Blog

What can God do with a nation if he wants? What can God do with a political ruler, even a flawed one, if he wants? What can God do to change the circumstances of his people if he wants? The answer is clear: anything he wants.

 

At the end of 2 Chronicles, after the people of Judah have gone captive to Babylon for their rebellion against the Lord, we get a little post script.

 

2 Chronicles 36:22-23 – 22 Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom and also put it in writing: 23 “Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, ‘The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he has charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whoever is among you of all his people, may the Lord his God be with him. Let him go up.’ ”

 

So, around 606 B.C., God had allowed the first set of nobles from Judah to go captive to Babylon. In around 586, the city of Jerusalem was destroyed, the temple razed, and the rest of the nation carried off. It looked to all sensible people like the nation was at an end. Surely the Lord could not and would not do anything to rebuild a nation of such rebels.

 

But the Lord had promised that the nation would be captive for seven decades. After that time, the Lord would return his people to their land. But again, this looks purely impossible. No observer of that day, without exercising pure faith in the Lord, could have ever believed it would happen.

 

But, this passage tells us of a decree that went out around 538 B.C., just about s decades from the original captivity of nobles. It was sent out by a Persian king, because in the intervening time, the strongest empire in the world, the Babylonian Empire, was toppled by the Medo-Persian Empire. And the ruler of Persia, led by a God he did not even believe in, gave a directive to send captive Jews back to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple of God. In fact, the king even funded the building project.

 

Think this through as you consider the power of God over nations or over our lives. There is nothing the Lord cannot accomplish. He can set up a nation and he can bring one down. He can restore fortunes or he can overthrow rulers. The Lord’s plans are not helped or hindered by politicians. Instead, kings, presidents, and princes are tools in the hand of the Lord.

 

May we not think our hope comes from our nation. Nor may we think our nation could ever be strong enough to stand against the Lord. Our God will do his will for his glory. We are to bow to him as the Lord. Let us obey the Lord. Let us find our hope in his goodness and his sovereign power. Let us pray that he will lead our leaders to pass laws that honor the ways of the Lord. But may we never think even for a moment that the Lord needs such things for his will to be done. God is God, sovereign over all. He is Lord, and he is worthy of all praise.

In my reading through Luke 20, one passage leapt out at me with two fascinating thoughts from the Savior. One involves his view of Scripture. The other involves his explanation of God’s view of the living and the dead.

 

Luke 20:37-38 – 37 But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. 38 Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him.”

 

In a conversation with the Sadducees, Jesus needed to correct their thinking. This group opposing Jesus did not believe that there would be any future resurrection from the dead. So, they tried to use the principle of levirate marriage to disprove the biblical expectation of genuine life through resurrection after death. In the verses above, Jesus deals easily with the argument and makes some important claims.

 

First, on the issue of the Scriptures, notice that Jesus cites the words of Moses as an authoritative text to refute the teaching of the Sadducees. Unlike modern theological liberals, the Lord Jesus displays that he believed that Moses was speaking unerringly about the Lord. If Jesus did not think so, there is no way that he could base an entire argument about the resurrection on a single word.

 

Theological liberals have, since the 19^th century, argued that the Bible is a good starting point for religion just as Jesus is the ultimate beginning of the faith, but they then go onto argue that the faith and revelation evolves. Liberals suggest that the Bible contains a husk of truth that we, evolved from the simplicity of the first century, build on to grow to a higher truth.

 

But look at how Jesus used Scripture. He did not leave any room for Moses to have misunderstood the words of God. Nor did Jesus leave any room for an evolved understanding. The Lord used a specific biblical passage, including grammar and verb tenses, to display absolute truth through Scriptural revelation. Jesus trusted that Moses spoke genuine truth that did not change over nearly a millennium-and-a-half. Jesus did not believe in or teach an evolving truth. And thus, we can say that the Lord Jesus is not on the side of the theological liberal.

 

If you do not believe that we must think about the way theological liberals handle Scripture, stop to consider the way that so many today twist and even flat reject biblical teaching on issues that are frowned upon socially in our day. Whether we are talking issues of marriage, gender roles, sexual ethics, homosexuality, or any other hot-button issue, the common practice among some who claim the faith is to say that Scripture’s teaching on those topics is outdated or irrelevant. The modern move is to assume that we have come to a place of truth that the biblical authors did not understand or simply got wrong. And this is exactly the opposite of the view of Jesus and his handling of Scripture. Jesus handled Scripture as perfect, inspired, and authoritative, and so must we. We must do so, even if that trust in and faithfulness to Scripture does not make us popular.

