11.20.2013 demoss 3 WHAT TRUE FORGIVENESS IS - AND ISN'T

christianity does not make light of sin...
on the contrary it takes the sins against us so seriously that,
to make them right, God gave His own Son
to suffer more than we could ever make anyone suffer
for what they have done to us. john piper, 'future grace'

..it's possible that even after reading the scriptures and examining the concepts we've explored,
you still find forgiveness too painful and difficult to contemplate.
or perhaps, truth be known,
you'd rather keep nursing your wounds and savoring your resentment
than to release the offense.
either way, YOU'RE JUST NOT READY TO FORGIVE.
if that's the case with you,
i feel compelled to share a loving, but earnest, word of warning.

your unwillingness to trust and obey God in this matter
-even if it's more from exhaustion and self preservation
than from rank hardness of heart
-WILL KEEP THE ATMOSPHERE OF YOUR LIFE
CONTAMINATED WITH THE POISON OF BITTERNESS.
you may not be conscious of its noxious effects every day,
but IT WILL CUT OFF THE FLOW OF GOD'S GRACE INTO YOUR LIFE.
satan will use it as a foothold to gain advantage over you,
to point his finger of blame as evidence that you're not all you profess to be
-and that God is not as strong and loving toward you as you'd like to think He is.

this doesn't mean that what's been done to you isn't terrible.
but there is simply no comfort in unforgiveness.
it soothes nothing.
it takes you nowhere.
why go on letting it eat you alive when God's strength
is so near at hand,
so ready to bring you relief?

having said that, i realize that many people
who genuinely want to find themselves on the side of forgiveness
have bought into myths and misconceptions
that have defeated their best attempts at following through.
they have misunderstood what forgiveness should look like, feel like and be like.
as a result, they've found their journey to freedom frustrated.

in this chapter we'll look at four common myths that masquerade as truth in the area of forgiveness.
...if you have fallen pray to any of these misunderstandings about forgiveness,
as the light of His word dispels the fog,
you will be able to walk into God's open air with your head held high,
your arms supported by His awesome strength,
and your heart beating with gratitude for His abundant grace in your life.

THIS DOESN'T FEEL LIKE FORGIVENESS

perhaps you've been misled by this common assumption that
1. FORGIVENESS AND GOOD FEELINGS ALWAYS GO HAND IN HAND

you may have honestly, genuinely trusted God to help you forgive your offender.
you've given Him your heart,
you've laid it all out before Him,
YOU'VE RELEASED THE RIGHT TO PUNISH ONE WHO HURT YOU.
but then the phone rings.
their birthday rolls around.
a situation flares up where they handle a similar set of circumstances in the same insensitive way.

and your emotions start to heat up again.

that's when many people conclude,
'i guess i haven't really forgiven him, because if i had, i wouldn't still feel this way.

but forgiveness can't be proven by our feelings,
any more than it can be motivated or empowered by them.
forgiveness is a choice.
and feelings often aren't.
it's quite possible to forgive someone in totally the right way-God's way
-and still have thoughts flash across your mind that completely contradict the decision you made.

in many ways, forgiveness is not rocket science.
the imperatives of it-though often difficult to concede and comply with-
are fairly straightforward as they're presented to us in the scripture.

but neither is it an exact science.
forgiveness is not like planting tulip bulbs,
where once it's done you never have to think about it again
and everything just comes up pretty and refreshing in the spring.
instead, life goes on and sometimes old feelings turn up when you're not watching,
dug up to be handled and replanted,
left on your doorstep to be dealt with all over again.

but that doesn't negate what you've done.
it simply gives you an opportunity to let Him rule over those emotions,
to stay the course and keep on forgiving-by faith.

CAN'T WE JUST FORGET IT?

many people also live with this myth that -
2. FORGIVENESS MEANS FORGETTING.

they'll point to what the scripture says about the way God has forgiven us,
how He has flung our sins 'as far as the east is from the west. psalm 103.12

but the bible never says that God 'forgets' our sins.
how could a God who knows everything forget anything?
instead, the bible says that He has not 'counted' our sins against us. II corinthians 5.19
He has chosen not to remember them against us hebrews 10.17,
not to bring them back up, never again to accuse or condemn us with them.
He has modeled for us the silent promise of forgiveness.

so the fact that you have not been able to FORGET the offense
doesn't necessarily mean that you haven't  FORGIVEN it.

we may be tempted to think how wonderful it would be if we could just forget all the pain-
how much easier to forgive, if we didn't have to deal with all the memories.
we could all wish that God would just take that divine eraser of His
and in one fell swoop purge from our minds all those negative images of the past. right?

i'm not so sure.
i have discovered that the most stinging memories from the past
can be powerful reminders of the grace and forgiveness of God,
living monuments of His mercy in my life-markers that keep me dependent and trusting.

further, the memory of past hurts can provide a powerful platform for ministry
to other hurting people.

if we had no memory of how it feels for our hearts to be exposed and laid bare,
damaged by the blows of sin and injustice,
how in the world could we ever understand the pain that people around us are going through?
how could we possibly be tenderhearted and compassionate toward them?

and how could we reach out to them with His comfort in any sort of meaningful way
-if we could not identify at least to some measure with suffering's sting?

those memories help us realize how easy it can be for someone to find herself consumed with anger
and sinking in desperation.
they give us the ability to look others in the eye and say,
'i've been there,.
i know.
and i'm telling you, His grace is sufficient for you.

the scripture reminds us that affliction not only allows us to receive deep, rich comfort from God
but gives us a basis from which to minister that comfort to others:

the father of mercies and God of all comfort...
comforts us in all our affliction,
SO THAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO COMFORT those who are in any affliction,
WITH THE COMFORT WITH WHICH WE  ourselves ARE COMFORTED  by God
II corinthians 1.3-4

this is so important.
forgiveness is far more than just a way for us to 'cope' with our own wounds.
the mercy and grace of God and the lessons learned along the way
are intended to extend beyond us and be a means of blessing to others.

what God has invested IN us is not just FOR us.

thank God, of course, that He mercifully choose to keep some things
eternally withdrawn from our memory banks.
but thank Him, too-as He gives you the grace to do so-
that He chooses to leave behind enough to make us useful in ministering to others.

if we could totally forget, we would too easily become
self absorbed and useless.
and deep down, we know it.

FORGIVENESS AS A PROCESS

there's a third myth that keeps many people from experiencing
the reality and blessings of forgiveness in their lives..that

FORGIVENESS REQUIRES A LONG, DRAWN OUT PROCESS
AND CANNOT TAKE PLACE UNTIL HEALING IS COMPLETE.

i have heard people say, " i'm moving toward forgiveness,
or 'i'm in the process of forgiveness
-sometimes even after years of counseling or therapy.
there's no question that for some people,
coming to grips with the awful offenses they've been forced to endure
can be a long and arduous journey.
the road just to get to the place where forgiveness is barely palatable is often a story in itself.

but i'll just say this from experience:
i've watched believers 'working their way' toward forgiveness
for years and years and never getting there.
in fact, i might even go so far as to say that when forgiveness is
seen primarily as a work in progress,
it seldom becomes a work in practice.

the choice to forgive does not have to involve a
long, extended process-
any more than God's forgiveness of us is a
slow moving, wait and see, not till i'm good and ready
series of events and checkpoints.

now the outworking of restoration and reconciliation in a broken relationship
may extend over a period of time,
requiring a lot more in the hard work department
than  one single prayer or decision.
and as you grow in your understanding of the circumstances that took place.
as well as your understanding of God's ways,
the forgiveness in  your heart may well go to deeper levels.

but BY GOD'S GRACE
YOU CAN CHOOSE TO FORGIVE IN A MOMENT OF TIME,
to the level of your understanding at that point.
and though much more may be required of you down the line,
the reality of being released from the prison cell of your own unforgiveness can happen today.
this moment.
and established fact.

some would suggest that forgiveness should take place as the result
and at the tail end of a lengthy healing process.
while it's true that the healing of mind, emotions, heart and relationships
generally takes time and involves a process of growth,
if we wait to forgive until we are fully restored,
we will likely never forgive.

i believe that, as a rule, the POINT of forgiveness
is followed by a PROCESS  of  healing an restoration
-not the other way around.
the willingness to forgive is often the beginning of true healing taking place.
coming to the point of forgiveness
allows us to fully enter into the process of restoration.

just as you were extended God's grace in a moment of time,
you can extend grace to others as a right now expression of your will.
and then, as you mature in Christ, the fruits of forgiveness begin to blossom.
your responses become less quick and reactionary, more kind and gentle.

so although we do indeed make PROGRESS in forgiveness,
it is not a PROCESS that has to be worked up to.
it happens-then it grows on us.

