally, he sees the same vision in chapter 43.

These four appearances of the glory of the Lord form a simple outline of the book. Each appearance of this vision is followed by specific messages. We might think of these as "sections" of the book:

1. chapters 1--3:31 Following the vision on the banks of the Chebar (vv. 1:1--3:15), the Lord speaks to Ezekiel and gives him the rules of the watchman (vv. 3:16--3:21). That is, He tells Ezekiel his duty as a prophet. This section closes at v. 3:21, after essentially only one message from God.
2. chapters 3:22--7 The second section begins with the Lord revealing Himself "in the valley" (vv. 3:22--3:27). Ezekiel notes (v. 23) that this is the same vision he saw on the banks of the Chebar. Ezekiel's vision is followed by messages specifically for Jerusalem and her inhabitants (ch. 4--7). The key verse in this section is v. 5:5, "this is Jerusalem". All the messages God gives Ezekiel in this section are about Jerusalem and the surrounding area.
3. chapters 8--39 The third section begins with the same vision Ezekiel saw "in the valley" (v. 8:4) and "by the river Chebar" (v. 10:20). The Lord takes Ezekiel "in the visions of God" to Jerusalem (v. 8:3). I assume this means he wasn't looking at the literal Jerusalem, but a spiritual vision of it. The vision that begins in v. 8:2 continues through chapter 11. Following the vision in ch. 8--11, the Lord gives Ezekiel several messages. Unlike the previous section, these messages address not only Jerusalem, but the captives in Babylon, and the nations as well. This section is the largest in the book.
4. chapters 40--48 The fourth and final section is millenial: it starts with the Millenial temple and describes the nation and its worship under the Son (cf. Psalm 2). Ezekiel sees a vision "like the vision that I saw by the river Chebar" (v. 43:3). It's in this section that he sees the glory of God return from the mountains in the east back into the Temple.

There is a clear moral symmetry between the vision in ch. 11 and that in ch. 43. In chapter 11, he sees the glory of the Lord leave them Temple and head east into the mountains. In chapter 43 he sees it come back from the mountains through the east gate and into the Temple.

Ezekiel is characterized by conversations between the Lord and his prophet. Unlike Isaiah (largely composed of the messages the Lord has for His people) or even Jeremiah, Ezekiel is mainly the Lord telling Ezekiel what to tell the people. It doesn't really record that he actually passed the messages on. It's not a book about the prophet speaking to the people, it's a book about the Lord speaking to the prophet.

The characteristic title of Ezekiel is "son of man". He's one of two men called that in the Old Testament: the other is Daniel. This gives us a hint of where we'd look to see Christ in this book. Isaiah and Daniel describe the One who is coming: Ezekiel doesn't. In Ezekiel, the prophet himself stands in the place of the coming Son of Man. In type, Ezekiel is a book where the Father talks to the Son.

This brings us to chapter 8. Chapter 8 comes a little more than a year after the vision in Chebar (cf. v. 1:1--2; v. 8:1). Ezekiel is brought by the Lord into Jerusalem "in the visions of God" (v. 8:3). The story starts outside the Temple, by the gate (vv. 8:3--6). There is an image in the gate of the Temple, which Ezekiel describes as "the image of jealousy" (v. 8:3). Next the Lord has him dig a hole through the Temple wall, and he finds a chamber full of men burning incense to idols (vv. 8:7--13). Then the Lord brings him into the court of the temple, where women are wailing for Tammuz (vv. 8:14--15). Finally, the Lord takes him into the inner court, where 25 men are worshipping the sun, with their backs to the altar (vv. 8:16--18).

The first thing we notice in this sequence is the transitions between the visions. After the first three visions, the Lord asks Ezekiel if he sees what he people are doing, and He says Ezekiel will see something even worse (vv. 8:6, 13, 15). So we understand that these visions are actually a progression. It's not just that there are four different idolatrous practices going on, but each is worse than the one before. We also notice that the trend is inward from the Temple gate toward the sanctuary.

I'm not sure what the "image of jealousy" is (v. 3), but it seems to be an idol. That is, there was an idol in the entrance to the Temple. If we remember our Sunday School lessons, we recall that at least two kings of Judah set up idols in the Temple itself: Ahaz built an altar modelled after the idolatrous altar he saw in Damascus, and put it into the Temple, moving the brazen altar out of the way to make room for it (2 Kings 16:10--16). Manasseh also set up his idols in the Temple (2 Kings 21:1--9). No doubt there are others: these two spring to mind.

There's an enormous difference between going to bow down to an idol in its temple, and bringing the idol into the house of God. But that's exactly what these two kings did.