 

A second thought that grabbed my attention in the verses above has to do with the Lord and the dead. As Jesus pointed toward a future day when the dead would be raised, he reminded his listeners that God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Then Jesus said, “for all live to him.” Stop and let this sink in. God does not see any person as dead. Those who have died, faithful or unfaithful, believer or nonbeliever, saved or judged, all are alive to God. They are not artifacts of the past. They are not pieces of history. Rather, they are still souls, aware and spiritually as real as you and I are in our bodies on this earth.

 

That would mean that Moses and Abraham are alive. These men of old who die millennia ago are in the presence of the Lord. they are not simply words on dusty pages of history. They are men awaiting their resurrection bodies while they are rewarded and comforted by God. Similarly, Goliath and Judas Iscariot are also living souls. They are suffering spiritual “death” in the fact that they are not in any form of paradise or heaven. Instead, they are suffering torment as enemies of the Lord who died under his judgment. They are now aware of the wrath of God for their rebellion against him and his perfection. But they are not gone. They await the day of judgment when their ultimate sentences will be carried out.

 

This principle, the fact that all are alive in the eyes of God, reminds me that eternity is a very big deal. Those who have gone before us are not gone forever. Those who have loved the Lord in the past are not simply footnotes in history books or entries on our family tree. Instead, they are living, comforted saints in the presence of God who are looking forward to a new life with resurrection bodies. Even those dear family members of ours who slip from our minds unless something stirs our memories are not gone from the eyes of God. He knows them. He sees their living souls, even if we forget that all humans everywhere are going to exist before the Lord forever.

 

I’m not sure if there is a clean way to tie those two thoughts together. They made sense in Jesus’ argument with the Sadducees. What I see is that Jesus fully trusted Scripture, and so should we. And Jesus saw us as beings who will live eternally, and so must we. These two truths dramatically impact our worldview.

In his book, Tactics, Greg Koukl talks about something he calls “the question.” This is a question that someone puts in front of you that, regardless of your answer, you will find your position hurt. The question is designed by an adversary to make you look foolish, closed-minded, harsh, or the like. It is often presented in a format where you can only answer in a couple of ways, without qualification, and those answers both make you look bad.

 

Interestingly, in Luke 20, we see that the religious leaders of Jesus’ day tried to ask him a form of “the question.” They tried to put him in a position where they could condemn him. The religious leaders demanded that Jesus tell them where his authority came from. If Jesus claimed his authority was directly from God the Father, they would have accused him of claiming too much. If he told them that he, as God the Son, had the authority in himself, they would have disregarded him. In no way were they really looking for his answer. They wanted to trap him.

 

Luke 20:1-8 – 1 One day, as Jesus was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders came up 2 and said to him, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority.” 3 He answered them, “I also will ask you a question. Now tell me, 4 was the baptism of John from heaven or from man?” 5 And they discussed it with one another, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Why did you not believe him?’ 6 But if we say, ‘From man,’ all the people will stone us to death, for they are convinced that John was a prophet.” 7 So they answered that they did not know where it came from. 8 And Jesus said to them, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things.”

 

How did Jesus’ respond to “the question?” He refused to respond . In Jesus’ wisdom, he posed a question back at the teachers that disarmed them. The Savior asked about the teaching and authority of John the Baptist. The teachers knew that any answer they offered would get them into trouble. And when they refused to answer Jesus, he simply responded in kind, refusing to answer the trick question they asked.

 

When you and I are in conversations with others, we will find ourselves sometimes in dangerous places. People will ask our views on emotionally-charged issues. There will be times that no answer we can give will sound loving or politically correct on the one hand and consistent with Scripture on the other. This is not because there is not a loving answer, but simply because a straight answer, without qualification, cannot explain to a skeptic the loving purposes of God.

 

We can learn from Jesus when we are pressed into a corner. Ask a question of your interlocutor. Make them respond in such a way that allows you to safely respond to their question. Put them in a position where they cannot trap you by backing you into an unfair corner.