FUTURE FORGIVENESS

 one final myth that needs to be exposed is this that
4. FORGIVENESS SHOULD ALWAYS MAKE THINGS BETTER.

part of being human, made in the image of God,
is the expectation that life should normally follow an upward trend,
getting richer and fuller and more fulfilling along the way.
that's why moviemakers craft stories that build in intensity and grow toward a thrilling climax.
that's why the people who create the rides at amusement  parks
build  their rollercoasters to start slow and finish fast.
that's why concerts and fireworks displays have a 'grand finale'.

but life generally isn't like that in our fallen world.
yes, for believers in Christ, who know that the years we spend on this earth
are but a fraction of our eternal lifetime,
we are assured that there is a forever finale awaiting us in glory.

but in the meantime-if we're going to live at peace with God and our fellowman
-forgiveness is going to have to be a way of life.
as you have been wronged in the past,
so you are certain to face future situations
where you will again be wronged, maligned and treated unfairly.

over and over again in life-
in marriage, with your children, in the workplace, at church, even serving in a ministry
-you will be faced with the same crossroads:
do you forgive or do you harbor resentment and bitterness?

recently in my quiet time, i was meditating on the book of II timothy
-the letter that most scholars agree was the last written by the apostle paul from prison,
shortly before his execution.
even at that point, so late in his life
-after years of faithful service for the Lord-paul found himself dealing with fresh wounds.

fearful of reprisals under nero's repressive regime,
'all who are in asia turned away' from paul. 1.15
then there was 'alexander the coppedrsmith', who had seriously undermind his ministry.
this man cause paul 'great harm' 4.14
and was perhaps gloating over seeing him put away in prison.

there were others who had once been supporters of the gospel
and friends of paul's unique calling and ministry,
but when the cost of friendship had gotten hot, requiring courage to go along with their convictions,
'no one came to stand by me'.
all of them 'deserted me'.
but the apostle's reaction to this kind of stinging disappointment was clear:
'may it not be charged against them. 4.16

how was he able to do it ?
how was he able to forgive..
and to keep on forgiving even new hurts and offenses?

how do you do it when a freshly hired co worker seems to
delight in questioning your capabilities?
how do you do it when your husband's longtime, secret obsession with
online pornography suddenly comes to light,
hitting you full in the face with the utter rejection and betrayal of it?

or perhaps it's something much less severe and much more everyday.
how do you forgive the neighbor whose dog barks half the night
and wakes you up with frustrating regularity?
how do you show mercy to the friend who turned an issue you shared with her in confidence
into a prayer request for her small group?

GETTING IN THE HABIT

i think paul derived this ability from at least three good habit he had honed over the years
-two that are mentioned specifically in this passage in II timothy,
and another that seems to rest just beneath the surface.

1. paul EXERCISED TOTAL CONFIDENCE IN GOD'S POWER
AN HIS ETERNAL PLAN.

he wasn't oblivious to what was happening to him or around him.
he didn't live in blissful denial or even try to 'forget' the things that had been done to him.
instead, he dealt with the blows by letting them marinate in this truth:
'the Lord will rescue me from every evil deed
and bring me safely into His heavenly kingdom' 4.18
he knew that those like alexander who had done him harm,
had more than paul to deal with;
'the Lord will repay him according to his deeds. 4.14

when you are feeling overwhelmed by your inability to cope with the pain you feel,
when your mind is being badgered with clever comebacks you wish you could use on your offender,
when the strain of it all is more than you can bear,
DELIBERATELY cast your cares upon the Lord.
turn your weakness into prayer.
THROW YOURSELF FULLY on the grace of God
and trust Him to handle this in His own way,
in His own time.

2. paul  was MORE CONCERNED ABOUT HIS CALLING THAN HIS COMFORT

he knew that the proclamation of the gospel
-the driving force of his life's work and energies-
was more important than whatever drama was unfolding in his personal life.
he recognized that the Lord's strength was not designed solely for his own benefit,
but 'so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed
and all the gentiles might hear it. 4.17

does God have strength enough for you?
absolutely.
he is able to rescue you 'from the lion's mouth'
and set you free from the suffocating grip of unforgiveness,
just as He was for pau.
but He has more in mind for you than just seeing you happy and contented.
HIS PLAN,
HIS PASSION FOR TRANSFORMING PEOPLE THROUGH THE POWER OF THE GOSPEL
IS YOUR CALLING AS WELL.
AND THE STORY OF YOUR FORGIVENESS WILL BE ONE WAY HE DOES THAT.

3. paul had LEARNED THE SECRET OF FORBEARANCE.

this is not a word we hear a lot today,
but if we will learn how to practice it on a daily basis. ,
it can become one of our greatest weapons in staving off unforgiveness.

to 'forbear' means
to show restraint,
 to be patient in the face of provocation,
to be longsuffering
and willing to put up with people's actions or inactions
-to let things go.

forbearance is actually a by product of love,
the kind of love that 'covers a multitude of sins' I peter 4.8
-or as paul put it so eloquently in I corinthians 13,
a love that 'is not provoked...
does not take into account a wrong suffered...
bears all things,
believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things v5-7

let's look at in real life:
-your husband fails to notice something special you did for him.
-your adult children don't call as often as you'd like
-your boss blames you for something a co worker did
your mother in law says something that hurts your feelings
someone walks right by you at church without saying a word.
-it's  obvious your parents think you're crazy for having another child.
-a motorist talking on his cell phone nearly runs you off the road.

what do you do? you forbear. you LET IT GO.

yes, some offenses need to be confronted and dealt with.
but many others-most of them,l in fact-just need to be overlooked and put away.
(our problem is, we tend to confront the sins we should overlook,
and overlook the sins we should confront!)

the lack of forbearance in our homes and everyday circumstances cause us to exaggerate offenses-
'until a (fly's) becomes as huge as ever was laid by an ostrich' as charles spurgeon put it.
it magnifies tension and intensifies conflict;
it erects walls in relationships,
makes us petty and peevish,
and severs friendships.
i'm convinced that many divorces could be averted if one of both partners
would simply practice the grace of forbearance.
many tensions and misunderstandings in the workplace would vanish
if we would learn to be forbearing with one another.

exercising forbearance in minor, daily matters is important practice and preparation
for extending  forgiveness in the bigger issues that are sure to arise.

when we hear or read the stunning accounts of forgiveness
that happen in the lives of ordinary people who have been thrust into
extraordinarily stressful circumstances.
it's doubtful that they suddenly developed this huge capacity to forgive.
i think it's probably because all along they've been practicing forgiveness and forbearance
in the everyday, spilled milk situations of their lives.

the woman who forgives the man who raped her and left her not only pregnant with his child
but infected with HIV,
yet who says, 'every time we feel the pain, we need to forgive again'-

the man who watched his father shot dead over the few dollars in his wallet,
but who one day shakes that same attacker's hand and declares,
'i forgive you, and it's over'-

the mother who is hit head on by a speeding, unlicensed driver,
killing her two children and leaving her in critical condition,
but whose first words to her husband upon reviving from
a drug induced coma are, 'did you forgive him? -

these heroics don't just happen.
instead, they are almost always borne out in people who knew
what it was like to forgive
long before the stakes became life changing.

and you can be one of those people, too.

