We live in a part of the country where we cannot ignore the very public nature of homosexuality and gay marriage. Rarely does a week go by that I do not see or speak with someone who is either part of this community, or is interacting with someone who is. Even more frequent is the barrage of information and opinions about this social phenomena from the various forms of media that so directly influence society — we are talking about television, movies, radio and our various news outlets.

We need to be careful to have a discerning spirit as we listen to this information. And we need to be even more diligent to maintain a thoroughly loving and Christian attitude as we interact with others about it. In an effort to help you be discerning, careful and loving in your evaluation and interaction about this often biased information, I want to pass along some information and articles that will both inform your understanding, as well as help shape your attitudes toward others who may not agree.

In the Fall 2008 “Master’s Seminary Journal” there was a series of articles on the topic of homosexuality from various angles (scroll down to the Fall 2008 section to find the articles on homosexuality). There is certainly merit in reading them all, but I would like to draw your attention to two of them in particular. The first because it aims to correct common misconceptions and misinformation that is often promoted as fact. The second because it is an excellent and practical encouragement for how we must minister the grace and truth of Scripture to lovingly address this issue.

Cultural and Medical Myths about Homosexuality, by Michael A. Grisanti

The first article, by professor Michael A. Grisanti, assesses and evaluates the plethora of research that attempts to identify and describe the biology of homosexuality. Particularly, he aims to clarify what current research concludes that “genes” can and cannot tell us about homosexuality.

He first chronicles the day in 1993 when NPR (National Public Radio) reported that a new study to be released the next day suggested that “someone had finally discovered the gene that causes homosexuality.” This report was quickly and widely circulated through other news outlets, despite clarifications by the researchers themselves, and caveats issued by other geneticists, that even if they had found a correlation, “this gene might only be associated with homosexuality and not the cause of it.”

The study ventures into a very tenuous and controversial field of research called “behavioral genetics,” the linking of complex human behaviors to particular genes or chromosonal regions. Grisanti cites one popular author, Charles Mann, who offers the bold clarification that these kinds of studies (linking genes with behaviors) have never been able to be replicated (repeated and proven). Mann says, “All were announced with fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute [in the academic community].”

Despite their disrepute in the academic community, the trumpeting of these ideas in the popular press, and the widespread public acceptance of these theories, has virtually sealed the irrefutable nature of these so-called “truths” with the majority of Americans. Not only that, but these unprovable theories have become the foundation and justification for a wide variety of legislative actions (gay marriage, hate crimes, etc.), public outcry against those who disagree, and a level social acceptance for homosexulaity that goes far beyond the biblical mandate to show mutual respect for fellow humans. Instead, it demands the acceptance of their lifestyle as “alternative” rather than “deviant.”

Grisanti helpfully details other studies that have similarly been widely embraced by the public, while being flawed and inconclusive from a scientific standpoint. These include studies regarding homosexuality among twins, differences in brain structure, studies of genetic scans and linkages, and prenatal hormone exposure. He concludes this section by saying:

All of the above research did not “discover” a gay gene, although many have suggested that. However, these studies that suggested some biological cause for homosexuality significantly influenced public perceptions. As Yarhouse points out [Mark A. Yarhouse, “Homsexuality, Ethics and identity Synthesis,” Christian Bioethics 10 (2004):241], “The more people believed that homosexuality was a biological ‘given,’ the more likely they were to support a variety of issues deemed important to some in the gay community (e.g. ordination of practicing gay, lesbian, or bisexual clergy; gay rights legislation, etc.).

Grisanti then goes on to discuss the modern research and opinions regarding the possibility and effects of a person “changing” their sexual orientation. This is another topic about which the academic community, and particularly the fields of medicine, pyschiatry, psychology, and sociology often disagree.

While some have stated it to be impossible, Grisanti cites studies that conclude, “that change in sexual orientation can happen and that change in sexual orientation does not harm the participant who changes.” Again, the very fact of change being possible suggests that the theory of “biological determinism” is wrong — a person’s sexuality is not “determined by their biological makeup.”

Grisanti concludes by outlining various ways this prematurely embraced research combined with public sentiment to influence our modern culture, as well as both domestic and international legislation. Despite the fact that it is not justified by any reliable research, he concludes corectly that the influence of the this agenda far surpasses their actual numbers.

Now, how should we respond? What should Christians think and do in response to this influential segment of society?

It is John MacArthur’s article in the series that explains the biblical teaching on the subject of homosexuality most thoroughly. He includes a brief discussion of how the concept of “homosexual love” contributes to the confusion, and concludes with a helpful “pastoral perspective” addendum that briefly outlines how we should respond.

However, it is Professor Alex D. Montoya’s article that thoroughly articulates how we should think and respond, and it is his article I would commend for that purpose.

The Church’s Response to Homosexuality, by Alex D. Montoya

My purpose is simply to reproduce the basic outline of his encouragements for the universal Church of Jesus Christ. He says there are four biblical mandates for the church as a proper response to the influence and agenda of the homosexual community.

1. The Church Must Expose Homosexuality as a Sin Against God

While MacArthur’s article thoroughly addresses this issue, Montoya points out the basic arguments, which clearly parallel and overlap at points. First, he shows that homosexuality is against God’s created order (Gen 1:27-28; 2:22-24; Matt 19:4-6; Heb 13:4) and is a perversion of that created order (Rom 1:24-27). Second, it is stated clearly that homosexuality is a violation of God’s moral law (1 Tim 1:8-11). Third, homosexuality is a sin against God’s Kingdom (1 Cor 6:9-10). And fourth, homosexuality is a sin against God’s holiness (1 Thes 4:3; 1 Pet 1:15-16). It is called unrighteous and ungodly (Rom 1:18; 1 Cor 6:9; 2 Pet 2:9; Jude 4).

Because of these truths, Montoya reminds us that, “Christians are under obligation to know and to make known the sinfulness of homosexuality. They cannot be swept away by the tide of public opinion or public decrees; nor can they remain mute concerning the terrible consequences of those who practice homosexuality.” Christian, let us not remain silent!

At the same time, if homosexuality is indeed a sin against God (and it is), then it is also a sin for which Christ died.

2. The Church Must Extend the Grace of God to Homosexuals

Montoya outlines five ways the church must be prepared to extend the grace of God to homosexuals.

First, the church must learn to show compassion to the homosexual. We must not be like the Pharisees who showed no concern or compassion for those who were lost.

Second, the church must be willing to associate with homosexuals. He points out that this is the point where many Christians show their “ignorance and arrogance when it comes to reaching out to homosexuals.” He exhorts us to “dispel the label of being ‘homophobic’ by not refusing to befriend and associate with homosexuals. We have nothing to fear and everything to gain for the gospel’s sake.”

Third, the church must have the conviction of the power of the gospel to convert the homosexual. The Bible clearly teaches that homosexuals can be powerfully transformed by the gospel (1 Cor 6:11).

Fourth, the church must provide special discipleship for homosexuals. Repentance from homosexuality, and overcoming the powerful lusts that once controlled them, will require help and encouragement. There are many evangalical ministries that are providing such help, and local churches must be willing to expend the effort necessary to help those in their midst.

And fifth, the church must effectively incorporate converted homosexuals into the Body of Christ. When men and women come to Christ, repenting of their homosexual practices, they should be discipled and embraced, rejoicing that God has saved them, and carefully be incorporated into the life of the church.

However, there are those who may be associated with the body, who refuse to repent of this sin. How must the be dealt with?

3. The Church Must Expel Practicing Homosexuals from the Fellowship

This is only one form of sexual immorality that may be present in the church, and all of them must be dealt with similarly. Montoya outlines a number of moral principles that must guide the church in its necessary actions.