There are four steps from the "image of jealousy" in the gate to the sun-worshippers inside the Temple:

• the image of jealousy
• burning incense in the room of idols
• wailing for Tammuz
• worshipping the sun

These four steps form a sort of progression: inward into the Temple, as we mentioned earlier; but also a progression of the heart. First, there is an image in the gate (v. 3). No one is worshipping the image: it's just there. We might think of this as passive idolatry. Second, we have active worship on the part of Jaazaniah and the seventy elders of Israel (v. 7). Then we have emotional idolatry, the women wailing for Tammuz (v. 14). Finally, we have complete obeisance in the twenty-five men bowing with their backs to the altar (v. 16).

It's interesting there are four steps here. They remind us of the four downward steps in Romans 1:21--32 and those in Proverbs 30:11--14.

But the main point is the progression not only towards to the center of the Temple, but in the hearts of the idolaters. And we notice again that this is all in the Temple: in the center of the worship God Himself established. We might remember the last verse of 1 John: "Children, keep yourselves from idols" (1 John 5:21). There is a danger--- a very real danger--- of dabbling in idolatry, especially in the house of God. God doesn't have an house anymore, "The God who has made the world and all things which are in it, *he*, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands" (Acts 17:24). But the Scripture tells us that God has chosen the Church as "a habitation of God in the Spirit" (Ephesians 2:22). So there is a parallel, isn't there? The Israelites brought idolatry into God's habitation, and it offended Him. We ought not do the same. We need to be careful that we aren't dabbling in idolatry.

There's another thread in this story: it's the thread of God looking for a man He can confide in. The whole book of Ezekiel is characterized by the idea the God is baring His heart to the prophet, but it's particularly brought out here in chapter 8. At every step, the Lord asks Ezekiel, "Do you see what they're doing?" There's a sense where God is looking for someone to take His side against His people.

It's significant that the prophet who is so intimate with God's heart should be the prophet most particularly called "son of man". Really, God has found exactly one Man to whom He could completely pour out His heart. The Son of Man walked on this earth, and He saw exactly what grieved God. And there were conversations between the Father and the Son about it, although we only read one explicitly (John 17) and catch other small glimpses (John 5, etc.). The Lord Jesus, while eternally God, was here as the Man that God was looking for. He was the Man that God could take completely into His confidence.

And it's a sobering thought that He was the one Man who actually understood exactly how evil this world is. I will never know just how bad my sin is, because I'll never be required to pay its price. The Lord Jesus knows exactly how bad my sin is, because He suffered for it.

Can we imagine what it must have been like for the Eternal Son of the Eternal Father to walk down here in this wicked world? The Pharisees said, "This man receives sinners and eats with them" (Luke 15:2), which indicates just how seared their consciences were. Yes, this Man did eat with sinners: and had He eaten with the Pharisees, He wouldn't have been in any better company. He was the Son of God, He had come down from Heaven. To imagine there's any significant difference between different degrees of fallen men in comparison with Him is sheer foolishness.

And once again, we remember the God has found the Man He was looking for. Indeed, He had to provide the Man He was looking for, because there's no other man, woman, or child that is good enough. And now that God has found Him, He's not looking for another. He has found what He wanted, and He is content in Him. We ought to be content in Him too.

Well, that's more or less what I ought to have said the other day. What I actually did was go on long digressions through the histories of Ahaz and Manasseh, as well as a diversion through the identity of Tammuz. It was frankly a bit of a mess. Hopefully I'll be a little more to the point next time.

Imperfect Sacrifices

We've been going through the epistle to the Romans in our Wednesday night Bible readings. We're up to Romans 12 now, and I have to admit it's been very convicting.

Like a lot of Christians, I've gotten caught up from time to time in a sort of Gnosticism: a sort of a sickly pseudo-spiritual affectation that looks down on the physical world. Romans 12 really smashes that sort of thing to bits:

1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the compassions of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your intelligent service. 2 And be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God. (Romans 12:1--2, JND)

What is the very first thing Romans 12 asserts? It's that our "intelligent" service is to present our bodies as living sacrifices.

We ought to consider the context of Romans when we think of this passage. Remember it's Romans 8 that tells us our bodies aren't yet redeemed (v. 8:23). Well, it's not only Romans 8; Philippians 3 is quite clear as well.

20 for *our* commonwealth has its existence in the heavens, from which also we await the Lord Jesus Christ as Saviour, 21 who shall transform our body of humiliation into conformity to his body of glory, according to the working of the power which he has even to subdue all things to himself. (Philippians 3:20--21, JND)

So our bodies are yet unredeemed, even though we're spiritually alive. They'll be redeemed one day: that's the promise of Philippians 3. But right now, we're still in fallen bodies. But the shocking truth of Romans 12 is that God wants us to present these fallen bodies as living sacrifices.