..steve saint, the son of one of the five men who were killed
by native residents in a far away south american country,
was confronted with a difficult situation on the return home
of his daughter who, in the midst of a welcome home party
suddenly complained of a headache
and was taken to the hospital.
..he is recounting the story to the author...

i didn't know what was going on, steve said,.
even i just sort of had the idea that if we do what God asks us,
then He's obliged to play by our rules.
i know that isn't true, but it's tempting to believe that.

it was tempting, too, for mincaye-the riend who stood beside steve and ginny at the hospital,
the man who many years before had thrust the murder weapon into nate saint's body.
'who's doing this? he was asking.
why is she dying?

but when the reality of it all began to drape down around them.
this warrior from the amazon jungle
-who at first wanted to defend stephenie from the medical team and the ambulance,
from sights and sounds he couldn't understand
-was the first to give voice to what would become their greatest reassurance.
'this is GOD, he said.
don't you realize God Himself is doing this?

and in that moment, steve shared with me as i wiped away the tears,
while the life of my only daughter, whom i loved dearly with all my heart, was draining away,
grandfather mincaye, the man who killed my father,
put his arms of faith around me
and helped me hold on to that legacy i had received
and pass it on to the next heveration.
we don't always understand, by God has His reasons.

total trust.
coming full circle.
and all because of five brave women (wives of the killed)
who dealt with unspeakable circumstances in God's way
-and whose legacy continues to yield God's kind of results.

who could have imagined the scope of diving purpose
that lay in that original atrocity,
the day the war whoop echoed with death along a small inlet of the ecuadorian jungle?
yet how many have been brought to faith,
or moved to missions,
or inspired to lifelong attitudes of grateful sacrifice
because of five men who lost their lives in such a senseless-senseless?-fashion.

no, we cannot begin to fathom God's purposes,
even when they're happening right around us.
but we can know that He HAS one
and that His desire is to use us as part of its generations long fulfillment.

if we will trust His heart. if we will forgive.

11.19.2013 demoss 2 ANGRY AT GOD

whatever men expect,
they soon come to think they have a right to;
the sense of disappointment can,
with very little skill on our part,
be turned into a sense of injury.

-screwtape to wormwood
the screwtape letters, c.s. lewis

in the matter of drusky versus God-God has won.
that's how the associated press report, dated march 15.1999, started out.

it went on to explain:
'a pennsylvania man's lawsuit naming god as a defendant has been thrown out by a court in syracuse. (ny)
after a longtime battle with his former employer (then called US steel), donald drusky had blamed God
-officially-
for failing to bring him justice as a result of his firing by the company some 30 years earlier.

'defendant God is the sovereign ruler of the universe, the lawsuit read,
and took no corrective action against the leaders of his church and his nation
for their extremely serious wrongs
which ruined the life of donald s. drusky.

according to the news report,
'US district judge norman mordue threw out the case.
mordue ruled that the suit-which also named
former US presidents ronald reagan and george bush,
the major US television networks,
all 50 states,
every single american,
all federal judges
and the 100th through 105th congresses as defendants
-was frivolous.

as ludicrous as all this sounds to rational people,
in a sense drusky's diatribe is different only in degree
from what i hear a lot of people saying these days.

as i read the letters and e mails people send to our ministry
and listen to people share their stories,
one of the recurring themes is: 'I'm angry'.

'angry at my husband.'
'angry at my children.'
'angry at my parents.'
'angry at my pastor.'

and sometimes, after they get through all those layers,
i hear them express something that is really at the heart of the matter:

'I'm angry at God.'

even godly people like gracia burnham are sometimes tempted to direct their resentment toward God.
you may have picked up on it in the last chapter.
in listing the many causes of her plight while being trapped as a hostage in the philippines,
she singled out the people.
she named names.
she saw faces.
then she pointed to a face she couldn't see, yet someone she felt
must somehow be at least partially responsible for her suffering-

God.

it came out in the excerpt i shared from her testimony:
'i even blamed God, she said,
because...well, He's in control of everything, isn't He?

AFTER ALL, IF HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE ALL POWERFUL,
HE COULD HAVE STOPPED THIS.
IF HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE ALL LOVING,
HE COULD HAVE PROTECTED MY HEART
AND SPARED ME THIS PAIN.
BUT HE DIDN'T.
HE TURNED AWAY AND CHOSE NOT TO.
SO HOW CAN I TRUST A GOD LIKE THAT-
A GOD WHO WOULD LET SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN IN MY LIFE?

have you ever said words similar to these-or at least thought them?
have you gotten to the place where being mad at your offender isn't quite enough for you anymore?
in your search for answers and justification,
have you turned instead to wag your finger toward the heavens and let God have it
for treating you the way He has?
or maybe it's not so blatant-more like a nebulous, simmering resentment.

can such feelings and accusations ever be warranted?
does God condone such backtalk from the people He created:
does our relationship with Him include the privilege of being this hones in our expressions?

do we ever have the right to be angry at God?

BELIEVING THE IMPOSSIBLE

bill elliff, who with his wife, holly, has been a longtime friend,
was a grown man before he endured the gut wrenching blow of a parent's betrayal.
up until that time, he would have told you that his childhood years
were almost embarrassingly ideal.
mom and dad were the living portrait of love and commitment.
his dad's service as a pastor and denominational church leader wasn't an act.
their ministry together was one of genuine joy and gratitude
-enough to inspire all three of the boys to become preachers,
and his sister to become a preacher's wife.

in fact, bill was already out of seminary and well into his ministry calling,
musing at times on how gracious God had been in his life,
how little pain and trouble he and his family had been forced to face.

by this time, his dad had stepped away from weekly pulpit duties
and had been providing expertise and oversight to a large group of churches in their denomination.
when he finally approached retirement age,
he had accomplished all his goals and more.
he had lived a full life, with the rewards of his golden years ahead,
ready to be shared with the wife of his youth
-the wife he had been faithful to for more than four decades.

that is, until the rood caved in.

through the harsh intervention of one man,
bill's father was denied a final important ministry assignment THAT HE REALLY DESIRED.
at that point, rather than receiving God's grace to deal  with the disappointment,
he allowed bitterness and unforgiveness to take root in his heart.
in this state, he began to counsel a woman in his office who was struggling in a tough marriage.

then this man, the one man you might easily have said was
the last person on earth you'd ever expect this of,
allowed himself to be lured into an immoral relationship.

bill didn't know this right away, of course.
the evidence of his dad's indiscretion sort of trickled down.
suspicions crystallized into realities that were hard to ignore or escape.
evidence mounted in the face of adamant denials.
finally, when it seemed they simply must know the truth,
his grown siblings went to their parents' home unannounced,
asked the hard, disbelieving question and confirmed the painful truth.

so began a several year roller coaster ride of nauseating dips and turns.
here sat a precious wife and mother, who was dealing 
most personally and painfully with this shameful act of
betrayal and rejection.
yet even in the face of her husband's erratic swings of behavior and perspective,
she remained steadfast in her desire to hand this matter God's way.
she had been wronged, yes.
cruelly, needlessly wronged.
yet she was choosing to let God comfort her heart.
she was choosing to forgive.

for bill, however, everything he had ever known or believed
-about life, about his dad, about his calling, about God
-was being riddled with unanswered questions.
'why would god allow this to happen?
weren't we trying, as a family to serve Him?
why wouldn't God answer our prayers- and answer them NOW?
how could a loving God allow His children to suffer so?
is God always true to His promises? or not?

one day, deep into this seemingly endless ordeal,
bill's mother returned from an everyday errand to find no one at home,
nothing but a carefully placed not on the table.
in the end it had come down to this
-this final, pitiful excuse for a fitting conclusion.
like the last page of a novel you kept hoping would take a turn for the better,
this one single piece of paper gave sad silent expression to everyone's most dreaded thought.

dad was gone.
with the other woman.
and he wasn't coming back.

HOW LONG, O LORD?

...i want to explore this quite natural reaction to pain and distress,
this inclination to become angry and displeased with God when we are harmed or injured by others.

i have come to believe that,
at one level,
all bitterness is ultimately directed toward God.
it may be cloaked in anger toward a particular person or group of people
who have wronged us,
but it actually extends far beyond them, far above them.

we all seem to know intuitively that God's power is great enough to deal with our problems
-if He wanted to.

so when woundedness turns to bitterness-when unforgiven is
given enough room, time and oxygen to take on a life of its own
-the prospect of a powerful God who doesn't seem to care enough about us
to step into our situation is troubling to us.
it goes against everything we've been led to believe about
His goodness and fairness,
everything we've painted in our minds about
 an even handed God who always squares things in the end.

we even seem to be given a measure of permission to feel this way
as we read the impassioned cries and prayers of the psalms.
you don't need a concordance to find them.
the emotional transparency of these verses spills from nearly every turn of the page.

how long, O Lord?
will You forget me forever?
how long will You hide Your face from me?...
how long shall my enemy be exalted over me> psalm 13.1-2

all this has come upon us,
though we have not forgotten You,
and we have not been false to Your covenant.
our heart has not turned back,
nor have our steps departed from Your way;
yet You have broken us in the place of jackals
and covered us with the shadow of death.
awake! why are You sleeping, O Lord?
rouse Yourself! do not reject us forever!
why do You hide your face?
why do you forget our affliction and oppression? psalm 44.17-9;23-4

job, too, was not afraid at times to take the gloves off in
dealing with God's seeming injustice:

i would speak to the Almighty,
and i desire to argue my case with God...
why do You hide Your face
and count me as Your enemy? job 13.3;24