 

Koukl suggests that we respond to “the question” like this:

 

“When someone asks for your personal views about a controversial issue, preface your remarks with a question that sets the stage—in your favor—for your response. Say, ‘You know, this is actually a very personal question you’re asking. I don’t mind answering, but before I do, I want to know if it’s safe to offer my views. So let me ask you a question: Do you consider yourself a tolerant person or an intolerant person on issues like this? Is it safe to give my opinion, or are you going to judge me for my point of view? Do you respect diverse points of view, or do you condemn others for convictions that differ from your own?’” (77-78).

 

This is very similar to what Jesus did. Jesus showed the religious leaders that they were not willing to be treated as they were trying to treat him. When they would not make a stand, he simply refused to answer their question. And if a person in conversation with you will not make it safe for you to answer a difficult question, if they will not give you the opportunity to explain fully your position, you do not have to answer them either.

Sometimes in real life, we cannot get everything right, no matter how hard we try. We want to do things perfectly, but, if we are honest, we will find that we sometimes just are not getting there. This, of course, is a problem for those of us who are deeply committed to doing things in a biblical way, submitting to Scripture from start to finish.

 

King Hezekiah ran into a conflict in 2 Chronicles 30 that I think shines some light on some things that I find myself experiencing from time to time. The king wanted to help the people of God to repent of sin and worship the Lord. The people had not participated in the Passover as biblically prescribed for a very long time. Hezekiah was trying to lead the nation to repentance. He had worked to restore the neglected temple and cleanse the nation to the best of his ability.

 

The problem was, when it came time for Passover, the people were not all ready. Not all the circumstances were perfect. The celebration could not happen in the way it was commanded, at least not perfectly.

 

What was Hezekiah to do? Was he to wait until next year to obey the command to have the Passover? Or was he to go ahead with the celebration, asking the Lord for grace since the people were not going to be ceremonially clean?

 

2 Chronicles 30:1-4, 12, 18020 – 1 Hezekiah sent to all Israel and Judah, and wrote letters also to Ephraim and Manasseh, that they should come to the house of the Lord at Jerusalem to keep the Passover to the Lord, the God of Israel. 2 For the king and his princes and all the assembly in Jerusalem had taken counsel to keep the Passover in the second month— 3 for they could not keep it at that time because the priests had not consecrated themselves in sufficient number, nor had the people assembled in Jerusalem— 4 and the plan seemed right to the king and all the assembly.

12 The hand of God was also on Judah to give them one heart to do what the king and the princes commanded by the word of the Lord.

18 For a majority of the people, many of them from Ephraim, Manasseh, Issachar, and Zebulun, had not cleansed themselves, yet they ate the Passover otherwise than as prescribed. For Hezekiah had prayed for them, saying, “May the good Lord pardon everyone 19 who sets his heart to seek God, the Lord, the God of his fathers, even though not according to the sanctuary’s rules of cleanness.” 20 And the Lord heard Hezekiah and healed the people.

 

What do we see in this passage? Hezekiah invited people to celebrate. People wanted to come and celebrate the Passover, and verse 12 tells us this was from God. But, in verses 18-20, we see that some were not ceremonially ready. In any other year, they should have been forbidden participation. But here, Hezekiah prayed for them and the Lord allowed the intention of their heart to override the letter of the law.

 

I think we should take from this both a warning and a lesson. First, let’s see the warning, as I think it has to come first as a disclaimer. We must not allow this single event to say to us that, when we do not like biblical commands, we can ignore biblical commands because we claim our hearts are for God. We cannot throw off limitations that God has clearly given in Scripture just because they are hard. We are to strive to obey.

 

Though God allowed the unclean people to be forgiven and participate in Passover here in the passage, I doubt very seriously that God would have allowed them to do so next year. The people were doing their best to get things right and they were not able to repent to a level of cleanness during this celebration. But, it would be a different story if, next year, knowing the Passover was coming, the people presumed on the Lord and still not gotten ready to handle the event rightly. God was gracious because of their heart and situation at that moment, but he was not going to say that his word did not matter in the future.

 

So, we will not intentionally violate the word of God for the sake of people’s feelings. We will not say that, if this command is hard to obey, you are not required. We will strive with all our might to be fully biblical.

 

At the same time, there is a lesson to learn that we dare not overlook. God did show mercy to those who participated in the Passover though they should not technically have been allowed to do so. God saw the repenting heart of the people, heard the gracious prayer of Hezekiah, and allowed people to participate in Passover though they were not clean. God let the intent and heart of the law outweigh the letter of the law in this circumstance.

