One Pursuit

ONE PURSUIT:  If the purpose of man is to bring glory to God by acknowledging and reproducing His character, it becomes incumbent upon us to pursue the knowledge of God’s character.  If we are to judge our actions by what God would do or according to what action most reflects His character, we must know His character, His ways, His thoughts.   If we are to follow the commandment to love him fully, we must know him.

            It seems clear that the one pursuit that every Christian should pursue is coming to a personal knowledge of God.  All else is rubbish.  (Phil 3:8) One does not know another person’s character by looking at a snap shot or even a description of his activities. Knowing God does not come by looking at one event or a list of some of things he has done. It is not enough to know all the rules or principles of scripture, even though these are certainly a strong beginning.  We will be a failure in knowing God if we only know what he does or did. 

            We are told to pursue holiness, we are to pursue evangelism, we are to pursue social justice.  Each of these is admirable and reflect the character of God.  However, if any of these things become the focus of our energy, we substitute a part of God’s character for the whole.  It is possible to pursue one of these in a way that does not honor the whole character of God.  It becomes a temptation to substitute the activity for the foundational relationship.  This most often happens in conservative circles when we are told to keep the main thing the main thing—usually referring to evangelism.  Evangelism is a derivative of glorifying God—acknowledging and reproducing his character.  Evangelism is to be a result of my knowing and loving Jesus. Evangelism can quickly become an activity substitute for personal knowledge and relationship. 

       Moses is a great example. Moses was not looking for a road map to follow in order to please God. He was not looking for things to do. He wanted to have an ungoing discussion with God so that he might know Him and His ways.  It was in knowing Him that Moses wanted to find grace. It was in knowing God that he expected to know how to conduct himself.  (Ex 33:12,13) The one thing we are to be pursuing above all others then is to know God/Jesus to the fullest extent possible.
      So, how does one come to know God? A future blog.

One Commandment

ONE COMMANDMENT:  Commandments are like moral absolutes.  I suggest that logically there should be one dominating commandment that follows directly from the one moral absolute.  It seems that the Scripture teaches this also. While there are many things we are commanded to do, in reality there is one commandment with a host of footnotes.  The one commandment from which all others derive is that we are to love the Lord our God with all our hearts, minds, bodies and souls.  The second command is an extension of the first.  I show love to God by loving other people, whom He created. All other commandments hang on the great commandment like Christmas ornaments on a Christmas tree.  All other commands are instructions on how to love God and other people.  (Mat 22:37-40)

            Before we start throwing out other instructions/commandments as optional or subject to our understanding, we need to remember that all these instructions were given by the God who knows all things, understands all things, created all things and loves all things.  I know how to love God because He told me how.  If I throw out the “footnotes” I show that I think I know better than God how one loves God and loves other people whom He designed.  This is what 1 John 2:4-10 says.  I clearly do not know or love God if I think I know better than He how one loves God and other people.

I know what is loving because He told me what is loving.  It is not what I feel is loving but what He knows to be loving.   For example, I may think that I am being loving by condoning/accepting extra-marital sex.  In reality this is not a loving pursuit.  It encourages others to violate the Character of God and his designs and because of that it has tragic consequences.

Sin is not about violating a command. Sin is about falling short of God’s glory—not having His character.  It is about heart attitudes.  God is far more interested in why we do what we do than what we do. Was the first sin eating the apple or the heart attitude that preceded the eating of the apple?  Actions are always a result of heart attitudes—character. (Mark 7:14ff –It is not what enters a man but what comes out from within that defiles him. This included eating the apple).

We are told that God looks upon the heart—what were we thinking when we did what we did.  He looks on our hearts with perfect understanding and knowledge.  If we loved God with all our hearts, minds, body and soul, we would do what he would do.  The only limiting factor to perfect activity would be our lack of knowledge of His character.  In the end the one commandment is to follow the one moral absolute. We are to love the character of God to such an extent that we live it out in our relationships and actions. 