HOW FAR IS TOO FAR?

can we be honest with God? absolutely.

are we not encouraged to have a righteous anger against sin,
including the sins that have been committed against us?
yes, we are.

but there is a point where our honest questions directed toward God
cross the line
and become an expression of a proud heart.
insubordinate.
demanding.

the word cautions us against letting even righteous anger escalate into sin:
be angry and do not sin.  psalm 4.4
instead the psalmist exhorts us to ponder these things
'in your own hearts on your beds, and be silent.
offer right sacrifices and put your trust in the Lord.  v4-5

God is God. we are not.

his is in many respects the basis for our relationship with Him.
beyond that, He loves you, cherishes YOU-
and is doing something in the midst of this horrendous situation that might be hard to believe
even if He wrote it across the heavens in clouds and smoke.

in His inscrutable wisdom and love,
He is able to use even the most agonizing circumstances that touch your life in this fallen world
to refine and purify you,
to make you fruitful
and to magnify His grace and glory through your life.
i know it's sometimes hard to believe.
i know you may not see how you can possibly continue with this pain
another week, another day, another hour.

but unleashed anger toward God comes, i believe,
from having a faulty view of Him,
from thinking that He is flippantly ignoring you,
that He couldn't care less what you're going through.

the truth is, HE IS GOING THROUGH IT WITH YOU
AND FOR YOU.
i love that verse in isaiah that so tenderly describes God's dealings with the children of israel
(even when they were reaping the consequences of their own sinful choices):
'in all their suffering, He suffered' 63.9
in all your suffering, He suffers.

He is with you right in the midst of it.
helping you.
loving you.
hurting with you.
driving you back to Him.,
drawing you closer in,
making you more dependent upon His grace and power.

as you get to know and trust His heart,
you will be able to face the cross-
the way Christ faced it from the haunting shadows of gethsemane
-and still say, even through your tears,
'not My will, but Yours be done.

WONDER-WHYS AND WHAT-IFS

ruth's mother in law, naomi, is a classic biblical example of his very dilemma.

have you ever watched your mate make a seriously unwise decision,
only to discover over time that YOU  were the one
who would suffer the harshest consequences for it?
have you been the one to pay the most, it seems for someone else's mistake?

you can relate, then, to the fertile ground for bitterness in naomi's life.

during a time of famine in their hometown of bethlehem,
her husband, elimelech, made a shortsighted decision
for their family to go live 'for a while' in moab,
just long enough for the crisis to let up. ruth 1.1
unfortunately 'a while' turned into many years.
and before their plans of going back home again could be realized, elimelech died.

to make naomi's homecoming even more unlikely,
to drive her unwanted roots even deeper into pagan soil,
here two sons chose to marry moabite women.
but in the ensuing years tragedy struck again...and again...
as both her boys died, leaving their young wives without husbands.

and naomi without a family.

in the well known story of her return to bethlehem with her daughter in law ruth,
the bible records the hometown reaction to this one who had gone away with her husband seeking fullness
but had come back even emptier than before-not just empty in body now but empty in soul.

is this naomi? they asked each other.
was this the same woman who perhaps at one time
had been so pleasant and happy,
so vibrant and contented with her life as a wife and mother...
before the days when her had led her away from everything familiar to her,
chasing a foolhardy scheme to fix his family's problems?
in the end-no matter how complicit she may have been in their relocation plans
-she felt that his unwise decision had ruined her.
as far as she was concerned,
life was over.

'do not call me naomi, she said to them -a name which means 'pleasant'.
instead, 'call me mara (bitter), for the ALMIGHTY
has dealt very bitterly with me.
i went away full,
and THE LORD  has brought me back empty.
why call me naomi, when THE LORD has testified against me
and THE ALMIGHTY has brought calamity upon me? ruth 1.20-1

do you see how is getting the blame for her calamity?
naomi and elimelech had made a choice.
if all had gone well, they would probably have patted each other firmly on the back
for being sharp enough to outsmart the elements and to read their situation so correctly.

but all had NOT gone well.
and God was taking the fall.

have you been there?
have you found yourself the victim of your own poor choices
or perhaps the poor choices of others?
but instead of taking responsibility for them
or choosing to forgive the one who misled or mistreated you,
your ultimate response has been anger toward God
for letting this turn of events occur without warning you,
without bailing you out,
without stepping in and stopping it while there was still time to avoid disaster?

it's at this point that some would even suggest a need to 'forgive God'
-as though He had erred and was in need of pardon.
US?

FORGIVE GOD?

think about it.
even if said by a heart not meaning to offend or overstep,
the very idea borders on outright blasphemy.
to think we have that kind of power over the righteous sovereign God
is to demean His name and inflate our importance.

no, God doesn't need forgiveness from us . He is never guilty of making mistakes
in fact, the thing you may think is a cruel injustice on His part may actually turn out to be
the best thing that ever happened to you.
it can at least, we know-by the Father's all wise grace-
be transformed for your good, for His glory, and for the advance of His eternal kingdom.

so i ask you to look again into the heart of God
and to see Someone who has a deeper, more loving plan for your life-
even in the midst of this painful turmoil-
than you could ever figure out on your own.
you can be confident that if you will choose to submit your way to Him through this trial of faith,
His presence and provision will be sufficient for you.
He will use this disappointment, this heartbreak, this unspeakable circumstance
to teach you, train you and fulfill His holy, eternal purposes for your life.

the alternative-anger with God-can do nothing but make things worse
and further delay your healing.

WHAT DO YOU SAY?

naomi didn't get that.
even the word she used for God in her outburst
-El Shaddai, 'the Almighty', the All sufficient One'
merely accentuated the depths of her anger and disillusionment.
sure, you folks may call Him Almighty, All Sufficient, Jehova
-all those high sounding names you fool yourself into believing-but not me.
He certainly hasn't lived up to His name in my life.

a friend told me the other day about a recent conversation with her sister
who has experienced some significant losses-
and is sounding a lot like naomi.
a professing christian, she feels God has turned His back on her
and has failed to be who she thought He was;
so she is living her own life, independent of God
and making decisions that are clearly contrary to His word.
though she doesn't acknowledge it,
here anger and bitterness have been turned toward God.

what about you?
do you feel that God has not lived up to His name in your life?
does it seem that He has been one thing in the sermons and the sunday school lessons
but quite another when you needed Him the most?

listen to yourself.
what are you saying about Him?
what is your life communicating to others about Him?

all naomi could do was talk about how awful God had been to her.
but when people hear you speak His name,
or describe His character,
or resent the circumstances that have come into your life
-what are they led to believe about Him?

..john piper on news of prostate cancer..
'this news has, of course, been good for me
the most dangerous thing in the world is the sin of self reliance and the stupor of worldliness.
the news of cancer has a wonderfully blasting effect on both.
i thank god for that.
the times with Christ in these days have been unusually sweet...

..naomi's perspective was so different.

no question that she had suffered a great deal .
she had been forced to endure a lot of things that were probably not her fault.
but instead of running to God as her refuge,
she responded to Him in bitterness.
and the evidence was all over her face.

...i've seen over and over again the damage that 'naomis' can do
-in a marriage, in a church, in a workplace, in a ministry, in a friendship, in a family.
their bitterness, their anger toward God and others, is toxic,
though they are often the last to recognize both their bitterness and the effect they have on others.
in their attempts to salve their wounds or to gain sympathy and understanding,
they contaminate their corner of the world.

our anger toward God will inevitably become a poison that spreads far beyond our own hearts,
just as it did with naomi.
what seems so intensely personal becomes impossible to keep to ourselves.
believe me, it shows.