 

Sometimes, if we are honest, we will realize that somebody is in an untenable position. Sometimes somebody wants to obey and there is just no clean way for them to do so. In that situation, we need to be wise and prayerful, gracious and kind, biblical but not legalistic. We may find that we cannot produce circumstances that we love in every situation. We may have to seek the merciful Spirit of God to help guide us through when we are in a situation that does not offer us a clearly attainable, biblical alternative.

Somewhere around 606 B.C., a young Jewish noble named Daniel was part of a large group of nobles taken captive by King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. These young men were likely forced to become eunuchs and to serve in the court of the king. The obvious intent by the emperor would be to prevent the political leadership of Judah from attacking since they knew that the Babylonians had their sons.

 

Can you imagine the hard choices that Daniel had to make? When should he go along with the society around him and fit in? When should he stand on his principles and make a stand? When should he make a stand, butt not make a stink?

 

The king had the young men educated in the Babylonian system. By all accounts, Daniel and his three friends showed themselves to be the best students in the bunch. So, apparently, Daniel felt comfortable learning what he was told to learn without forcing every classroom session to be a philosophical debate. At the same time, Daniel did not compromise his true beliefs from the word of God.

 

Daniel 1:8-9 – 8 But Daniel resolved that he would not defile himself with the king’s food, or with the wine that he drank. Therefore he asked the chief of the eunuchs to allow him not to defile himself. 9 And God gave Daniel favor and compassion in the sight of the chief of the eunuchs…

 

When the king wanted to feed Daniel from his table, Daniel asked for mercy. To eat that food would be a direct and personal violation of the law of God. The people of Judah had been given by God direct commands to avoid certain foods in order to set themselves apart from the rest of the world. Daniel made this point a line in the sand. He asked for permission not to heat the king’s provision, but instead to have a more vegetarian diet.

 

Why was this the area of a stand for Daniel? Why was this the time to ask to be let out of the king’s plans? Daniel could live as a good citizen of Babylon in most areas. Daniel could go to school, learn what his teachers wanted him to learn, and get good grades on his tests. But to eat the king’s food would be Daniel’s choice to compromise himself. It was not Daniels job to stop Babylon from being Babylon. It was not his job to make them stop their odd astrology or even to change their diets. But Daniel could not go so far as to violate the law of God for the sake of peace and quiet.

 

So, Daniel spoke up, the Lord gave favor, and Daniel and his friends were allowed to eat vegetables instead of the unclean foods of the Babylonians—and no, this is not a biblical call to veganism. Instead, I would argue that it is a call to learn where you and I can compromise and where we cannot. It is not our jobs to politically turn our nation upside-down. Sometimes it may be for us to live in our nation as best we can while refusing to join in any activity that requires personal sin on our part. Then, as we live in our own Babylon, we can communicate the gospel of Christ with those around us and see our nation changed, not through the political process so much as through the process of the Lord God changing lives through the love of Christ and the power of his Spirit.

 

Christians, we are living in a Babylon. We had better start thinking like Daniel. I am not telling you what that looks like. You may feel a strong desire to participate in the political process to bring about change, and that is great. You may see that your role involves more of outreach to friends and neighbors, and that is great. Just remember that we are here to serve and worship the Lord Jesus. Remember what God commands us to actively change. Realize that the biblical command is not for us to battle against every wrong thing that those who do not know the Lord would do. Instead, we are to obey Christ, share the gospel, make a difference where we can, pray for our government, and live to the glory of the Lord even here in our Babylon.

Where do you stand before god? Why do you stand there? Is it something good in you that makes you who you are?

 

Hear the words of Jesus.

 

Luke 18:9-14 – 9 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

 

Jesus tells a story of two kinds of people. One man is smug. He is proud of how good he is. He is thrilled not to be like the dirty tax collector. You can imagine the sneer and the ugly tone of voice from the religious man as he looks down on the tax collector whom he sees as an unpatriotic sinner.

 

On the other hand, the tax collector is broken. He looks at his own life, and he sees nothing good in himself. He does not like what he sees. He does not think he has anything to make God want him.