And this truth ought to shock us. I was listening to a preacher once who was talking about this chapter. He made the statement that, "your [reasonable] service" means, "in light of all God has done for you in chapters 1--8, the reasonable thing to do is..." Which makes me think he wasn't really paying attention to the first eleven chapters of the book. The whole point of Romans is that there's absolutely nothing you have to offer God. The first three chapters are all about all the terrible things we've done. Chapters 6--8 are all about how we were so bad that God has to apply the Cross to us to cure us of ourselves. Chapter 7 reminds us that "in me, that is, in my flesh, good does not dwell" (Romans 7:18, JND). Chapter 8 reminds us "the body is dead on account of sin, but the Spirit life on account of righteousness" (Romans 8:10, JND). If you think you have anything reasonable to offer God, then you haven't been paying attention to the first eleven chapters.

But we come to Romans 12 and we find that God does actually want something: He wants our bodies. Our fallen, sinful, unredeemed bodies. He wants the "bodi[es] of humiliation" (Philippians 3:21, JND) that Christ is coming to change.

Now, there is an Old Testament picture of this. Consider Leviticus 22:

A bullock and a sheep that hath a member too long or too short, that mayest thou offer as a voluntary offering; but as a vow it shall not be accepted. (Leviticus 22:23)

We sometimes say the Law forbade offering a blemished animal as an offering. That's not strictly true. It was possible to offer an imperfect animal, but only as a voluntary offering. It couldn't be offered as a sacrifice for sin, or as a trespass offering. It couldn't bear sins. But it could be offered as a "voluntary offering."

I am not accepted with God for the sacrifice of my body. I can't earn a single thing by offering my body as a living sacrifice. I am accepted with God for exactly one reason: the Lord Jesus has died for me. But there is this business about a "voluntary offering," and that brings us to Romans 12.

Another passage in the Old Testament presents the concept of an imperfect offerings: Leviticus 27.

9 And if it be a beast whereof men bring an offering unto Jehovah, all that they give of such unto Jehovah shall be holy. 10 They shall not alter it nor change it, a good for a bad, or a bad for a good; and if he at all change beast for beast, then it and the exchange thereof shall be holy. (Leviticus 27: 9--10, JND)

Notice that phrase in v. 10, they can't change "a good for a bad, or a bad for a good." It's not just that they couldn't exchange a worse sheep for a better one, they couldn't offer a better sheep for a worse one.

There's a trap here for us. There's a temptation to look at our bodies and think, "this one isn't good enough." And that's true, in a way. We're waiting for the Son of God to come and change our bodies to be like His. So there's a lot of truth in the idea that the bodies we have aren't worthy of Him. I mean, if they were, the Son of God wouldn't be coming to change them.

But we're in the same position as the Old Testament saints: they weren't allowed to exchange a better sacrifice for a worse one. I'm bound to offer the body I have. I can't wait until the Son of God makes it better. I can't even wait until I drop a few pounds. I need to offer the body I have.

And it surprises us, but we find they are "acceptable to God."

We do well to remember that the Son of God came here as a Man. We are fallen creatures in a fallen world, but God's solution to that isn't that we somehow step out of the physical world. We're not called to some sort of neo-Gnostic super-spiritualism. We're called to honour God in these fallen bodies, in this wicked world.

But that doesn't mean we're allowed to settle down here. We can't forget that the Son of God is coming to get us. And the second verse of Romans 12 tells us that. We can't be conformed to this world: we're called to live here, but we're not called to live for here. Our life is in Heaven (Colossians 3:1--15). Someday we'll appear with Him in glory and the world will see He really is as wonderful as we [ought to] say. Indeed, we recall that "the things that are seen are for a time, but those that are not seen eternal" (2 Corinthians 4:18, JND). This isn't home, but we live here. So we do well to remember both sides of the truth: we're called to glorify God in our physical bodies, but we look for the day when we'll see Christ face to face and forget all about this wicked old world.

One of my daughters and I were talking about baptism when she was very young (maybe 6). I was explaining to her that baptism is how we declare that this world is under judgment, and we are take the place of death with respect to it. She said to me: "So what you're saying, Dad, is that we're here on a business trip, not a vacation." That might have been the single best summary of the snare of worldliness I've ever heard. It's not that we don't live here, but we're here on business, not pleasure.

Mawidge

I'm involved in a wedding this weekend. I've been working with the bride and groom to develop the actual ceremony. It's given me a lot to think about. So I'm going to share them with you.

First, A successful marriage starts with a wedding and ends with a funeral. If you have a successful marriage, either the bride is going to bury the groom, or the groom is going to bury the bride. Unless, of course, the Lord Jesus comes back to get us first. I certainly don't mean to be morbid, but the fact is that a marriage that ends without a funeral is a failure.