UNFULFILLED LONGINGS

perhaps your anger with God stems from a dream He hasn't allowed you to realize-
a promotion that went to someone else less deserving,
a financial setback that's forcing you to live
far below the standard of living you were once accustomed to.

perhaps your anger with God comes from being single in a married world.

childlessness, too, can be a source of anger against God.
why would He taunt any of us in this way,
at such a vulnerable part of our hearts and lives?
and yet we must learn how to accept what we receive-or don't receive from Him.
we must learn how to bow before His sovereignty.

it comes down to a choice:
blame God and rail against Him (first, in your heart)
for His capricious crueltycomplaining and insiting on getting our way.
or trust that He knows what He's doing,
that He is working in us to both purify and prepare us for lives of greater service and usefulness,
and that He is employing one of His greatest teachers-time-
in order to enlarge our hearts and expand our vision.

this is the hard work of isaiah 26.3,
the submissive discipline of keeping our minds 'stayed' on the Lord,
trusting Him in ways we cannot see of understand,
in places where we must learn to be content with mystery.

airline pilots have to learn how to read their instruments-
and to trust those instruments.
when they get into a storm or white out conditions,
they can get disoriented;
their sense of direction gets turned around and can easily mislead them
and cause them to make decisions that would endanger lives.
in those situations, they have to make a conscious choice to believe the instruments,
rather than their instincts or their feelings.

for believers, the word of God is our instrument panel.
there will be points in our lives when,
in the midst of  'white out conditions',
our feeling will betray us and contradict His word-
insisting God doesn't care or that He's made a mistake.
at that point, we dare not rely on our feelings but must choose to trust
that what the Instrument tells us is true.

we are born as people ruled by our emotions and feelings.
but we 'did not come to know Christ that way'. ephesians 4.20
part of being transformed into a new creation means that our feelings
no longer get full, unquestioned access to our internal 'driver's seat'.

in this way, then, the lines that separate christians and non christians begin to diverge.
no wonder the unbeliever has little choice but to be angry with God when life mistreats him.
his emotional outbreak has nothing bigger and more persuasive to check it,
no steady, objective instrument from which to gain perspective and to direct his response.

but by our redemption-by being forgiven-we are empowered by His grace
to submerge our hot, emotional, human anger
beneath a legitimate trust in God's loving, eternal purposes for our lives.

the longer i live under God's providence,
the more readily i can trust Him
when it comes to my unfulfilled longings
and life's unsloved mysteries.
the more joyfully i am able to love and worship Him
and to be satisfied with that which He supplies.
and the more patiently i can wait for that day
when faith will be sight and all that which made no sense to my limited frame of reference
will be made clear.

NEAR DEATH FORGIVENESS

humanly speaking, bill elliff's mom had every reason to allow
a root of bitterness to spring up in her heart,
after the way her husband had sinned against her.
then, as if she hadn't already suffered enough,
no more than a year after her husband left home.
she contracted alzheimer's.
another possible reason to be angry at God.

i can't imagine what that year had really been like for her. (perhaps you can.)
but i can imagine that it would bave been easier now than ever
to resent what here husband's heartless actions had brought on
-being forced to endure the slow,fearsome loss of her bearings and faculties
without a loving, supportive husband to be there for her,
to catch her when she was falling,
to lower her risk of embarrassment,
to keep her growing limitations from being quite so obvious and exposed for all the world to see.

her marriage was gone.
her health was going next.
what was left to trust God about?

one day bill let himself into her nearby apartment,
which the family had rented so he and his sister could keep a closer eye on her.
it was quiet.
too quiet.
and as he stepped into her room, he could tell something was wrong.

his mother was barely alive.
sweeping her into his arms, bill rushed her to the nearest hospital,
where doctors confirmed that she had suffered a cerebral hemorrhage.
before the afternoon was out, she had slipped into a coma;
the doctors held out little hope that she would live through the weekend.

yet a week later, she unexpectedly emerged from unconsciousness,
uttering words that were unintelligible at first, forcing bill and his sister to strain to make them out.
only one word was clear enough to be understood and she repeated it three times.

forgive...forgive...forgive.

the next day, as her family gathered around her bed
-sometimes singing, sometimes praying, sometimes reading scripture
or just sharing memories with their mom,
who was now aware of what was going on-the phone rang.

it was bill's dad.

the family put the receiver to their mother's ear...
and listened as she strained to put voice to her words of forgiveness and love,
the parting gifts of grace to this man
who had wounded her heart but could not steal her trust in a gracious and good God.
the next morning, as a brief window of lucidity opened
for her to express what her whole being was feeling,
she said to her son,
'billy, isn't it great about dad calling?
why, this is what we've been praying for, that he would return to the Lord!

later that night, the curtain of unconsciousness fell around her face once again.
a few days before her homegoing, her entire family gathered one last time around her bed-
her sons, her daughter, their spouses, her grandchildren...

and her husband.

bill's mom had realized early on in this ordeal that whe would never be remarried to her longtime mate.
she knew her life would never be the same, ever again.
but as she struggled with her emotions
and with the maddening effects of her unexpected, late in life trauma,
whe came to a point of surrender where she told the Lord,
'all i want, Father is for You to receive glory.

she could have chosen anger. that would have been only natural.
she could have shut God out and had no more use for what He offered.
she probably had friends who would have agreed.

instead, she gave herself to His purposes and  was able to see them come to pass.

what about you?
are you in a place every bit as treacherous and untenable
as bill and his siblings and mom were?
have you wanted to scream your anger toward God through clenched teeth,
banging on the doors of heaven that seem coldly closed to your heart and life?

hear God asking the question He twice asked of His resentful prophet:
do you do well to be angry? jonah 4.4,9

He knows your heart, dear one.
he has not left you alone.
and by trusting in His sovereign wisdom, goodness and love,
you, too, may one day see the sweet restoration of everything you've prayed for.

but even if not, you will have found a refuge in His will and in His care
-a blessed place that is reached only by those who trust His heart
-and keep trusting it even when the darkness closes in around them.

11.17.2013 choosing FORGIVENESS by nancy leigh demoss: THE ART OF FORGIVENESS

the glory of christianity is to conquer by forgiveness -william blake

but how?

we've spent the first half ..considering some of the major whys of forgiveness (F).
bug like everything else in the christian life, forgiving others is much more than
what-fors and how-comes.
OURS IS AN ACTIVE FAITH.
it is made alive and appealing only when our nouns (forgiveness) turn into verbs. (forgive)

on the other side of 'choosing forgiveness' is the kind of life
god intended for you when He sent His Son to die for your sin -
the freedom to bless others,
to walk unhindered by bitterness and resentment,
to relate confidently with God and with people around you
and most important to be a living, walking display of the gospel and grace of Christ.

but how do you get there?
how do you come to the place where forgiveness can do its healing work,
both in you and in your offender?

how do you become like the woman who wrote to share,
'i have chosen to forgive my husband
for the sexual relationship he had with his girlfriend before we met.
i've been holding on to this hurt for four years.
i'm excited now to embrace him and tell him he has been released.

how do you find freedom from an issue that's been seething and simmering
for a good part of your lifetime,
like the person who told me,
'the Lord had me release a prisoner that i've held captive for over 16 years.
now God can restore the years that the locusts have eaten.'

how do you overcome an offense so entangled in your heart
that it's shaped the person you are and the way you react to all of life,
like the woman who said,
'i was molested by my brothers and father for as long as i could remember until i was 16.
this led to years of letting men abuse my body.
i never knew how to have a healthy relationship with men.
i have held this hatred for so long in my heart.
but i am choosing to release it and give it to God.

i've seen the Lord give people grace to forgive in situations that are almost beyond belief.

...WHO DID IT?
i want to suggest three practical steps you can take
-both to accelerate and cement your forgiveness of others.
i don't mean to suggest that forgiveness is easy or to reduce it to a three step formula.
i realize that painful memories, emotions and relationships
may all be involved and may require further healing.

but i have found these steps helpful for jump starting that process
and setting people on the journey to freedom.

as a starting place in the pathway of forgiveness,
ONE, IDENTIFY THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE WRONGED YOU
AND THE WAY(S) THEY HAVE SINNED AGAINST YOU.
(note: would another list identifying the people i have sinned against and how be in order...?)

here's a simple way to do that:
take a blank sheet of paper and draw two lines from top to bottom,
forming three even columns down the page.
..in the left column, write the names of all those who have sinned against you,
anyone with whom you still have unresolved issues of the heart.

you know who they are. mother, father, stepparent, brother, sister, former employer, former pastor,
neighbor, son or daughter, ex mate-make the list.

then in the middle column-next to the names you've just listed
-write out the specific offense(s) each one has committed against you.
how did they wrong you? be specific.

wait, you may wonder, what's the point of bringing all this stuff back up again?
i thought we were supposed to 'forgive and forget', to bury these things.
now you're telling me to list it all!

it's important to realize that forgiveness does not mean pretending that the offence never happened.
that's not honest.
that's denial.
true forgiveness is not about mind games and dream worlds
-it's not about escaping from reality.
it's about FACING reality and dealing with it god's way.

these things that others did to you were wrong.
they have hurt you.
and God does not want you to run AWAY from your pain
but to run TO HIM in the MIDST of your pain
-to fly head-on into the full fury of it,
to face it,
to let Him meet you right where it hurts
and give you the grace to be set free from any bondage to that hurt.

but one important disclaimer here:
in encouraging you to list the ways others have sinned against you,
i am NOT suggesting that you should try dredging up
things from your past that you have no memory of, as some would counsel.
God is able-and sometimes chooses-to erase painful memories from our minds
there is no value-in fact, i think much harm can be done
-in conjuring up memories that God may have mercifully removed.

if there's someone you need to forgive,
you probably won't need to go hunting to know who it is and why.
deal with the issues you know need to be dealt with,
the ones that are clear in your mind
and trust the Lord to bring to mind any other offenses you may need to forgive.

write down any inflicted wounds from the past or present that you are consciously aware of.
don't hide from these.
see them for the genuine sins they are.