 

Which one of these is pleasing to the Lord? While God probably is not at all pleased with the life of the tax collector, at the end of their prayers, it is the sinful tax collector who is forgiven. The arrogant, smug, sneering religious guy is in big trouble, because nobody can stand before God, recount his own personal righteousness, and earn God’s favor.

 

More important than the imaginary story, which kind of person are you? Do you believe that there is something in you that should make God want you? Friends, you and I have nothing in ourselves to impress God. It does not matter whether you are a criminal or a loving grandma, if you do not have the grace of Christ on yourself, you are in trouble before the Lord. We are sinful from our very beginnings. We cannot do enough good things to impress the Lord. We must, we absolutely must, have the forgiveness of God through Jesus. Otherwise, we are without hope before the Lord.

 

May we not think we are special. May we not brag on our goodness. May we not think that our giving, our turning away from sin, our commitment to our nation, or anything else makes us able to stand before God in our own strength. We must see that our only hope is to cry, “Lord, be merciful to me, a sinner!” If we do that, in faith that the Lord Jesus died to cover our sins and lives even now, we will be saved. God has mercy on all who he brings to himself in faith and repentance. This is our hope. And this is no foundation for personal smugness in our religion.

Forgiveness is a fairly complex topic in Scripture. In truth, forgiveness is often wrongly taught and improperly applied. That false teaching or poor application leads us into some terribly difficult emotional situations.

 

To forgive someone is to release them of a debt they owe to you. In emotional life, it is to let go of the emotional debt that someone owes you for wronging you in some way. Forgiveness is a release accompanied by a restoration of sorts.

 

The problem is that many people apply this concept in very dangerous, foolish, or unbiblical ways. People see the commands of Jesus  that we forgive as the Lord has forgiven us, but then we actually apply a supposed forgiveness that has absolutely no genuine resemblance to the forgiveness that Christ granted us.

 

This topic is big, and is worthy of an entire book. In fact, one of the most helpful Christian books I have read is the book Unpacking Forgiveness by Chris Brauns. And one of the beautifully biblical lessons that Brauns shows us is that the way that God forgave us is not and has never been unconditional.

 

What do I mean? Imagine that you are dreadfully wronged in a serious way. Someone commits an actual crime against you. You paint the picture for yourself. What is required of you, as a follower of God, as concerns the command to forgive? Must you immediately and unconditionally grant forgiveness? Are you not allowed to press charges or testify in court? What is the biblical teaching?

 

If you are given to much modern handling of this topic, you probably have heard someone say that you must immediately, unconditionally forgive. I have heard people give counsel to Christians that they should walk up to the criminal who hurt them and, without preamble, declare to the unrepentant wrongdoer, “I just want you to know that I forgive you.” But this is terribly unbiblical.

 

Why would I call this unbiblical? That is not how God forgave any of us. The Lord did not forgive any who are genuine Christians today apart from the two-sided coin of faith and repentance. When we try to help people toward salvation, we always tell them that they must believe the truth of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, and offer of grace. We also call on them to turn from self-rule, confess their sin to God, ask Christ for mercy, and commit themselves to his lordship. This is how we are forgiven, and it is not unconditional.

 

You see, the problem with the word unconditional is that it applies to our Christian lives in a particular way. God offers forgiveness to all who will come to Christ without condition. Anyone who believes in Jesus and repents is saved. This salvation is not based on any sort of prerequisite spiritual activity, religious dues being paid, or social status being met, thus it is unconditional in that way. But the Lord does not forgive unconditionally if you are considering that word to mean that forgiveness is applied to a person regardless of whether or not we trust in Christ and turn from sin. We are saved by grace alone through a repenting faith alone. But we are not saved if we do not believe in Jesus or in any way repent.

 

Look at one text that is often used to suggest that we just forgive others regardless of their thoughts or actions. But see how it actually teaches the opposite.

 

Luke 17:3-4 – 3 Pay attention to yourselves! If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him, 4 and if he sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times, saying, ‘I repent,’ you must forgive him.”

 

Notice that Jesus does command forgiveness. But what else does he require? We forgive when our brother says, “I repent.” That includes a lot of data. That is a person owning their sin, agreeing it is wrong, and committing to turn from it. Now, Jesus is illustrating in the extreme—7 times in a day. But Jesus is making the point that we offer forgiveness to any repentant brother without limit.