One Purpose

ONE PURPOSE:  The one moral absolute then leads to man’s purpose.  All moral creatures have the same purpose—to glorify God.  That is a much misused and little understood phrase.  God’s glory is His character.  (Thus when Moses saw God’s glory, he was led to speak of God’s character.)  All that He does simply reflects His character.  We glorify God by acknowledging and/or reproducing His character.
The sermon on the mount reflects this.  It has been suggested that the sermon on the mount was meant to answer the question, “How righteous must one be to be acceptable to God?”  The answer did not begin with a commandment or set of rules.  It began by saying that God is more interested in what you are than what you do. In other words, the sermon on the mount started with the beatitudes (character qualities) before it talked about any activity.
   My destiny is that I will have the character of Christ (Romans 8).  I am presently being conformed to that image. My goal is to be as close as possible to that end when I die,  so that when I die the pain of being changed will be the less.  (Like Eustace in the Dawn Treader having his dragon skin removed)  As I cooperate, obey, desire, and achieve this end, the pain and chastisement I must face is less even here. 
If all men had God’s character they would not all have the same personality. Personality is as different from character as style is from workmanship.
   Acknowledging God’s character takes many forms including:  true praise, believing correctly, prayer, accepting that God is holy, just, merciful, gracious, etc.  Acknowledging the truth of God’s character is foundational to salvation. When I understand and acknowledge his holiness, I understand I am a sinner. When I understand his justice I know I must die.  When I understand His grace, I know I may live. Etc.  In fact every facet of God’s character comes into play in salvation and hence the importance and fulfilling purpose of evangelism and our own acceptance of salvation.
   Reproducing God’s character can be in myself or others.  When I accept salvation I not only acknowledge His character but I begin the accelerated process of having it reproduced it in me both by God and my obedience.  The same is true of others when I lead them to salvation.  Or when I help even non-believers do something or be something consistent with God’s character. 

One Moral Absolute

   As there is one overriding fact,(That there is a sovereign God)  there can be only one moral absolute.  It would make sense that the one moral absolute could be directly derived from the one over riding fact.
When we make a list of moral absolutes we run into numerous problems.  It seems that even in Scripture moral absolutes sometimes come into conflict.  One must be subordinated to the other.  This gives rise to a number of questions.  How can a truth be considered absolute and still occasionally not be applicable?  Does not the irresolvable conflict invalidate the absolute nature of the subordinated imperative?  To suggest that God will always make it possible to act in accord with all absolutes seems contrary to the teaching of Scripture and experience. (Rahab choosing between the spy's life and lying and being held up as on of great faith, Obey every ordinance of government when some ordances contradict)
  Some argue that this conundrum leads to having no moral absolutes.  However, the logic that there is at least one moral absolute is inescapable.  Even if one suggests that there are no moral absolutes he is actually positing that there is no other moral absolute than the one which states there are none.  This is in the end is a statement that cannot be affirmed without negating itself-a clear indication of  being false.
  So if the position that there are no moral absolutes is not true, and if there can only be one,  then there must be a moral absolute that is so encompassing that it covers all morality and yet cannot be internally contradicted.  In the end there can only be one moral absolute to which all other ethics and moral truth become derivatives and subordinate.  That moral absolute is the glory of God.  God’s glory is different than man’s glory.  Man’s glory is derived from what he does.  God’s glory is what He is—His character. 