First, we must recognize the church today is faced with the problem of moral compromise. The Bible’s admonition is to “remove the wicked man from their midst” (1 Cor 5:13).

Second, the church must have the courage to to confront the homosexual activist within and outside the church. The homosexual community has an agenda aimed at undermining and destroying the biblical definitions of sexuality and marriage. Many Christians, churches and pastors are falling prey to the intimidation of these activists and either wittingly or unwittingly compromising the truth. We must embrace and stand for truth.

Third, the church must have the conviction to practice excommunication on its own membership. This is a biblical mandate (1 Cor 5:13; Matt 18:18-20), and it is a sad commentary on the state of the evangelical church that most do not deal with the unrepentant sin within their walls. Montoya challenges us whether we can properly deal with homosexuality if we are not dealing with other forms of immorality.

4. The Church Must Resist the Assault of the Homosexual Community upon Society

Montoya states, “What Christians in America need to know is that the homosexual community has an organized agenda to change the moral fabric of American society.” It is a “purposeful effort to sell the homosexual lifestyle to America.” Christians need to not only be aware of these efforts, but must resist their impact on the political process and the growing changes they are making on our body of legislation, both at the state and national level. Not only is it redefining terms, it fails to be honest and forthright about the many dangers of the homosexual lifestyle, both in matters of public health and in matters of public safety.

I encourage you to read the articles in order to be informed and equipped to begin fulfilling your responsibilities as Christians.

In a post on The Gospel Coalition website titled, “My Church or the Kingdom?” Ray Ortlund makes this insightful comment.

“My passion isn’t to build up my church. My passion is for God’s Kingdom.”

Ever heard someone say that? I have. It sounds large-hearted, but it’s wrong. It can even be destructive.

Suppose I said, “My passion isn’t to build up my marriage. My passion is for Marriage. I want the institution of Marriage to be revered again. I’ll work for that. I’ll pray for that. I’ll sacrifice for that. But don’t expect me to hunker down in the humble daily realities of building a great marriage with my wife Jani. I’m aiming at something grander.”

If I said that, would you think, “Wow, Ray is so committed”? Or would you wonder if I had lost my mind?

If you care about the Kingdom, be the kind of person who can be counted on in your own church. Join your church, pray for your church, tithe to your church, participate in your church every Sunday with wholehearted passion.

We build great churches the same way we build great marriages—real commitment that makes a positive difference every day.

Thank you Ray Ortlund for this poignant and insightful reminder and practical admonition to be about the work of the kingdom BY being committed to local church ministry.

Here is a short article that answers that very difficult question in a way that is faithful to reconcile biblical passages that seem to indicate major differences, even though we know the Spirit was working in OT saints. I believe a thorough study of other passages would confirm this author’s conclusions. In the past I have described the transition in the Spirit’s activity at Pentecost as “different in degree, but of the same kind.” Here is how this author states his conclusion.

Both the OT and NT present the Holy Spirit as the only regenerating agent in the plan of redemption, the sole agent of sanctification—working in the hearts of OT and NT believers, convicting them of sin and producing genuine God worshippers—and as the only agent of empowerment, enabling the saints of both testaments to live holy lives which are acceptable to God. He continues to fulfill this role in us today as He had done from the beginning of time. The extent of His work in believers has increased, but He was always in believers and among believers.

Click on the link above to read the whole article. I think it will help you if you desire to have a clearer understanding of this issue.

How are we to understand such things?

We studied psalm 137 together some months ago. It is called an imprecatory psalm because of the curse and judgment that is pronounced by the psalmist against others. Because there are many passages of Scripture that include such statements, I thought it might be helpful to review in summary fashion how we understood that psalm. This provides a pattern for understanding similar passages in Scripture.

This is a psalm that must have been written shortly after some of the Israelites returned from the Babylonian captivity. The writer is lamenting his experience while in Babylon, and all that he says flows out of that sad experience. Despite many gracious warnings by God through the prophets, Israel persisted in their disobedience and rebellion, and brought the chastening and judgment of God upon themselves. God used the evil Babylonians as His instrument of chastening.

The Babylonians were violent and cruel. They spared no one as they took over the land. They killed the children, and raped the women, and carried the people away to live as slaves, oppressing them and treating them harshly. This psalm was written by someone who had experienced and witnessed all that violence, pain and tragedy.

It first expresses sadness over their condition, then a longing to be back in Jerusalem worshipping at the temple. At the end, he calls upon God to recompense the Babylonians for what they had done to the people of Israel.

The people of Israel constituted God’s kingdom on earth. The temple in Jerusalem was God’s dwelling place on earth. The throne of David was the throne of God’s coming Messiah. The people were waiting and expecting God to come and establish His kingdom on the earth forever, in keeping with His promises through the prophets.

While lamenting the past, this psalm also pleads with God to restore His people, and accomplish His kingdom purposes on the earth. And it does so with the understanding that every faithful Jew must make faithfulness and the worship of God His greatest joy, and his most diligent pursuit.

Because of these facts, the psalmist describes three divergent realities of a true kingdom seeker.

In the first four verses, the writer is describing the experience of Jewish captives in Babylon. They were sad days, but days that were brought on by the collective rebellion and unfaithfulness of the Israelites themselves.

And that leads us to the first reality in the heart of every true kingdom seeker.

Regretfully ACKNOWLEDGE the consequences of your SINFUL choices (v. 1-4)

Psalm 137:1-4
By the rivers of Babylon,
There we sat down and wept,
When we remembered Zion.
Upon the willows in the midst of it
We hung our harps.
For there our captors demanded of us songs,
And our tormentors mirth, saying,
“Sing us one of the songs of Zion.”
How can we sing the LORD’S song
In a foreign land?

Having been taken captive, a band of enslaved Israelites find themselves lamenting the loss of their great land, and the privilege of worshipping in Jerusalem. So they sit down by a river and simply start crying.

It was somewhat different for them. We now know the spiritual reality of having one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. But in their religious economy, they needed the temple, they needed the priest, and they needed to offer the sacrifices in order to have their sins covered, and to offer gifts of worship and thanks. As well, it was at the temple that there was also vibrant worship, songs were sung, prayers were offered, sacrifices made. There was dancing and feasting and worship.

But all of that was taken away from them in Babylon.

So, knowing they could not recreate the scene, or offer the sacrifices, or engage in acceptable worship, they simply took their harps and hung them up in the tree (see 137:2).

They did this in part as an expression of sadness over what they couldn’t experience for real. But it was also in protest to the taunting of the Babylonians themselves. Their “captors demanded” that they sing their Jewish songs of joy and mirth. They wanted to hear one of those songs celebrating the greatness of Zion, the majesty of Jerusalem, the splendor of the temple, and of the glory of the God of Israel.

But Zion wasn’t great, Jerusalem’s majesty and splendor (the temple) had been ransacked and torn to the ground, and the house of the Lord wasn’t filled with the glory of God any more. It was covered in the ashes of defeat and the dust of destruction.

For those Jewish captives, there was nothing to sing about.

They were in a foreign land, taken captive through the violence and brutality of a foreign people, knowing that their temple worship had been laid waste and torn to the ground. As far as they knew at that time, there was little to cause them hope of returning and restoring those glorious realities.

But joyously, according to the words of the prophets, there was great cause for hope.

• The prophet Jeremiah had predicted that this captivity would only be for 70 years (Jeremiah 25:11).
• The prophet Daniel had appealed to God’s prediction as promise, and pleaded with God to allow the captives to return (Daniel 9:2).
• The prophet Isaiah had predicted that a future king named Cyrus would order that Israelites return and rebuild the temple in Jerusalem (Isaiah 44:28).
• In time this would all actually happen, and these future events are recorded in the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Haggai.