 

What is unconditional about forgiveness is the offer of forgiveness. We should be willing, as Christians, to say without qualification, “If you will repent of this sin, I will eagerly and willingly forgive you.” When a person comes to us, says they were wrong, and asks for forgiveness, we should be quick to forgive rather than to desire to apply more pressure or exact further suffering from them.

 

Go back to the imagined crime committed against you from the earlier illustration. Please note that I am not saying that forgiveness will restore your relationship with the criminal to exactly where it was before. But forgiveness means that, as far as you are concerned, you will release them from the emotional debt that they owe to you for wronging you. It could be that what they have done has made it so that you two  cannot wisely relate to each other in the same way that you did in the past. But, for your part, you will not hold onto anger against them, you will not try to hurt them back for how they hurt you , and you will not use this situation against them in the future. Interestingly, this may not have any bearing whatsoever on whether or not, in a criminal situation, that you testify in court and see them sent to jail. But you will not hate or try to hurt them in the process. If the crime was monetary, forgiveness does not mean you have to give them access to your checking account. What it means is that you do not hold yourself  as superior to them or pretend they must pay a further emotional penance to you.

 

This all gets complicated, and so many questions arise. But we would be wise to at least stop using the term unconditional as it applies to Christian forgiveness. Instead, let us try to be biblical. Christ is the source of how God forgives us. He sought to forgive us. He bore the penalty himself for our sin against God. He called us to himself. But forgiveness was not transacted apart from faith and repentance. And even though God is the one who gave us the heart and ability to repent, he did not forgive unconditionally.

When King Jehoshaphat allied himself with King Ahab to take on an enemy, we get a bit of insight as to the lengths men will go to in order to convince themselves that God is on their side. Consider this scene.

 

2 Chronicles 18:4-7 – 4 And Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel, “Inquire first for the word of the Lord.” 5 Then the king of Israel gathered the prophets together, four hundred men, and said to them, “Shall we go to battle against Ramoth-gilead, or shall I refrain?” And they said, “Go up, for God will give it into the hand of the king.” 6 But Jehoshaphat said, “Is there not here another prophet of the Lord of whom we may inquire?” 7 And the king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat, “There is yet one man by whom we may inquire of the Lord, Micaiah the son of Imlah; but I hate him, for he never prophesies good concerning me, but always evil.” And Jehoshaphat said, “Let not the king say so.”

 

Jehoshaphat asks the King of Israel about enquiring of the Lord as to whether or not God will grant them military success. The King of Israel produces more than four hundred men claiming to be prophets of the Lord. They all say the same thing. This sounds like certain victory.

 

But stop and think. Jehoshaphat then asks the King of Israel if there is not even one more prophet of the Lord to ask. Why would he do that? The text does not say. But, it catches my attention. What was it about the original four hundred prophets that make Jehoshaphat want to hear from one more? Something about these men must have showed the King of Judah that they were not speaking a faithful message from God.

 

Now, if you follow the story to its completion, you will find that Micaiah comes and, as a true prophet of God, reveals to the kings that God will not give them victory in the battle. But the kings go on and fight anyway, leading to the death of Ahab, the King of Israel.

 

I think that there is a life lesson for believers right here. It is so easy for us to grow a closed mind and a dislike for those who deliver to us messages that we do not enjoy. I’m not here talking about future prophecy. Instead, I am simply thinking of those who rightly or wrongly handle the word of God. If we are honest, we can very often tell when we are being fed a line from people who want to work their way into our good graces without actually telling us the truth. The kings had four hundred men who told them exactly what they wanted to hear and claimed it to be from God. But even then, they knew deep down that there was something wrong with that message. It was the one dissenting voice that spoke the truth.

 

May we not fall prey to the desire to hear things our way. Instead, may we submit, not to persuasive voices saying what we like, but to the true, inspired word of God. May we submit ourselves totally to Scripture so as not to allow ourselves to be misled by those who would play on our desires.

When you see people make comments about what kind of person Jesus is, it is often interesting how inaccurate they are. People have in their minds a picture of who Jesus is, but so many have not allowed the word of God to actually paint that picture. Instead, people believe they understand Jesus based on their own imagining, on poorly painted murals, on Hollywood films, on TV depictions of religious people, or on moralistic misunderstanding.

 

Let me show you one thing that Jesus says about himself that the world basically ignores.