In the end there can only be one moral absolute to which all other ethics and moral truth become derivatives and subordinate.  That moral absolute is the glory of God.  God’s glory is different than man’s glory.  Man’s glory is derived from what he does.  God’s glory is what He is—His character.
    One may be tempted to ask, “Which character quality is the absolute?”  This is would be a great question except that God’s character is simple.  In a sense it is like the difference between fresh and homogenized  milk.  Fresh milk can be broken down in to cream, butter milk and (what ever else milk breaks down into). God is homogenized milk—the same throughout and not broken down into component parts. We talk about God’s love or God’s mercy or God’s justice as if they were separate qualities.  It is necessary to do this so that we can grasp and understand what facet of God’s overall character we are talking about.  In reality these qualities cannot be understood separately and indeed they are not separate.  God’s love can only be completely understood in the context of His holiness, grace, justice, etc.  To try to make any one character quality preeminent is like shining only red light on a painting of many colors and thinking that we can interpret the whole magnificence of the picture.  Only with the whole spectrum can we understand each part or what is to be illuminated.
    It was interesting in a recent theological debate to have reactionary books from two sides suggesting that the other side took away from the glory of God.  On the one hand it was said that not knowing all things exhaustively took away from the glory of God.  On the other hand it was suggested that a God who could not work within a flexible framework was not as glorious as one who could work with uncertainties.  Each came to what God must be, based upon what they thought was more glorious.  What ever God is, is glorious, not whatever is glorious is what God is.
    One of the reasons the Jews missed Christ as the Messiah is that when they looked at the two descriptions of the Messiah as conquering king and suffering servant they thought the conquering king was more glorious and therefore anything distracting from that was unacceptable.  Some today reject the earthly reign of Christ because they feel that the suffering servant is the glorious standard that would be detracted from by a conquering king.  In truth, without both aspects Jesus Christ would be reduced to something less than the full glory of God.  We often do this when we have preconceived ideas of what God should be or do based on personal preference or theology.  It is the emphasis of one character quality over others that leads to most heresy and misguided Christianity.
   Now we get to the bottom line question, “What is the moral action to be taken in any given situation?” The answer: "That action which reflects God’s character."  In other words, what would God do in this situation. It is not “What is the loving thing” or “What is the just thing.” These are only one facet of God’s character and out of balance with the whole.  So while speaking the truth is most often the right thing to do, it may not always be. The question is “Does truthfulness most demonstrate God’s character in this instance.”
            This one moral absolute then becomes the measure of all moral activity and the achievement of this becomes the greatest good for all moral creatures.

Angels and Men

    Angels and Men: God has chosen to delegate his power and rights. To the angels he has given much power but little authority. To man he has given much authority but little power. In fact, it is probable that most of the ability to exercise power that man had at creation was lost at the fall.
    Man as a whole has jurisdiction (dominion) over most things within the universe. What man lacks, and will always lack, is the ability or power. This is true both spiritually and physically. In fact, even acting within natural law man really has little power in the cosmic sense.
    It is when one acts outside his jurisdiction that one reaps the worst consequences. Satan desiring to be God. Man desiring to know what was only for God to know (Adam and Eve were tempted with academic freedom to know and experience what was not seemly for them)
    What Jesus as man brought to the equation was the reuniting of the combination of power and authority in one man. His was a delegated authority but it was unlimited delegated authority.
Man has no jurisdiction over the spirit of another. He may exercise jurisdiction over the body and soul of another, but never the spirit. We may pray for another but prayer is an invitation to God to exercise his authority and power in another’s life. I’ll more about prayer at a future time.
These are all just seminal thoughts whose implications will be addressed when I talk about prayer.

Sovereignty and physical laws

Natural law. God created the physical universe to run according to natural laws. Most events that occur are explained according to these natural laws.


   Since He is still the sufficient cause for its continuing existence, God could not have left the universe alone. It is only by His present power that the chaos at the sub-atomic level produces order.


   If there was nothing outside the natural laws (supernatural), then all things would progress directly from point A to point B in a straight line. If one understood all the laws and had all the current facts, it would be possible to predict all events to the end of time. There would be no free choice, only the completely predictable natural outcome of the chemical/electrical interactions in your brain. If there was nothing outside the natural laws, the greatest pursuit would be the pursuit of science—the understanding of natural law. But this is not the case.


   The Bible is clear that there are entities that are able to operate outside the natural laws. These entities have free choice. God is not influenced by natural laws. The angels are not controlled by natural laws. And the spiritual part of man is outside natural laws. Our experience confirms that man has some degree of free choice. The spiritual entities are able to act upon the physical world to alter the straight line progression of natural law. When a spiritual being makes a choice to act in the physical world, it effects the straight line progression from point A to point B so that the universe is now aimed at point C. The magnitude of the change in the physical universe is a function of the nature of the choice and by the power of the spiritual entity to influence the physical world.