Scripture doesn't say as much about marriage as we might expect. There are a few passages that address marriage: Ephesians 5, 1 Corinthians 7, Colossians 3, etc., but for all the importance Scripture places on it, it doesn't give us a lot of detail. I think the foundational truth Scripture teaches about marriage is in Ephesians 5. Ephesians 5 lays out the most important fact about marriage: marriage was given to teach us about Christ and His love for the Church. Thus, the Scripture teaches, there are two important roles in marriage: the husband is to love his wife, and the wife is to reverence her husband.

A husband is to love his wife like Christ loved the Church, laying down His life for her. In the same way, husbands are to love their wives, laying down their lives for them. I noticed several years ago that Scripture doesn't say Christ was willing to lay His life down for the Church, but He actually did it. I interpret that to mean that a man ought not merely to be willing to lay his life down for his wife, but he ought actually to do it. If we take this literally, the husband's job is to die first. The husband's job is to give up his life for his wife. In a more figurative sense, there is a metaphorical laying down of a man's life for his wife. This is hard: really, really hard. It's possible a man might need to die to save his wife, but it's more likely a man would need to choose to put his wife ahead of himself.

Colossians 3:14 says, "Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them" (JND). Colossians warns against the main danger to a husband: becoming bitter against his wife. Why would he become bitter? Because he gives up his own life for her.

So what's the wife's job? The husband is to love his wife, she is to reverence (or respect) her husband. If he is to lay down his life for her, perhaps we might say her job is to lay down her pride for him.

It's obvious that many women are married to men who really might not deserve their respect. So does that mean she doesn't need to respect him? Perhaps we could ask another question: when a woman isn't very lovable, is her husband excused from loving her? Of course not! A man is to love his wife, regardless of whether she's lovable. A woman is to respect her husband, regardless of whether he deserves it.

Scripture does tell us more about marriage. Ephesians 5 isn't the only passage in Scripture about marriage. But I'm sure Ephesians 5 is the most foundational. I'm no marriage counsellor: I'm not trying to give marriage advice. But it's important to remember the underlying principle.

Every couple of weeks we have "all-day meeting". So rather than head home after the Lord's Supper, we have a potluck lunch in the meeting hall and then have meetings in the afternoon. There is another small gathering in a town about 45 minutes away, and those folks typically come down and join us for what my family calls "eatin' at the meetin'". Yesterday they hosted the all-day meeting instead, so we headed up there. It's about an hour drive from our house to the other meeting room.

When we first arrived, I realized I'd done a pretty shoddy parking job, so I hopped back into the truck to re-park it. The truck wouldn't start.

So when meeting was over, we gathered around the truck, and some of the more mechanically-included poked, prodded, played with jumper cables, and finally gave up. It looks like we have a bad starter.

We called the roadside assistance number for our insurance company, who told us there wasn't anywhere to take the truck until this morning, so they'd send someone out around 7:00 AM.

So there we were, stranded about an hour from home, with a tow truck coming to pick up our vehicle and take it to a dealership for service the next morning.

A family in the meeting offered us a vehicle to drive and another family drove us out to pick it up. I figured I'd be having to make a 5:30 AM commute this morning to meet the roadside assistance people by my car for 7:00; but a brother in the other town took my car keys and met them instead. By his reckoning, it made more sense for him to travel ten minutes and handle it, rather than for me to travel an hour to handle it. "You should just sleep in," he said.

So yeah, we're annoyed and frustrated. But the kindness and generosity of the people we remember the Lord with has turned this from potentially disastrous to annoying.

By this shall all know that ye are disciples of mine, if ye have love amongst yourselves. (John 13:35, JND)

Interesting...

I mentioned this at the Bible reading last night:

Matthew 11 makes a strange and powerful statement. The Lord Jesus is speaking, and He says:

23 And *thou*, Capernaum, who hast been raised up to heaven, shalt be brought down even to hades. For if the works of power which have taken place in thee, had taken place in Sodom, it had remained until this day. 24 But I say to you, that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in judgment-day than for thee. (Matthew 11:23--24, JND)

Certainly the point the Lord Jesus was making is, His presence in Capernaum robbed them of any excuse before God. God had reached into the world in a way unknown even to Abraham, God's friend. And so even though the sin of Sodom was so great that God rained fire on it from Heaven, the sin of Capernaum was greater. They had rejected the Son of God.

There is a more subtle point: God knew exactly what it would take to drive the Sodomites to repentance, and He chose not to do it. This is worth consideration.

God is sovereign. It is because He is sovereign that He reaches out in love to us. It was an act of sovereignty to send His Son to die for our sins. God's sovereignty extends to His judging the world. He owes us absolutely nothing. God is perfectly within His rights to pour out love on wicked sinners. He is perfectly within His rights to pour wrath on them too.

God has declared that He will judge the earth by raising Christ from the dead (Acts 17:31). It is not our place to judge God, He judges us. We ought not to think that God owes us anything. We would do well to remember the God judged Sodom.