And now, as the psalmist writes the 137th psalm, the captives HAD returned.

Notice that in verses 1-3 the writer is speaking of those experiences as in the past. Now in verses 5 and 6, the writer is expressing an exhortation that this precious, temple worship must be his most supreme joy and pursuit. In other words, he wants himself and everyone who would ever sing his song (read his psalm), to learn from the experience of the Israelites.

When you are unfaithful, your privileges of worship will be overshadowed by your experience of God’s chastening. You will be weeping, you will be lamenting your unfaithfulness, and bearing up under the weight of God’s chastising hand–perhaps even with your oppressors mocking your claim to be God’s blessed and chosen people.

So instead of wallowing in that experience, the psalmist is encouraging all who would read this psalm with understanding to adopt the mindset that will forever guard you from wandering away from God.

And that is the second reality of every true kingdom seeker.

Passionately EMBRACE genuine WORSHIP as your SUPREME joy (v. 4-6)

The psalmist asks how his heart and mouth can be filled with songs of worship, while he is being chastised for his rebellion and unfaithfulness to God (see 137:4).

The answer is that ‘they can’t!’

Now, having been restored to the land, the writer is recording his experience, and putting these words to paper in order to remind us what MUST be MOST important.

Psalm 137:5-6
If I forget you, O Jerusalem,
May my right hand forget her skill.
May my tongue cling to the roof of my mouth
If I do not remember you,
If I do not exalt Jerusalem
Above my chief joy.

When the writer says he must “exalt Jerusalem,” he is saying that he must always remember that it was in Jerusalem that God had chosen to establish His name, to appoint His king, and to build His temple so that He might be worshipped and served appropriately. The experience of worship, and the cause of God’s kingdom on earth was, and will be, centered in Jerusalem.

And so the psalmist says, “I want this pursuit of worship to be my passionate, and uninterrupted pursuit.” In fact, he says, “If I ever forget Jerusalem, if I don’t remember its importance and its glory, and if I don’t live in a way that will continue to ensure God’s blessing on His people, and on His holy city, then may my right hand shrivel up so I can never play my harp, and may my tongue be so lame that I can never sing again.”

He would rather be physically maimed and crippled than to ever be in a place again (like Babylon) where he cannot worship. Even more lamentable to his mind was the fear of ever being in a place spiritually where his own thoughts and actions invited the chastening of God as the thoughts and actions of God’s people had done in the past.

He wanted nothing to stand in the way of this passionate pursuit of true worship in the city of Zion, Jerusalem.

Whatever it was that he counted most precious, most enjoyable, most pleasurable and satisfying, he says now that his love and appreciation for genuine temple worship, in the presence of very God, must be high above even that.

Do you Passionately EMBRACE genuine WORSHIP as your SUPREME joy?

This is certainly a reminder that we must be ever mindful of what it is that competes with God, that competes in our hearts, for true worship of God. He had experienced the painful consequences and chastening of God for having set God aside as the chief joy in his heart (as did all the people collectively), and now he is wishing great pain and even personal injury if he does not avoid the same compromise in the future.

Now the psalm turns the last corner, and perhaps the most difficult one. We have heard his GRIEF over past chastening, and seen his expression of LONGING for uninterrupted and uncompromising worship. Now, there is the matter of wishing a curse upon others-or technically, wishing a blessing upon those who carry out atrocious acts upon his oppressors.

How are we to understand this?

First of all, we must acknowledge that these words are an inspired expression of worship in the Lord’s own songbook, and therefore it is right and holy (in some sense) to wish and express such things.

Therefore, we will phrase the third heart reality of every true kingdom seeker in this way.

Properly ANTICIPATE God’s JUSTICE upon the ENEMIES of God’s Kingdom (v. 7-9)

Let’s read it again to have it fresh in our minds as we try to grapple with the reality of it.

Psalm 137:7-9
Remember, O LORD, against the sons of Edom
The day of Jerusalem,
Who said, “Raze it, raze it
To its very foundation.”
O daughter of Babylon, you devastated one,
How blessed will be the one who repays you
With the recompense with which you have repaid us.
How blessed will be the one who seizes and dashes your little ones
Against the rock.

Clearly the psalmist is anticipating that God WILL judge both the Edomites and the Babylonians. And his pronouncement of blessing upon whoever God chooses to be the instrument of that judgment implies that it will be deserved and just-even if it is horrible and violent in its particulars.

In order to help us understand both this particular psalm, and others like it, I want to give you four broad principles that ought to govern how to think through and interpret statements like these in Scripture.

(1) God judges the nations of the earth in righteousness, both in the final day, and often in history.

God has fixed a day in which He will judge the earth in righteousness.

Psalm 96:13b - …He is coming to judge the earth. He will judge the world in righteousness and the peoples in His faithfulness.

Acts 17:31 - because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead.

This speaks of a final judgment upon the earth, but we also have many, many examples in Scripture of God judging particular nations for their sins-like Sodom and Gomorrah, the Philistines, the Canaanites, and even the Babylonians. The psalmist is simply identifying with God’s own stated purpose, and one that is consistent with His character, His holiness, and His prophetic word.

But secondly, this is not purely a personal request for the psalmist.

(2) This is not a request for personal vengeance, but a concern for God’s kingdom purposes to be established.

This is not a personal issue for the psalmist, but one that reaches to the heart of what God had promised and was purposing to carry out. It is God’s purpose to establish His kingdom on the earth. Sadly, the disobedience and rebellion of the Israelites had diverted God’s intention, by His own sovereign and divine purposes, away from the immediate establishment of His earthly kingdom.

But the psalmist knew that it was promised, and he knew that at present both the Edomites and the Babylonians were opposed to God’s people, and opposed to God’s kingdom. Having been delivered out of Babylon, and back to the Promised Land, the psalmist now had a renewed hope that the promises of the kingdom would soon be established. And so he is simply praying that it would come about.

The Old Testament did not teach, nor does it justify, the seeking of personal vengeance. And that leads us to the third broad principle for understanding such passages.

(3) Despite different emphases, the Old and New Testaments are consistent in their expression of personal ethics and national justice.

God often carries out His purposes of judgment through the tragic events of war, using civil governments as His agents. But these are civil governments acting as agents of justice, not individuals carrying out personal vengeance.
We must not confuse the demand and practice of personal ethics of the Bible (love your enemies, bless those who persecute you) with the establishment and execution of the civil law of government agents (an eye for an eye, stoning murderers, etc.).

The personal ethics taught by Jesus were based on Old Testament principles outlined in God’s Law (Leviticus, Exodus and Deuteronomy). They do not contradict, or even alter, the Old Testament directives regarding civil law or God’s purposes to accomplish justice through the nations.

In fact, this principle is also taught in the New Testament.

Romans 13:1, 4 - Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God…4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.

When the Old Testament speaks about personal ethics, it is completely consistent with the personal ethics of the New Testament. And, when the New Testament speaks of civil government, and God’s purposes for and through them, it is completely consistent with Old Testament teaching.

Despite different emphases, the Old and New Testaments are consistent in their expression of personal ethics and national justice.

There are different emphases, because the Old Testament was spoken and given in the context of God ruling an entire nation of people (Israel), through the laws of civil government (significant portions of the Mosaic Law). The New Testament is spoken in a context where there are true believers, but they are of every tribe and tongue and nation-and so the emphasis is on personal ethics, not civil law.

Now back to psalm 137.

Having established that God does and will judge the earth, and that the psalmist is not requesting personal vengeance, what is psalm 137 really saying should happen?