   It is in the context of events following a natural progression that we must understand miracles and providence. Miracles occur when God (or any spiritual being) acts outside the laws of nature to effect a desired outcome. Providence is God working within natural laws and the free will of men to bring about desired ends. These are not always easy to differentiate.


   A man goes into the hospital with a clearly identified cancerous growth. The following day it has disappeared. A miracle or a natural occurrence? It is possible that God intervened outside of natural laws and removed the cancer. God may have worked through a number of natural methods, either psychological or physical, that triggered the immune system to attack the growth. God may have not have intervened at all but there was something about the genetic make-up of the cancer that caused it to die on its own.


There is a car accident that takes the life of an individual. Did God cause the death of that person? In that He created all things and physical law, He is ultimately responsible. However, with rare exception, the accident followed all the physical laws of speed and mass and the free choices of men. That God did not intervene is His sovereign right that He exercises with wisdom and understanding. It is possible that He intervened to cause this accident but highly unlikely.


    How often man asks the question, “Why did God do this.” The answer is most often that God did not do it. He had the right and the ability to intervene but the norm is that He does not.  If God intervened every time that bad things were going to happen, this would be a very chaotic world. Would men be grateful if every time a person tried to eat fatty foods (ice cream) God intervened to make sure they were unable to do so? To ask God to destroy evil is a personal death wish. Furthermore, without man’s free choice, it would be impossible to glorify God because part of God’s character is free choice.


The picture in scripture is more often that of God protecting until some point when he decides to let man have his own way.

Sovereignty, One foundational truth

     All thinking begins with a set of observed data. I observe a complex, well balanced, supremely engineered world. To me this leads inexorably to the conclusion there must be intelligent design and therefore an intelligent designer. This suggests also a creator. From this I derive the foundational fact, the one truth,  that everyone must deal with. There is a sovereign God. Sovereign means that he (not sex or gender, just a necessary English appellant for a person) has the right and ability to do whatever he decides to do.
     God has the right to do as He desires because He created all other things from nothing. He therefore has the right of ownership. He has the right of the designer to direct and mold all that He formed.
     His ability is obvious from his demonstrated capacity to create. God has the ability to do whatever he decides to do. There is no power on heaven or earth that can hinder anything that God determines to do.
     To deny his right in the end makes one their own lord/God, with all the moral/ethical implications of being god. To deny his ability leads to living a life that ignores him. If there is a sovereign God, why are things so messed up?

        One of the rights that is inherent in sovereignty is God’s right to delegate his authority and not to use His power. If God could not limit his authority; if He could not restrict the use of His power, He would not be sovereign. It seems clear both in Scripture and by observing the universe around us that God is not the immediate cause of all that occurs. (From scripture it is clear that there is at least one specific thing that God does not cause, that being temptation. If there is one thing He does not do, this establishes the principle that God is not the immediate cause of all things. If I can find one thing, then it is a matter of determining what else falls in this category.)  More in the next blog.

Truth

While individuals are unique, truth is does not change from individual to individual.  An individual’s perception of that truth may vary, but the truth does not. I define truth as “that which conforms to reality, both physical, spiritual and moral.” In the classic poem about the five blind men who try to describe an elephant based upon the part they touch, each is adamant about in their own knowledge.  One declares the elephant is like a tree because he has touched the leg, one declares an elephant is like a rope because he has touched the tail, etc.  Each one is logical but is wrong because of incomplete knowledge.

Traditionally thinkers have tried by either empirical data or superior logic to come to know the real nature of the elephant (truth).  The post-modern thinkers do not do this. They deny that the elephant exists at all because no one blind person can know it correctly.  I suggest that because any one man, or collection of men, do not know all truth does not in the least change truth or its existence.