CLEAR ABOUT THIS?

now, some would perhaps stop right here.
they would think that the mere process of naming those
who have wounded you would be healing enough.
they might even suggest that you burn this list in the fireplace,
symbolically letting all the pain and suffering go up in smoke.

but i believe the bible leads us to do something else,
something deeper, something more healing and holy-
TWO, MAKE SURE YOUR CONSCIENCE IS CLEAR
TOWARD EACH OF THE INDIVIDUALS ON YOUR LIST.

that's what the third column on your paper is for.
ask yourself, 'HOW HAVE I RESPONDED TO THIS PERSON?
then record your answer.
-have you blessed them? loved them? prayed for them? forgiven them?

or would it be more honest to say that you have
withheld love from them, resented them and been angry with them?

have you given negative reports about that person who painted you in a bad light to your friends?
have you subtly retaliated against the in law or the sibling who has made your life difficult
by giving them the silent treatment
-disengaging from the relationship,
rather than pressing through to love them?

you can't really forgive until yhour conscience is clear toward those who have sinned against you,
until you've let god fashion His love in your heart toward those who have failed you.

the truth is that you're not responsible for what goes in that middle column
(assuming their offense wasn't in response to your sin against them!
you didn't ask for it,
didn't invite it,
don't deserve it.
but you ARE responsible
-solely and fully responsible
-for what goes in the third column.

and if your response has not been Christlike,
then you need to go back to that person
and seek his or her forgiveness
for the way you've sinned against them.*

*clearly, there are some situations where it would not be appropriate
to go back and establish contact with an offender.
if you are unsure, i would encourage you
to seek godly counsel from your pastor or another mature believer.

again, this line of thinking sometimes draws a knee jerk (and quite understandable) reaction:
'wait a minute!
this person sinned against ME!
and now you're saying i've got to go ask HIM  for forgive ME for what i did to him?!

yes.

perhaps, of course, you've honestly done nothing wrong in your heart toward this person.
you haven't wanted revenge.
you haven't talked about here behind her back.
you haven't rolled your eyes at him when he says he's sorry.

i hope that's the case.  but it's usually not.

more often than not, the OFFENDED becomes an OFFENDER
in his response to the offense.
in the mind of the one who has been offended,
that response may be completely justified:
HE DESERVES IT...IT'S HIS FAULT, NOT MINE...

regardless of what may have provoked our response,
if we have sinned against a spouse, a parent, a friend, an old acquaintance, an authority figure
-whomever-we need to ask their forgiveness just as if we were the one
who started this whole thing in the first place.
we need to take responsibility for our sinful response.

well, you acknowledge, i may have been responsible for 5 PERCENT
of what happened to break up our marriage.
but 95 PERCENT OR MORE  of it was his fault!

okay,
then assume 100 percent responsibility for your '5 percent' and ask forgiveness.

you nay find, of course, as you allow God to search your heart
that the percentages are really not quite as skewed as you've
been leading yourself to believe.
granted, there are situations where we can be totally innocent of all guilt,
where we did little or absolutely nothing at all to bring this about,
situations where we've continued to forgive and move on
without holding a grudge.

but for the most part, we're quick to overlook our share of blame
-just as quick as the other person is.
that usually leaves a lot of unclaimed responsibility lying around,
where it can keep on spreading its poison, perpetuation the damage.

in the sermon on the mount, Jesus reminds us that it's a lot easier to see the failures in others' lives\
than it is to see our own needs.
we tend to look at everyone else's sins with a microscope,
while looking at our own with a telescope!

Jesus emphasizes the importance of dealing with our own sins
before we try to deal with onters' failures.

'why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye,
but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?
or how can you day to your brother,
'let me take the speck out of your eye',
when there is the log in your own eye?
you hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye,
and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. matthew 7.3-5

this isn't to minimize what your 'brother' may have done.
it's just that it's hard to be objective about HIS sin, or effective at helping him get rid of it,
if you haven't confessed your sin.
not to speak of being hypocritical.
so be honest: has someone else's sin
begotten sin in your own life:
then confess it.
to them, if it's possible and appropriate.
not in a way that excuses you,
not in a way that blames them for pushing you to it,
not in a way that leads you into even more sin by stirring up your anger against them.

God is saying, 'you take responsibility for your part.
have you?

if not humble yourself.
go and seek forgiveness.
be sure your conscience is clear.

YOUR CHOICE

once you've identified those people who have wronged you,
once your conscience is clear with the Lord and with those individuals
-you've sought forgiveness for anything you've done to them,
either in contributing to what happened
or reacting to them with sinful attitudes and behaviors
-it's time to take the next-and what may be the hardest-step in your journey.

THREE. CHOOSE FOR FULLY FORGIVE EVERY PERSON
WHO HAS SINNED AGAINST YOU.

this is where the proverbial rubber meets the road.
this is where all the tender and wounded parts of your emotions
may cry out in self protection and protest.
and this is where the Enemy will work hard to keep you from going all the way with God
and doing what you know you need to do.

but THIS IS WHERE YOU HAVE TO GO IF YOU WANT TO BE FREE.

CHOOSE TO FORGIVE EACH INDIVIDUAL(OR GROUP)
WHO HAS SINNED AGAINST YOU.
 clear their record.
press the delete button.
release them from your custody.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO FEEL LIKE IT.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO WANT TO.
but if you want to be an obedient child of God, you've got to forgive.

chances are, when you started this book, when God put it on your heart-again-
to deal with this issue that's been forefront and center in your life for so many years,
you knew we were going to get here eventually.
there's just no detour around this point in the journey to freedom in Christ.

IF YOU HOLD A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G AGAINST ANYONE, FORGIVE HIM. mark 11.25

but what if they haven't asked for forgiveness?
what if they don't think they did anything wrong?

well, sadly, their unwillingness to repent will keep them from receiving God's forgiveness
(the forgiveness that matters most)
and from having a right relationship with Him.
and it will limit their capacity to have a fully restored relationship with you and others.

but though that person's hardness will affect his well being and his relationships
until he faces and deals with his sin,
though it may keep him in bondage,
no one can force YOU to be bound as a prisoner in your own heart
-not as long as you take the bold step to forgive.
that is a choice you can and must make,
regardless of where the other person is in their journey.

as you respond to the Lord in this matter,
BE SURE NOT TO STOP SHORT
OF ACTUALLY FORGIVING YOUR OFFENDERS.
i've heard sincere, well meaning people pray,
'Lord, please HELP ME TO FORGIVE this person'
i've heard others say,
'i know i need to forgive him...'
i don't doubt their sincerity, BUT THAT'S NOT ENOUGH.
don't just ask God for help;
don't just talk about your need to forgive.
go all the way.
say, 'Lord, by Your grace and in obedience to You,
i CHOOSE  to forgive-
to clear their record
to press the delete button
to release the offender
to let the offense go.
i DO forgive!