(4) These judgments will happen according to God’s word; the psalmist is really requesting that God would fulfill His own stated will and purpose.

God had already declared the just judgment and destiny of both Edom and Babylon. The sons of Edom were doomed, according to God’s own prophetic word (Obadiah).

Obadiah 1:9-11 - “Then your mighty men will be dismayed, O Teman, So that everyone may be cut off from the mountain of Esau by slaughter. 10 “Because of violence to your brother Jacob, You will be covered with shame, And you will be cut off forever. 11 “On the day that you stood aloof, On the day that strangers carried off his wealth, And foreigners entered his gate And cast lots for Jerusalem-You too were as one of them.

They rejoiced in the day of destruction in Jerusalem and Israel. As psalm 137 says…

Psalm 137:7 - Remember, O LORD, against the sons of Edom The day of Jerusalem, Who said, “Raze it, raze it To its very foundation.”

They were cheering for its total destruction, that it would be razed, or leveled to the ground. Because of this, God said they would be judged.

Obadiah 1:15 - For the day of the LORD draws near on all the nations. As you have done, it will be done to you. Your dealings will return on your own head.

The Babylonians, likewise, were destined for destruction and judgment, and to be repaid equally, in God’s justice and wrath, for the atrocities committed against His people. With the Babylonians, these judgments were actually very specific.

Isaiah 13:1 - The oracle concerning Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw.

After describing a lot of the details of this judgment, we see in Isaiah’s prophecy some strikingly similar and specific details of how it will come about.

Isaiah 13:16-18 - Their little ones also will be dashed to pieces Before their eyes; Their houses will be plundered And their wives ravished. 17 Behold, I am going to stir up the Medes against them, Who will not value silver or take pleasure in gold. 18 And their bows will mow down the young men, They will not even have compassion on the fruit of the womb, Nor will their eye pity children.

We also read this in Jeremiah.

Jeremiah 51:56 - For the destroyer is coming against her, against Babylon, And her mighty men will be captured, Their bows are shattered; For the LORD is a God of recompense, He will fully repay.

The very things that the evil Babylonians had done to the children of Israel, God was going to bring upon them through the hands of another wicked nation, the Medes. This actually happened later, as we know from the book of Daniel, and from secular historical accounts.

But for our purposes, what we are noting is that the psalmist was not requesting personal vengeance, or saying something out of character with God’s plan and purposes for judgment. He was actually requesting that God Himself would fulfill His own stated purpose and plan for those wicked Babylonians (and Edomites).

Now, how does this apply to us today? How are we to properly anticipate God’s justice upon the enemies of His kingdom?

As we read such a disturbing statement as we have at the end of psalm 137, I think it seems atrocious to our minds because we do not fully grasp, in a godly way, the heinousness of sin. We have people all over our nation, and in our world, doing things every day as horrible as what the psalmist describes.

We can’t imagine someone “dashing the head of an infant against a stone,” and yet there are people every day burning, and dismembering babies in their mother’s womb. It is only a mercy of God that He has not judged our nation more than He has, and this psalm is a reminder that one day He WILL. While we do not have a specific promise, as the psalmist did with Edom and Babylon, such a judgment would be completely consistent with His character.

We can offer the enemies of God’s kingdom a message of hope and forgiveness-the blood of Christ can cleanse us of all sin. All the wicked of our nation can repent and run to the crucified and risen Messiah of Israel for compassion, pardon and salvation.

Isaiah 55:5-7 - “Behold, you will call a nation you do not know, And a nation which knows you not will run to you, Because of the LORD your God, even the Holy One of Israel; For He has glorified you.” 6 Seek the LORD while He may be found; Call upon Him while He is near. 7 Let the wicked forsake his way And the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the LORD, And He will have compassion on him, And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon.

But for those who do not repent, psalm 137, and passages like it, is a simple message of awful judgment. The words of psalm 137 remind us of the gruesome nature of sin, the hatred of God against it, and of the kind of awful judgment that is to come.

God recompenses mankind for their sin. God is not mocked. Man will reap what he sows. If our nation continues to legalize and encourage moral debauchery, and degrading lifestyles like those of the homosexual, and legalize the snuffing out of human life through abortion and certain forms of stem cell research, then we are on a dangerous path to destruction and judgment.

Nonetheless, we should not be the kind of people that express personal hatred or disdain for sinners. These matters are NEVER a cause for personal vengeance or vigilante justice. Rather, it should be a powerful motivation to bring the message of peace and reconciliation with God to the rebellious, dying and lost of our culture.

It is an awful judgment that they will one day face.

My hope is that the message of this psalm will motivate you to be faithful in the commission to rescue the perishing, and that this graphic reminder of the just judgment to come causes you to consider afresh the diligence with which you preach the gospel to all creation.

Regardless of my own tastes, I have often reflected on the ways these films can shape our views of romance and marriage in a way that is unbiblical, and therefore potentially harmful. She draws a careful (but guarded) comparison of chick flicks distorting a woman’s view of romance similar to how pornography can distort a man’s view of sexuality. She then discusses what she calls “three powerful lies communicated to and believed by women through this genre.” I appreciated her main points (and think it can just as easily distort men too):

1. Lie #1: Men think of romance and relational intimacy exactly like women do!
2. Lie #2: If I marry the right man [woman], all will be right in my life.
3. Lie #3: I will know that a man [woman] is right for me by feelings I get when I’m with him [her].

After explaining these points, she then shares her own personal experience in meeting and getting to know her husband. In the process she exemplifies some good principles to consider in dating, or in discipling our own older children in how to think as they get to the age of dating and courtship. Her recommendations at the end are very similar to the principles taught in “Holding Hands, Holding Hearts,” by Richard & Sharon Phillips.

I recommend this article for your edification, and welcome any comments.

In the midst of his own persecution and distress, David encourages four responses that will cultivate confidence in God and peace in our own hearts.

1. Cry out to God (4:1)

Psalm 4:1 - Answer me when I call, O God of my righteousness! You have relieved me in my distress; Be gracious to me and hear my prayer.

Even as we pray, it is our tendency to let our hearts and minds get fixed on, and even hope in things that we might pursue for vindication. We don’t give careful thought about what God’s word says about suffering for righteousness sake: “Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven…” (Matthew 5:10-12). We may also turn to others (family or friends) looking for a false reassurance that “we do not deserve” such treatment, and that “God is on our side” without really being careful to examine our own hearts.

However, David’s response exemplifies three approaches that we need to have to appeal to God in the midst of these kinds of trials. How should we understand David’s appeal, and how should we cry out to God? David exemplifies three elements of properly crying out to God in distress.

Approach God Honestly. David cries in the Psalm, “Answer me when I call…” David needed help spiritually and emotionally, and his prayer honestly acknowledges that. Later in the psalm, he expresses how the lies and deception have hurt him. Like David, we do not need to put up false pretences with our omniscient God.

Approach God With Thankfulness and Trust. In verse 1, David acknowledges, “You have relieved me in my distress…” The idea here in the word “distress” is “pressure,” the feeling of being pressed in from all sides and that there is no escape. This wasn’t a new experience to David, but as he says, God had relieved him before. God had “widened the space” when David felt the pressure. This is an example of appealing to past blessing as grounds for present relief.

Approach God Humbly. David refers to God as “the God of my righteousness.” He is not trusting in his own goodness or his own righteousness as the grounds for approaching God, or as the justification for receiving an answer. In fact, David finishes verse 1 by saying, “Be gracious to me and hear my prayer.” Instead of getting even, proving our own innocence, or running to friends for false sympathy, we should “cry out to God” honestly, thankfully, and humbly as David did.