Because truth is infinite, and those who seek to know it are finite, our knowledge of truth is always flawed and incomplete.  We need to know our limitations.

The problem with conservatives, of which I am one, is that since they are certain that they know some of the truth, there is a tendency to act as though they know all of the truth.  I have met few who claim to know all of the truth but many who act as though they know all the truth. They have taken the finite truth they do know and made claims that they are able to understand (or at least describe) infinite truth.  Their belief blinds them to the infinite scope of truth and they fail to remember their own finite and flawed understanding.  There is no problem with building a system or a systematic theology until we insist upon our system being identical with truth. Systems are better for building consistency or an understanding of life than they are for predicting truth.

It ceases to be helpful once one tries to force another to follow.

The problem with post-modern thinkers is not that they feel one cannot know all truth.  The problem is that they have stopped seeking to know any truth.   They have been intimidated by their finite nature.  Holding to relativism is to admit the failure. Relativism says more about the failure of the individual than it does about the nature of truth. To say that any one person cannot know truth is far different than saying that there is no truth.  To say “My perceptions of reality affect me more than reality does,” may be a true statement; however, one’s incomplete perception of reality does not change the fact that there is reality to be known.  One’s perceptions do no change the reality itself.  That five different people had different views of an accident and thus five different ideas of what occurred does not change what actually occurred.  Our goal should not be to give up looking for truth but to learn and describe reality to the greatest extent possible.

This blog is not an apologetic to convince unbelievers of the validity of Christianity.  This is an uncomplicated man’s understanding of how Christian truth fits into a world lost in relativity and confusion.

The uniqueness of men:  Each man is unique.  God knows and approved our uniqueness and interacts with us uniquely.  For us to make unequivocal statements about how God must interact with a man or how He must deal with an individual is misguided.  Only once did God talk to a man through a burning bush.  Only once did He speak through a donkey. Only once did tongues of fire appear over people’s heads.

            Christianity is a relationship. There are principles that make marriages work but no two marriages are identical.  No two people fall in love the same way.  No two people stay in love the same way. Even the nature of wedding have unique qualities and based upon cultures,  there are even different formalities, practices and times that indicate when one moved from not being married to being married.

            There are those who say that for a person to be saved, he must be able to point to a specific moment in time when he accepted Christ as savior.  Undoubtedly, God knows the time of our salvation, the point when I was transferred from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light, but it is entirely possible that I came to a gradual realization of the truth and cannot point to a specific moment.  There are those who say once I accept Jesus, the Holy Spirit comes to live in my life and from that time on I will by necessity produce good works and grow continually to maturity.  Some suggest that my spiritual growth will be a generally upward sine wave.   Others say that my sanctification will begin when I make a second decision of discipleship or lordship.  Some say I must have a devotional/quiet time every day and I must do a particular list of things and then I will gradually grow in maturity.  The list of suggestions/commands of what I should do or expect God to do to in my life is extensive.  It does not seem to me that any of these is portrayed as the universal path.

The beauty of God’s infinite capacity is that He is able to interact with each one on a completely intimate, individual level.  Neither is He limited to a certain time frame. God does not take time from someone else to spend time with you, His unused time remains infinite (in reality this is a category error, to speak of God’s time when He does not experience time like you and I is like talking about the length of a point) 

He will interact with me based upon His knowledge of me and encourages me to come to Him as best I am able. For some this may entail daily quiet time early in the morning. For others it may entail  several hours once or twice a week in deep communion. His conversation with you, his interaction with you, his movement in your life will be different from all other people and will be according to his perfect knowledge of your nature.

Each person has a unique message, a unique ministry, and a unique point of view.  Where ever you have come from, you have a part to play that no one else can play.  Both the good and bad that have come together to make you who you are, are understood by God and will be used for good if you love him and are called according to his purpose.*

Every believer has the same destiny; that destiny is to be conformed to the character of Christ.  But even that is unique.  Our character will be the same but our personalities will not be the same.

As demotivators says, “You are unique, just like everyone else.”