 

Luke 12:51-53 – 51 “Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. 52 For from now on in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”

 

One of the pictures that the world has of Jesus is of a wimpy, uber-tolerant, sappy character who just wants everyone to be happy in whatever way comes to their minds. The world’s picture of Jesus is that of someone who would never cause human conflict or create division based on theology or behavior. But that picture is utterly false.

 

Look at what Jesus said. He knew that his arrival on earth and his mission and identity would cause strong division. Jesus knew that his teaching and his claims about himself would divide even families, making enemies of parents and children, brothers and sisters. The Savior knew that his work would not make everybody on earth get along. Jesus knew he would not make us an undiscerningly tolerant people. Jesus would actually make things difficult.

 

How is this the case? Jesus made absolute claims about himself and his ministry. Jesus came to be the one and only way for a person to be forgiven by God. Jesus came to be the Lord of our lives, not just an addition for those who like his ways. Jesus came to claim ownership of us and of the universe. And for all who refuse Jesus and refuse his ways, there will be a separation from the Lord and from those who sincerely are wanting to follow the Lord.

 

If that all seems hard to imagine, just consider any normal part of human life. When people see contradictory things as true, there must be some sort of conflict. There is no just getting along. Imagine that you park your car and get ready to walk into a store. Then, imagine that a stranger walks up and decides to claim your car as her own. Will there not be conflict? The car cannot be both yours and the stranger’s. One of you has right of ownership. The other is a thief. We cannot just be tolerant of that claim. The truth of ownership must be established, and at least one of the two of you must ultimately be shown to be wrong.

 

Similarly, Jesus says he is our only way to God. Jesus presented a clear set of teachings about how children of God live. If a person has a picture of Jesus that denies the teaching of Jesus, that is a problem. If a person presents a picture of Jesus that denies his claim to be the only source of our salvation by grace through faith, that person is dividing against Jesus and his ways.

 

The funny thing is, our world and our culture has a faulty view of tolerance. Tolerance means that we do not attempt to attack and subdue others who believe differently from us. However, tolerance does not mean that we have any obligation to agree with the views of others or accept their views as valid alternative truths. No, Jesus did not come for that reason. He came knowing that his exclusive claims would cause division. And if we miss that truth,, we are probably missing Jesus.

It is sad to think about how many arguments have happened in churches over the end times. When will Jesus return? What will the order of events be? What is literal and what is figurative in the prophecies? Often, we get so caught up in arguing our position that we forget how the fact of the future return of Christ should effect our lives today.

 

 

Luke12:42-48 42 And the Lord said, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom his master will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper time? 43 Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. 44 Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions. 45 But if that servant says to himself, ‘My master is delayed in coming,’ and begins to beat the male and female servants, and to eat and drink and get drunk, 46 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces and put him with the unfaithful. 47 And that servant who knew his master’s will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating. 48 But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.

 

In this passage from Luke, the Savior has been counseling his disciples toward obedience. Of course, in the discussion, the return of Jesus and what the world will be like at that point is in the minds of the disciples. But notice what Jesus offers us for a thought. He wants us to consider that, when he returns, whenever that is, he should find us faithful.

 

Looking at that paragraph, we see that Jesus wants our consideration of his return to drive us toward obedience. The Lord wants us to know that he will come back, and that it would be better for us if he finds us faithful. There is no room in the life of a Christian to assume that today could not be the day when we meet our Lord. And so, this day should find us behaving in a way that is fitting a servant of the Lord.

 

Just ask yourself, “If I were to know that I would meet Jesus today, what would I do differently?” How would your obedience to the small commands of God change in the light of soon meeting the Savior? How important would your quiet time become? How significant would your study be? How much would you want to share the gospel? How sweetly would you want to treat your family?

 

On the other hand, if you knew you would meet Jesus today, think about what would not matter to you at all. Would you worry about who seems to have slighted you? Would you worry about how others on earth view you? Would you care about whether or not you were given a position of honor or a title? Would you worry about whether or not you got your way in an argument?

 

It does us good if we allow ourselves to view the return of Christ as Jesus paints the picture. He does not tell us to argue about pre or post tribulation raptures. He does not tell us to fight about a view of the millennium. He does not call us to try to fuss about the role of Israel in the final days. What he does call us to do is to realize that he will return, that we will stand before him, that we might meet him today, and that this all should move us to faithful obedience.