In verses two and three we see the second response we should have in our distress that will cultivate confidence in God and peace in our own hearts.

2. Understand God’s Perspective (4:2-3)

Psalm 4:2-3 - O sons of men, how long will my honor become a reproach? How long will you love what is worthless and aim at deception? Selah. But know that the LORD has set apart the godly man for Himself; The LORD hears when I call to Him.

David expresses an accurate picture of how God views the people involved. He acknowledges that he himself has a position of honor, a position of glory, and that other people of noble position in society are trying to shame him, to ruin his reputation, and bring reproach on him. David reveals their method of destroying his reputation by essentially asking, “How long will you aim at deceiving others, by telling them things about me that are empty, baseless, and untrue?”

In contrast to his honest, but painful assessment of his accusers, David also expresses his confidence in God’s calling of himself, and in God’s disposition toward His own children. The word “godly” in verse 3 is actually the word hasid, from which we get “Hasidic Jews”, the really devout, practicing Jews. The word simply means faithful, or loyal. God has set apart the faithful and loyal servant for Himself.

Furthermore, our loyalty is because of God’s grace. David also cries out in verse 1,”Answer me when I call, O God of my righteousness!” By understanding our identity in Christ, our calling as His children, and God’s setting apart of the faithful for His service, we are reminded that He is on our side and we have nothing to fear.

3. Worship during the trouble (4:4-5)

Psalm 4:4-5 - Tremble, and do not sin; Meditate in your heart upon your bed, and be still. Selah. Offer the sacrifices of righteousness, And trust in the LORD.

This was David’s third response. In verses four and five, David reminds himself about how he must, despite the trouble and trial, respond in worship and trust toward God. Specifically, David’s psalm displays three ways the persecuted and distressed ought to worship God in their trouble.

Do Not Sin In Your Anger. The Apostle Paul directly quotes Psalm 4:4 in Ephesians 4:26, “be angry, and do not sin.” It is right and proper to experience the emotion of displeasure at what is wrong and sinful; however, a destructive and vindictive reaction is sin.

React Thoughtfully. Instead of reacting sinfully, we are to give the situation some careful thought in quiet (see 4:8). David is definitely NOT saying that we should let the trouble keep us awake at night. He is advocating a calm, thoughtful, anti-reactionary view of events–not one that immediately sends us into a flurry of reactions and activity to “fix the problem” or “correct every lie.”

Continue To Worship In God’s Prescribed Way. In David’s day, God’s prescribed worship was offering sacrifices and prayerful worship, mingled with prayer and song. Today, similarly, we pray, sing, gather together, encourage one another, and “all the more as we see the day approaching.” There is no room in Scripture for “taking a little time for stress relief,” by avoiding the body or corporate meetings of the church. David says that our worship, and particularly worship in the place where God’s people gather to offer their sacrifices of praise, is exactly what we SHOULD pursue in the midst of trial. It is here that God ministers grace, and brings comfort and encouragement. As 2 Corinthians 1:3-4 states: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our affliction so that we will be able to comfort those who are in any affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.”

In verses six and seven we see the fourth response we should have in our distress that will cultivate confidence in God and peace in our own hearts.

4. Seek God, Not Good (4:6-7)

Psalm 4:6-7 - Many are saying, “Who will show us any good?” Lift up the light of Your countenance upon us, O LORD! You have put gladness in my heart, More than when their grain and new wine abound.

David prays for the goodness and favor of God to be made known to him. In the midst of trials and distress, it isn’t unusual for some to begin to doubt God’s goodness or care. In verse 6 it is “many” who are saying “…who will show us good?!” Those who respond to our distresses wrongly (even family and friends) can wittingly or unwittingly push us in the direction of doubt and despair. don’t let this happen.

David knows, and prays, for exactly what he, and everyone like Him needs to know and experience in the midst of trouble, trial and distress. In essence he says, “God, I want to know more of you! I long to see the light of your countenance, to know the glory of your holiness, and to experience the true, rich, and genuine gladness of heart that comes through knowing you deeply. I don’t want that cheap substitute for gladness that I often seek when times are good, when I have my grain and new wine.”

Despite many outside pressures, we need to pursue understanding the richer, eternal blessing of knowing God. In the midst of trouble, trial, distress and persecution, make the pursuit of God your primary pursuit, and you will grow in confidence and peace. Then, and only then, will your nightly theme be that of David.

Psalm 4:8 - In peace I will both lie down and sleep, For You alone, O Lord, make me to dwell in safety.”

May God grant you grace to worship and endure your own trials as David did.

Reminder: If interested you can listen to the sermon audio here. I definitely fill in some of the gaps, and explain further in the audio. This is only a summary of the message.

In this article, Leeman reminds us to love the people of the church, with all their warts, and wrinkles, and misunderstandings, and weaknesses, and idioscyncrasies. Those problems are, in fact, true of ALL of us in varying degrees. But, as he points out, these are the very people upon whom Christ has willingly placed his own name (Christ-ian), the ones for whom He has died and risen again, and in whom He is presently dwelling and conforming to His own image. We are all a work in progress, so let’s encourage and strengthen, rather than tear down, or demean.

He says:

When Christ died for the church, he made it his own. He identified it with himself. He put his name on it. That’s why persecuting the church is persecuting Christ (Acts 9:5), and why sinning against an individual Christian is sinning against Christ (1 Cor. 8:12; cf. 6:15). Individually and corporately, we represent him.

Think about what that means. It means that Christ has put his name on immature Christians, and Christians who speak too much at members’ meetings, and Christians who wrongly give their unbaptized children communion, and Christians who love shallow praise songs. Christ has identified himself with Christians whose theology is underdeveloped and imperfect….

How wide, long, high, and deep Christ’s love is! It covers a multitude of sins and embraces the sinner. Actually, it doesn’t just embrace the sinner. It places the whole weight of Christ’s own identity and glory on the sinner—“my name will rest on them, and my glory will be theirs.”

We should always come back to the gospel, shouldn’t we?

…One theologian helped me understand an important aspect of gospel love by distinguishing between giving of yourself and giving yourself. When I give of myself to you, I give you something that I possess like my wisdom, my joy, my goods, or my strengths generally. Of course, I don’t really risk losing anything in the process, because I gain praise for such giving. Indeed, I can give all that I have, even my body to the flames, and have not love. When I give myself, however, I don’t just give something that I have, I give my whole self. I identify my self with your self. I start giving attention to your very name and reputation because I view them as united to my own. Any glory that I might have becomes yours, and all the glory that you have is the glory that I most enjoy. It’s mine, too!

This is how we should love one another within a church, because this is how Christ has loved us. We don’t just embrace one another; we rest the weight of our identities upon one another. We share one another’s glories and sorrows. “If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together” (1 Cor. 12:26). We consider one another better than ourselves, in the same manner that Christ has done with us (Phil. 2:1-11). Indeed, we have taken on the same family name, and so we are now brothers and sisters (Matt. 12:50; Eph. 2:19; etc.). If you insult my brother, you insult me. If you defraud my sister, you defraud me. Nothing’s business in the church. It’s all personal, because the gospel is personal. He died for you, Christian. He died for me. So that we might represent and look like him. (Yes, he remains the final focus of our love for one another, just as his love for us was given so that we might love the Father—the final focus of his love.)…

…we should love people because they belong to the gospel, not because they have kept the law of a healthy church, even though that law may be good and biblical. It means we should love them because of what Christ has done and declared, not because of what they do.

If you love your children, you want them to be healthy. But if you love your children, you love them whether they are healthy or not.