FORGIVE TERRORISTS?

gracia burnham and her husband, martin,
made that choice under circumstances that most would have considered unforgivable.

abducted by a philippine terrorist group while on a brief break from their missionary responsibilities,
this couple endured more than a year of torture, want and abuse,
being pushed and shoved in pointless circles through the tangles of a tropical jungle.
in june 2002, when the national military attempted a rescue of the hostages,
gracia escaped, wounded by freed.
martin was killed in the firefight.

after their whole long ordeal together, gracia had to walk out of the jungle alone.

in her poignant telling of their story...'in the presence of my enemies...
she takes us back through some of the brutal realities of hostage life,
nightmarish scenes it's hard to imagine anyone surviving.

the maddening confinement of being chained to a tree for hours,
sleeping straight up, forced to beg for daily needs.

the pain of being wracked with incessant diarrhea,
heightened by the indignity of having no place to retreat in private,
no means of cleaning herself,
and no escape from the unsanitary conditions that only worsened the disease.

the exhaustion of being strapped down with 50 pound loads of gear
 to walk miles over rugged ground, with precious little on the outside to shield away the elements
and even less in their stomachs to sustain their weak, weary bodies.

torture.

and when not mortally afraid-anger.

as martin and i squatted around the cooking fire waiting for our portion,
we would carefully watch the server pile rice on other plates,
but then give us only two thirds of a cupful,
solely because we were non filipino and non muslim.
i wanted to scream.

yet even in the screeching, relentless jungle,
even with heavily armed captors laughing and poking fun
-men who had no right to be so callously, so coldheartedly standing between gracia and home,
between gracia and her children, between gracia and a warm bath or a home cooked meal
-even in these extreme conditions,
God was working in gracia's heart.

'..i found that as long as i blamed the abu sayyaf (the group holding them hostage),
my heart remained in turmoil.
i blamed the terrorists
i blamed the philippine military for their ineptness
i blamed the american government for not waving some magic wand to free us
i even blamed God because...
well,
He's in control of everything, isn't He?

but gradually her perspective began to change:
' began to realize that my resentment wasn't serving any useful purpose...
anger in the face of trauma is understandable.
but that doesn't make it productive...
the alternative, of course, was to forgive,
even without the benefit of an apology from the offender.
i could CHOOSE to forgive, all by myself.

and as she forgave, God did again what He does so well.
her anger cooled down.
the hurt began easing away.

but then a new day would dawn, she admits, and a new injustice would erupt.
i would be faced with a fresh need to forgive.
this was a conscious decision i would have to make and remake as time went by.
in fact, it became a pattern.
and therein lay a path back to self control and composure.

i did not pray, 'God help me forgive, she recalls.
to do so would have been to dodge my own responsibility...
the task was squarely mine, although ONCE I CHOSE TO OBEY,
GOD CERTAINLY GAVE ME THE STRENGTH TO DO SO.

gracia is safely back home now in a small kansas town,
raising here three children,
living a life that's more in line with what we can relate to and understand.
her battles today aren't the rigors of hostage survival
but the everyday trauma of a kid who keeps forgetting to take the trash out to the curb,
as friend who makes a derogatory wisecrack,
some family member who says something unkind.

but we would tell you: the same forgiveness model applies.

we identify the sin.
we clear our conscience toward the offender.
we choose-yes, Lord, we choose-to forgive.

FOR BETTER AND THE WORST

do you still think you just can't do it?
do you think your situation is just too hard?

several years ago, i watched a dear friend go through deep waters in this whole matter of forgiveness
-not just once, but again and again and again.
i vividly recall the day her husband of 23 years confessed to her
that he had been involved in a sexual affair with another woman for 6 months.

that part-the seer fact that he had broken their wedding vows-was bad enough.
but to add salt to the wound,
he wasn't sure if he was ready to give it up or what he was going to do about it.

things went on pretty much the same way for more than a year.
he would tell me the affair was over, she wrote recently as she rehearsed the story,
but all along he still had it going.
he actually showed no evidence of true brokenness and grief over his sin
and continued in it, sometimes almost flaunting it in my face.
this hurt me and our children more than i could ever describe.

but somehow, God gave this brokenhearted wife the grace to cling to the Lord,
to forgive her wayward husband
and to keep loving him faithfully,
even in the midst of her intense pain with his apparent lack of sorrow over his sin.

i didn't FEEL forgiving at first, she said.
my initial reaction was extreme anger, then great hurt.
but i remember that first night after finding out about the affair,
i fell on my face before God with an open bible and poured out my heart to Him.

i did not understand why God would allow this to happen to me,
but i did know that it had to pass through His loving hands to get to me
and that He wanted to use it for good in some way and for His ultimate glory.

I CHOSE TO FORGIVE MY HUSBAND THAT NIGHT,
even though he had not asked me for it,
and though i was trembling all over and almost numb with pain.
i could only think of Christ on the cross and
how He asked His Father to forgive those who were killing Him.

so was that the end of it?
once she chose to forgive, did their home become a happy place again,
where everyone interacted freely and looked forward to game night on fridays?

no. 'over those next 13 months, there were many more times when i would be devastated
by something my husband did or said in relation to the affair,
yet God continued to enable me to show him forgiveness
(note: what did that 'look/feel like' to him i wonder? ...like he NEVER sinned...)
even when he was still living in sin.

i could never 'work up' forgiveness like that.
i am weak and sinful,
and i realized during those tough times
that God was pouring His grace out on me to give me the ability to forgive.

in the midst of this painful process, as my friend chose the pathway of forgiveness,
she experienced the presence and power of God in an extraordinary way:
something amazing happened in my life as i continued to forgive my husband.
God gave me such freedom and joy in the midst of the pain i was experiencing.
somehow God let me see the whole experience,
not as something to despise, but as a GIFT TO EMBRACE.

there's no way, humanly speaking, to explain it.
God truly allowed me to rejoice in my suffering
and to see it as an opportunity to suffer
in a very small way as He had when He was rejected.

these are not the word of a bible teacher dealing with theory.
this is the testimony of a woman who has been there,
who knows what it feels like, what it costs, what it means
...a woman whose faith has been tried in the furnace of affliction and has come forth as gold.

in time, God mercifully brought her husband to genuine repentance
and graciously restored his broken life and their marriage
-something i am convinced never would have happened apart
from the willingness of this wounded wife to forgive (and keep on forgiving)
-long before she would see the outcome
or had any assurance that his heart would ever be changed.

here's how she concluded her written testimony:

'when we choose to forgive others,
even when they are not broken themselves,
God pours out freedom, grace, peace, joy, love
-and even forgiveness itself into our hearts.
it takes your breath away when you experience it yourself.
IT TAKES YOU TO DEPTHS WITH GOD
THAT YOU NEVER COULD HAVE REACHED
EXCEPT THROUGH THIS MYSTERIOUS PATH.

wow.

do you realize what that means?
whatever you are going through,
however great or small
the wrong that has been done to you,
the choice to forgive could mean your most precious days with the Lord
are right in front of you.

yes forgiveness is supernatural.
yes, it's something only God can do.
(note: is it the same for every other thing He commands me to do?)
yes, it is far beyond our flesh and blood ability.
but if you are a child of God, you have been infused with the same power
that He 'worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dad' ephesians 1.20
-think of that!
that means you have His limitless power within you
-supernatural ability to extend forgiveness for 'unforgivable' offences.
by His enabling power, you can forgive others with the very grace and forgiveness
that you have received from God for YOUR sins.

so choose it!
do it!
don't wait to feel like it or to figure out how it will all work out.
ultimately, forgiveness is not an emotion.
it is an act of your will-
and act of faith.
don't harbor that bitterness for even one more day.

your issue may be a monumental one like some of those you've read in this book-or worse.
or it may be something that seems insignificant by comparison-
so minor that you may have convinced yourself its not such a big deal
-that it's okay to continue on with this simmering resentment.

whether the offense is so large that you think you CAN'T forgive,
either way,
you'll stay in prison until you release it
into the cleansing stream of God's fathomless mercy and
LET.....IT......GO!

this is His will for you in Christ Jesus.
and you can chose to TAKE HOLD OF IT!

if you've still not taken that plunge into the ocean of His forgiveness,
cry out to Him right now:
Oh,God, for Jesus' sake-as You have forgiven me,
i choose to forgive him.
i choose to forgive her.
i choose to forgive EACH person who has sinned against me.

I CHOOSE TO FORGIVE!