Certainly you can rejoice when a brother or sister grows in theological understanding. You rejoice in the greater unity of truth you now share (see 2 John 1). But your gospel love—your “Christ died for us while we were yet sinners” love—should extend no less to the brother who is theologically, ecclesiologically, even morally immature, because such love is based on Christ’s perfection and truth, not the brother’s.

…if your church is filled with weak believers, you should still identify yourself with them as if they were strong. Maybe you feel more “like-minded” (a popular phrase among the Reformed) with the mature brother who shares your theology. Fine. But if that theologically-minded brother asks you to share his contempt for a less theological or mature brother, say to him, “My son, you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found” (Luke 15:31-32).

It is not always easy to love everyone. But as soon as we think such a thought, we need to remind ourselves that it cannot be easy for others to love us either, and yet Jesus Christ has loved us with an everlasting love.

Now, it would be easy to take these comments and conclude that one should never disagree, criticize or point out the faults and errors of fellow believers. That is not the case. What is important though, is the heart attitude and demeanor of the Christian as they do those things. It must be motivated by love, it must be saturated by a charitable spirit, and it must be accompanied by an obvious affection for others that leaves the warm embrace of concern on their shoulders, and not a cold shroud of criticism.

May God help us as we learn to love and care for (and about) one another.

My overall impression: While there are many good things about the book, I would never recommend it. In fact, the weaknesses of the book are so significant that I would go so far as to discourage people from reading it - if they are reading it for the purpose of being edified.

A Summary of the Book

Moore’s goal is to help us to believe God’s promises and to live by faith. Five statements form the backbone of the book.

1. “God is who He says He is.” Moore devotes chapter 4 to this statement. She references many places in Scripture where God calls His people to remember who He is. Moore then challenges the reader to evaluate whether his/her view of God is too limiting. She warns against trying to “tame the Lion of Judah” and attempting to “take away the mystery and wonder that surround God” (49).

2. “God can do what He says He can do.” In chapter 5, Moore challenges the reader to believe God can do miracles if He wants to and in chapter 6, she says, “sometimes God may prioritize performing a miracle in our hearts and minds over a miracle concerning our circumstances” (76).

3. “I am who God says I am.” In chapter 7, she reminds the reader that - if he/she is a believer - he is “blessed, chosen, adopted, favored, redeemed, and forgiven” (88).

4. “I can do all things through Christ.” Moore encourages the reader in chapter 8 to be confident in God based on the promise given to Joshua in Joshua 1:5: “No man will be able to stand before you all the days of your life. Just as I have been with Moses, I will be with you; I will not fail you or forsake you.”

5. “God’s Word is alive and active in me.” In chapter 9, Moore speaks of the power of God’s Word and God’s Holy Spirit to do things in us.

In chapters 10-11, Moore encourages the reader to believe the promises of God listed above and to speak them. Honestly, I have a little difficulty summarizing these two chapters - the main point of them is difficult to identify.

In the remaining chapters she urges the reader to (1) believe that God has been working out His plan for your life in the past; (2) believe that God sometimes wants us to focus on the basics of the Christian life rather than on big and impressive feats; (3) believe that God sometimes wants us to pray for big things to be accomplished through us; and (4) believe God so that we are enabled to love God and others.

Let me first mention some of the strengths of the book.

Strengths

1. Moore’s writing is interesting. She’s very creative. Consider these statements:

“Living agape is a daily commitment of the will to vacate the premises of the heart with its own preferential affections, and make its chambers a fleshy canteen for the liquid love of God” (p. 241).

“Faith and love are inseperable housemates that offer hospitality to hope” (p. 242).

I don’t think I can read those statements without smiling. While these examples are some of the more creative sentences in the book, I’m sure every reader would agree that every page is interesting and easy to read. Most Christians have unfinished books sitting around their house, but I’ll bet there aren’t many unfinished books written by Beth Moore.

2. The book is practical. Moore isn’t just trying to merely “educate.” She is trying to challenge and motivate the reader to love God and please Him. I really appreciate this quality in her writing.

3. The book has a lot of good things to say. Moore is evangelical; she loves God; and, she loves the Scriptures. So, we shouldn’t be surprised that she has many good points to make in her writing. Truly, God is worthy of our trust. We should believe Him. We should believe what He says about Himself, what He says about us, etc.

I appreciated her clarification on the blessings that we are “believing God” for. She writes, “Blessing is defined by neither ease nor worldly possessions nor stock-market successes. Blessing is bowing down to receive the expressions of divine favor that in the inner recesses of the human heart and mind make life worth the bother” (p. 5). Moore rejects the prosperity gospel, and for this I am thankful.

I could list many, many more biblically-sound and helpful things Moore has to say in the book, but I’m not sure it would be helpful since, overall, I can’t recommend the book. While there are many good things in the book, it is a mixed bag. In fact, reading the book was laborious since so much effort was required to compare what she says with Scripture. So, I’ll move to a discussion of the weaknesses of the book.

Weaknesses

1. Moore frequently misapplies biblical narratives, particularly Old Testament narratives. Throughout the book, Moore, frequently discusses the nation of Israel and the promises given to them. Then, she makes what she calls “figurative applications” (212 and others) to the reader. However, in the applications, I don’t believe she is doing justice to the text. I’ll give a couple examples.

Example #1: March around your Jericho. To provide the basis for chapter 14, Moore quotes Joshua 6:3-4 which contains God’s instructions to Joshua leading the people of Israel. The text says, “March around the city [of Jericho] once with all the armed men. Do this for six days…On the seventh day, march around the city seven times…” Then, she makes the following application: “God often directs us to keep walking around that Jericho day after day, repeating the same old fundamental steps while nothing seems to happen” (213). When she speaks of “fundamental steps” she has in mind spiritual disciplines such as reading our Bibles and praying.

I don’t think this is a legitimate application to make from the text. God wasn’t telling Joshua to focus on the “fundamentals.” There was nothing “fundamental” about walking around a city for six days. Moore’s application is fanciful.

Example #2: Go to your Gilgal. Chapter 13 is called, “Believing God to Get You to Your Gilgal,” and it’s based on Joshua 4:19-20 and 5:2-12.

After the people of Israel had wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, they came to a place called Gilgal (4:19), which means “circle or wheel.” Moore says, “I believe Gilgal could also represent the place where the Hebrew nation came full circle” (190) since the nation finally arrived where they should have 40 years earlier. Joshua 5:9, also speaking of Israel’s arrival at Gilgal says, “Today I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you.” Moore then says, “I’d like to suggest that Gilgal is an important place for you and me to go with God as well. Think of your personal Gilgal as the place were two highly significant works occur:

1. God brings you full circle and breaks any looming cycle of failure.
2. God rolls away your reproach” (191).

Moore discusses the cycles of defeat and cycles of victory (experienced by the nation of Israel and by individual Christians). The cycle of defeat has several stops: slavery -> deliverance -> testing -> prevailing unbelief -> [back to the beginning] slavery. The cycle of victory also has several stops: slavery -> deliverance -> testing -> prevailing belief -> Promised Land. Moore says we experience these cycles just as the nation of Israel did.

The starting point for each cycle is “slavery.” Moore says, “Slavery is anything that keeps you bound from your God-ordained destiny and the fulfillment of His earthward promises to you” (194). “Ultimately, how the cycle continues is based on one of two things: prevailing unbelief or prevailing belief” (195). Moore says, “God most often looks for what prevails in our lives. If unbelief prevails, we find ourselves repeating the cycle of defeat” (195).

Moore then talks about how God rolls away all our reproach just as He did for Israel. Moore says, “Think of our reproach as the vestiges of what we still insisted on wearing from our old wardrobe, whether telltale actions occurred before or after our salvation” (198). She then goes further to say, “Not only do we insist on wearing some of our old wardrobe, sometimes we also insist on wearing pieces of other people’s wardrobes. In other words, we can be victimized by someone else’s reproach or simply take on something that was never ours” (199). Moore lists many scenarios in which people might feel reproach: being divorced, being crazy (mental illness), going bankrupt, being fired, being “unwanted” (a single person may feel this way), getting pregnant outside of marriage, etc.

Are Moore’s applications legitimate? Should we each “go to Gilgal by faith”? I don’t think so. Here are some problems I see with Moore’s “figurative application.”

First, Israel’s slavery isn’t the same as our slavery. Moore is trying to liken our sinful habits to Israel’s slavery. The only “slavery” experienced by Israel up to this point was their slavery in Egypt, but that slavery wasn’t due to sinful choices as is true with our sinful habits. If Moore is thinking of Israel’s wilderness wandering - which was due to their unbelief - then it shouldn’t be called “slavery.”

Second, I don’t believe the Bible ever says, “God most often looks for what prevails in our lives. If unbelief prevails, we find ourselves repeating the cycle of defeat.”

Third, there’s no basis for saying Israel’s cycle is intended to be a pattern for us to look for in our lives. If we call it a pattern we run into some problems:

• The nation’s cycle wasn’t a pattern for individual Israelites at the time. Many Israelites died in the wilderness. They never saw the Promised Land. If it wasn’t a pattern for individuals in the nation of Israel then why should we think it is a pattern for individuals today?
• Prevailing unbelief among the nation of Israel is not the same as prevailing unbelief for an individual. Does unbelief prevail in your heart? Does unbelief prevail in the nation of Israel? To answer the latter question you will have to number the people, but not so with the first question. Prevailing unbelief of a nation is not equal to prevailing unbelief for an individual.

Fourth, there’s no basis for saying the rolling away of Israel’s reproach is a promise that God will roll away every feeling of reproach that we experience. Egypt had ridiculed Israel, asserting that God had abandoned them - that He wasn’t caring for them. After arriving in Gilgal, Egypt could no longer ridicule the Israelites by saying God had abandoned them. It was obvious that He hadn’t! No one could argue the fact that Israel was no longer in slavery.

This is not a promise that God will remove every feeling of reproach for an individual. God does not promise that a parent with a rebellious child will ever rid himself of the stigma of being a “terrible parent” (200). While God will help parents to change and become more faithful in their parenting, there is no guarantee that they will lose a stigma. As well, there’s no guarantee that a person having declared bankruptcy will ever escape a stigma.

For at least a couple of reasons, Moore’s application of the OT greatly concerns me. First, Moore’s figurative applications can give people false hope. For example, people with stigmas should not ever expect to have their reproach rolled away. They should expect forgiveness from God and strength from God to change.

Second, Moore’s figurative applications teach a faulty method of biblestudy that is all too easy to learn. My exhortation is: Don’t follow Moore’s example when interpreting and applying the OT! Interpret the text literally. Apply the literal meaning of the text. Watch out for “figurative applications.”

What do we learn from Israel’s arrival at Gilgal - without the use of figurative applications? A lot…God is merciful and patient: He did not abandon Israel. God is faithful: He brought is people to Gilgal because He was determined to keep the promise He made to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3. We could list many other principles. How do we apply these principles?

• Since God is merciful and patient, we should not think we are beyond the reach of God’s mercy if we repent. Therefore, we should repent quickly and seek Him!
• Since God is faithful, we should trust God’s character knowing that He will fulfill every promise to us. For example, He will help us fight against our sin today. He will establish His kingdom on the earth one day. He will take us to heaven one day. He will never leave us.

We don’t have to resort to “figurative applications” to make the text come alive.

I move now to a second weakness of the book.

2. Moore’s understanding of the means whereby God communicates to people undermines the premise of her book. Throughout the book, Moore speaks as though God communicates to Christians in a way that is direct, unclear, and outside the Bible. Moore says in chapter 15…

If you’ve walked with God for many years, you’ve probably noticed that what He requires from us to live in victory can differ greatly from season to season. Consider a few common scenarios:

• Sometimes in our challenges, He directs us to simply “Be still, and know that [He] is God” (Ps. 46:10).
• Other times He seems to command us to “stand firm and you will see the deliverance the LORD will bring you today…the LORD will fight for you” (Exod. 14:13-14).
• Still other times we may sense God saying, “Let me see you wield the sword of the Spirit and use your weapons of warfare.”
• Then again, seasons exist like the one we’re going to study in this chapter…He seems to say, “I’ve got a great victory in store for you…”
  (pp. 222-223)

If we are going to believe God, we need to be clear on what He is telling us. How do we know what God is telling us? How can we confidently believe God when He seems to say something to us? Must we sense God saying something? What do we do if He seems to command us to do something?

Moore is not speaking of “general revelation” (e.g. Psalm 19) since God does not communicate commands to His people through the heavens. Neither is Moore is describing the gift of prophecy whereby God communicates (or better, has communicated) propositional truth infallibly and authoritatively to a person.

What she pictures is something you won’t find described in Scripture. When God communicates to a person, the person knows it. The message from God comes through with clarity and certainty .

I believe Moore inadvertently undermines the premise of her book, which is ‘believe God,’ with her portrayal of mystical, unclear communication from God to Christians. How can we believe God when we aren’t clear or certain about what He is saying to us?

Before I move to the next point, I’ll just point out one more confusing portrayal of God’s communication. Moore says,

At the risk of sounding mystical, midway through the night I suddenly began to receive what I believe may have been a revelation of sorts: an unusual spiritual insight that I felt I could trust because it came to me totally through God’s Word (p. 208).

This is confusing statement! If her insight is the clear teaching of Scripture, then it is not “mystical” and she should certainly trust it. If the insight is not the clear teaching of Scripture, then to call it “revelation” is certainly mystical, and the insight should not be trusted.

Okay, on to what I think is a third weakness of the book.

3. Moore frequently demonstrates uncareful biblestudy. Here are few examples of uncareful biblestudy.

Example #1. Ephesians 2:10 says, “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” After discussing Ephesians 2:10 she concludes, “Too much predestination for you? Here’s the catch: we don’t have to cooperate. We can live our entire lives as Christians and never fulfill the glorious plan God tailored for us in advance” (p.8).

Moore’s conclusion is quite disappointing. Ephesians 2:10 teaches us that God has prepared a life of good works for His children - for believers. Do we have to cooperate? Of course! That’s the main point! We are His workmanship. Christian, if you were self-made, you might not live a life of good works; but, you are not self-made. God created you in Christ. Therefore, you will live a life of good works! Predestination means more than “Gods’ first choice.” The Christian’s life is predetermined by Sovereign God.

Example #2. Moore discusses Ephesians 1:13 which says about the Christian, “Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit.” Moore draws the reader’s attention to the past action, “having believed” which descibes what the Christian did at the time of his salvation. Then, Moore ties in Ephesians 1:19-20 which says,

having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places.

After explaining that the phrase “those who believe” is a present active participle in the Greek which means, “those who are continually believing,” she says, “In other words, the promise given in verses 19-20 is not applied to those “having believed” in verse 13. Rather, it is applied to those who are presently, actively, and, yes, continually believing God” (p. 21).

Moore understands the blessings of verses 19-20 to be conditioned upon our continual belief in God. However, that is not what the Apostle Paul is saying. He is not challenging the Christian to continue to believe. Rather, he is telling us that those who have believed (v.13) will continually believe. Christian, you will always be a believer. You will continually believe! As a believer, you experience the immeasurable greatness of God’s power. Paul is not telling the Christian that he might not experience God’s power if he doesn’t continually believe. Rather, he is telling the Christian that he might not “know what is the hope to which he has called you” if “the eyes of your heart [are not] enlightened.” The Apostle Paul says you might not know. He doesn’t say you might not experience. Moore misses the point.

Example #3. John 14:26 says, “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” This was spoken by Jesus to His disciples who would be His apostles - official representatives of Jesus Christ. The promise was that the Holy Spirit would inspire His apostles to infallibly and authoritatively proclaim the record of Jesus Christ. Moore misapplies this passage when she says, “We are going to enlist the help of the Holy Spirit in remembering and recording acts of God’s faithfulness to us in the span of our lifetimes. John 14:26 intimates a role He fulfills that can greatly assist us” (180).

Example #4. Moore says, “I had been taught that God does not work many miracles today because we live in a different time period on the kingdom calendar” (58). She later says, “Simply put, cessationism teaches that more dramatic miracles have ceased in our day. Sensationalism teaches that the whole point of belief is miracles” (59). “My complaint is the tendency of people, like me, to be drawn toward doctrinal extremes. Frankly, I’ve got a crick in my neck from watching them both, and I beg God for a biblical center” (59).

I have known a lot of cessationists, but I have never heard one say that God does not work many miracles today because we live in a different time period. Cessationists believe the “gift of miracles” and certain other spiritual gifts have ceased. The gift of miracles speaks of God’s working of a miracle through a particular person. A cessationist says that God does not work miracles at the hands of men today since God no longer energizes the ‘gift of miracles” today. God can do miracles. He can heal people. I’ve never met a cessationist who believed otherwise.

Moore is very unhelpful as she tries to help the reader sort through this issue. She misrepresents cessationism, calls it a doctrinal extreme, and then implies it is wrong simply because it is a doctrinal extreme. Why should we assume that the truth is found at the center of what we think are two extremes?

Some say God is sovereign over absolutely everything; other say He is completely powerless. These are two doctrinal extremes. Should we therefore “beg God for a biblical center” and conclude he has some power over some things? God forbid!

Moore goes on to say, “If the body of Christ in our generation is set on being bipolar [a reference to the “doctrinal extremes”], our choice is whether we’d rather be an unbelieving and perverse generation or a wicked and adulterous generation. Hmmmmm. Not good choices” (60).

Is cessationism equal to “an unbelieving and perverse generation”? Yikes!

Example #5. Moore discusses 1 Corinthians 13:8 where the Apostle Paul says, “Love never fails.” She says, “The word fail actually portrays something that drops or falls to the ground, thereby having no effect” (240). “Beloved, when you really love, difficultly and sacrificially, God catches it even if no one else does. It never falls to the ground” (240). “We’ve got to know that every effort to love sacrificially never fails…

• to get the priority attention of God (Mark 12:28-30).
• to ultimately and undoubtedly be rewarded.
• to have a profound effect, whether in the other person, in the circumstance, or in us…(240).”

Moore has misundertood Paul’s statement, “Love never fails.” He makes the statement in contrast to other things that do fail: prophecy (v.8), tongues (v.8), knowledge (v.8), faith (v.13), and hope (v.13). Certainly Paul is not saying that love never fails to get the priority attention of God, but prophecy, knowledge, and faith will (or, may). Certainly Paul is not saying that love never fails to ultimately and undoubtedly be rewarded but faith and hope may.

When Paul says, “love never fails,” he is saying, “love never ends.” There is an expiration date for the gift of prophecy, the gift of tongues, the gift of knowledge, faith, and hope, but there is no expiration date for love. Moore’s interpretation fails to account for the context and central argument of the passage.

Conclusion

While there are many good and helpful things in Believing God by Beth Moore, there are enough confusing, uncareful, and unbiblical teachings to conclude that it should not be considered part of a Christian’s healthy diet.

While it isn’t always sinful, our flesh very often turns the emotion into a sinful response. This is the danger with anger.

Well, in an article on anger (”Anger Part 1: Understanding Anger,” The Journal of Biblical Counseling vol. 14, no. 1 (Fall 1995): 40-53) David Powlison provides an excellent list of tests to ask and apply in order to discern if your anger is righteous from beginning to end, according to biblical guidelines.

Here they are!

• Test #1: Do you get angry about the right things?
• Test #2: Do you express anger in the right way?
• Test #3: How long does your anger last?
• Test #4: How controlled is your anger?
• Test #5: What motivates your anger?
• Test #6: Is your anger “primed and ready” to respond?
• Test #7: What is the effect of your anger?

I don’t know about you, but there haven’t been many times in my life where I have experienced the emotion of anger, without also failing one of those tests. The result? I’ve had to confess my anger as sin, often reconcile with others, and allow God to humble me and sanctify me for the next test.

These tests have helped me. I hope they help you too.

Here is the complete text of what Dr. Adams said.

In a book recently published by Hope Publishing Co., Edmund McDavid, III said it again. In answer to his own question, “Does God’s Spirit testify to me that I am a Christian?” he quoted Romans 8:16: “The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.” Then, on the basis of this quotation, he went on to ask the reader, “Do you have promptings from the Holy Spirit that convince you that he indwells you—that you are a Christian?” Without further discussion or explanation of the verse (he assumes that one will agree that it teaches the Spirit not only prompts a Christian, but thereby assures him of his salvation) he goes on to another point, seemingly thinking that mere citation is sufficient to verify his view.

There are serious problems with this all-too-frequent misuse of Paul’s words. Let me mention two:

1. Neither the term “prompt,” nor anything like it, ever occurs in the Scriptures as a means of assurance. The Bible allows for no such personal, individual revelation. People may have what they think are hunches, promptings, and the like, that originate from the Holy Spirit, but they have no biblical basis for interpreting these inner feelings as such. In particular, this verse teaches just the opposite, as I wish now to show you.
2. The word translated “with” is the Greek term, sun, which means “together with.” It never has the meaning assigned to it that is required by McDavid’s understanding. The verse simply cannot mean that the Spirit “testifies to our spirit”—as his interpretation requires.

Paul is speaking of the well-known biblical requirement that testimony must be given by more than one witness in order to be accepted as valid. So, here, he says that not only does a believer have an inner conviction of one’s salvation (i.e., the testimony in his own spirit) but that, along with that inner assurance, the Spirit testifies as well. The inner testimony that belongs to a Christian comes from his faith in God’s biblical promises. The external testimony by means of which the Spirit testifies is those dependable Spirit-revealed biblical promises themselves.

It is time for people to stop misusing this passage. A Christian’s personal assurance is dependent upon the certain witness of the Spirit in the Word that we believe and to which we testify; not upon some subjective feeling in us which may or may not remain constant.

So, he helps us see that the common (and commonly accepted) understanding of this passage is not correct. And he also helps us ground our assurance in the sure promises of God in Scripture. I am sure that Dr. Adams does not mean to communicate that if you are indwelt by the Holy Spirit that there will be no experience of the Lord’s nearness. It is not possible that a Holy being could take up residence in a newly transformed heart, and enter into a living relationship with you, and there not be some measure of experiential enjoyment of His presence. Rather, Adams is simply pointing out the dangers, and unbiblical nature, of interpreting any (and every!) subjective experience as some kind of communication from the Holy Spirit.

Notice, as well, how he helps us see the potential dangers of grounding our assurance in our subjective feelings. As he points out, those subjective feelings may or may not remain constant. Is it the case that we should doubt our salvation if we do not experience some kind of subjective confirmation? Certainly this is not what God desires, and therefore, the subjective feeling of assurance is a shaky basis for genuninely assuring our hearts. God’s unchangeable Word, however, is sure, certain and abides forever.

I found it helpful. I hope you did too.