11.13.2013 ARE THERE ANY ERRORS IN THE BIBLE?

taken from 'the new evidence that demands a verdict' by josh mcdowell p333f

this is all about whether or not we can trust that the bible is God speaking directly to us, whether the bible is the most objective means to know what God wants, whether we can trust it...actually whether we can trust God...can come to know Him on a personal level and come to have an intimate personal relationship between Him and ourselves. my prayer is that you would find what i have found....all of the above PLUS the realization that truly knowing Him is the same as surrendering yourself, your very life and everything you have, hope and desire, to God...to spend all your being on doing what He says to do in this book.
far from a historical book about things that, mostly, happened to ancient people,

(primarily the jews, as the one people directly chosen by God to be His people..ie. a beautiful picture of what He desires..that you would be His son and, so becoming, join others who He has made his children to show the world what God can do in the lives of a person/group of people who have become His own possession!)

and how God sent His Son, Jesus Christ...God Himself in human flesh, to make a way for persons from every tribe, tongue, nation and people, to be His. so it is really, at core, a REVELATION (God revealing who He is) to every person He created. but much more than that it is His way of revealing to every person their deep rebellion against and rejection of Him...but much more than that it is the revelation of how He wants each of us to live our lives here...starting with a growing horror at our the true nature of our heart (which He reveals is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked...who can know it!) leading to a crying out for Him to change us and make us to
not only come to want to
but to actually
love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength.
what does that look like?
Jesus said it this way. 'if you love Me KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS'. john 14.15
if you are not keeping/agonizing in prayer that He would help you keep what He commands here.
..chances are you are right now, every minute you are alive here, a nanosecond away from
eternal hell.
 ...so at the ultimate level this book is a 'lifesaver' of sorts thrown to you and i to see if we will come/be brought to the place where we
DO what God says
rather than read or ignore a book or even 'HEAR' a (so called) message from a (so called) God
who (supposedly) holds our eternal destiny in the palm of His hand.
He leaves each of us the choice. may i, may you, make the right choice.

'not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven,
but him who DOES THE WILL  of My Father who is in heaven.
not one of us wants to do what God commands in the Bible at any time...apart from JESUS..
APART FROM ME YOU CAN DO NOTHING is what He said.
may God, in His grace, move us with FEAR (if LOVE 'doesn't work..) TO OBEY HIM.
ecclesiastes 12.13-4

note: you and i and every human being is a rebel against God. we, in the warp and woof of our being know that we are totally 'in His hand'..bound to, created for one purpose..TO OBEY HIM. there has never, nor will there ever (as long as this creation continues) any person who died without the realization of these things for God says,
'for the wrath of God is revealed from heaven
against ALL ungodliness and unrighteousness of men,
WHO HOLD THE TRUTH IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS;
bedcause that which may be known of God is manifest in them
FOR GOD HATH SHOWN IT UNTO THEM.
for the invisible thing of Him from the creation of the world ARE CLEARLY SEEN
BEING UNDERSTOOD by the things that are made,
even His eternal power and Godhead
SO THAT THEY ARE WITHOUT EXCUSE...
who knowing the judgment of God,
that they which commit such things ARE WORTHY OF DEATH,
not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.  romans 1.18-20 ,32




1A WHAT THE BIBLE CLAIMS

in many places the bible claims to be the 'word of God.
but just what exactly does this mean?
and if it is God's word, then just how did God communicate it to humanity?

paul tells us that: all scripture is God-breathed
and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. II timothy 3.16
this passage is the key text for the doctrine of inspiration.
the greek word theopneustos is usually translated 'inspiration'.
in other words the bible is 'inspiried' by God.
the term simply means...'God breathed.
the bible is from the breath of God.

inspiration can be defined as the mysterious process by which God worked through human writers,
employing their individual personalities and styles
to produce divinely authoritative and inerrant writings.

it is important to be careful in how we use the term 'inspiration.
this word is part of our everyday vocabulary.
'that artist was inspired, we say,
or 'that music was certainly inspired.'
 this is a very general use of the term
and it is understood today as meaning something that is well done or of great value.
but when we apply this word to the bible we intend a different meaning.
the bible was not inspired the same way in which a singer or artist may be inspired.
the bible has been breathed by God.
the bible claims to be His very word;
it has come from His very mouth.

2B NEW TESTAMENT CLAIMS TO INSPIRATION

the new testament also claims to be the 'word of God.
from the very time it was being written the people of God knew that the writings were special.

in a real sense, Christ is the key to the inspiration and canonization of the scriptures.
it was He who confirmed the inspiration of the hebrew canon of the old testament;
and it was He who promised that the Holy Spirit would direct the apostles into 'all truth',
the fulfillment resulting in the new testament.

remembering how highly esteemed the old testament prophets were
and how divinely authoritative their writings were considered to be,
to compare the new testament message to the old testament scriptures
amounts to a claim to the same authority and inspiration.
such is confirmed in hebrews 1.1-2:
'God, who at var5ious times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,
has in these last days spoken to us by His Son,'
and the message was 'at the first...spoken by the Lord
and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him (heb. 2.3)

in other words, the message of Christ as given by His disciples
is God's voice today just as much as the message of the prophets was in time past.

according to ephesians 2.20 the church is
'built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets'.
the word 'apostle' should not be limited to the twelve apostles.
paul was an apostle galatians 1; II corinthians 12,
as was barnabas acts 14.14
james wrote with divine authority james 1.1,
and there were others with prophetic gifts (for example agabus in acts 11.28.
the gift of either an apostle or a prophet would qualify one to receive a revelation (c ephesians 2.20
and several new testament writers qualify as 'prophets' (for example mart, luke, james and jude.

acts 2.42 records that the believers 'continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship'.
the authority of apostolic teaching, then, is seen not only by virtue of its equality with the prophets
but by its fundamentality to the church.
what the apostles taught is the authoritative foundation of the church.
therefore the new testament is the authoritative foundation of the church.

peter refers to paul's writings as 'scripture' II peter 3.16,
and I timothy 5.18 draws from both luke 10.7 and deuteronomy 25.4
in applying the phrase 'for the scripture says'.
if the writings of luke, who was not an apostle,
are quoted as scripture, and peter, who incidentally was rebuked by paul (galatians 2.11),
considered paul's books to be scripture,
then it follows that the new testament as a whole should be regarded as scripture.
it would be included in the statement 'all scripture is inspired by God II timothy 3.16

3B IS GOD'S WORD INERRANT?

the bible claims to be inspired by God.
and if it is from God, then we can logically assume that the bible is without error or inerrant.
the words 'inspired' and 'inerrant' are usually linked together.
in order to understand inerrancy let us consider the following issues:
God's character,
what inerrancy means and
what inerrancy does not mean.

   1c GOD'S CHARACTER
a proper understanding of the inspiration of scripture must include its inerrancy.
the bible is the word of God...and God cannot err (hebrews 6.18; titus 1.12)
to deny the inerrancy of scripture is to impugn
either the integrity of God
or the identity of the bible as God's word.

the character of God demands inerrancy.
if every utterance in the bible is from God and God is a God of truth,
as the bible declares Him to be,
then the bible must be wholly truthful, or inerrant
Jesus said of God's utterances, 'Your word is truth' john 17.17
the psalmist wrote, 'the entirety of Your word is truth' psalm 119.160.
solomon declared, 'every word of God is pure' proverbs 30.5.
paul wrote to titus, 'God..cannot lie' titus 1.2.
the author of hebrews declared, 'it is impossible for God to lie' heb. 6.18.
in the final analysis, then, an attack on the inerrancy of the bible
is an attack on the character of God.
every true christian will join with pau in saying, 'let God be true but every man a liar; romans 3.4

  2c WHAT IS INERRANCY?
inerrancy means that when all the facts are known,
the scriptures in their original autographs,
properly interpreted,
will be shown to be wholly true
in everything they affirm,
whether this has to do with
doctrine or morality or with the social, physical or life sciences.

the bottom line is that the bible has been breathed by God.
He used men to write out exactly what He wanted them to write.
He kept them free from error but at the same time used their unique personalities and styles
to convey exactly what He wanted.

peter tells us that 'holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. II peter 1.21
the idea conveyed is that just as the wind controls the sails of a boat,
so also the breath of God controlled the writers of the bible.
the end result was exactly what God intended.

      1d GOD USED A VARIETY OF EXPRESSIONS
inerrancy does not mean that every word in the bible is the same.
because God is creative (He is the Creator),
He said the same thing in different ways,
from different viewpoints,
and at different times.
inspiration does not exclude diversity of expression.
the four gospels relate the same story in different ways to different groups of people.
they sometimes even quote Christ as saying the same thing, but using different words.

compare, for example, peter's famous confession at caesarea philippi:
   matthew records it: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God' 16.16
   mark records it:       'You are the Christ' 8.29
   luke records it:        'the Christ of God' 9.20

even the decalogue is recorded in a variety of ways:
   'written by the finger of God' deuteronomy 9.10 is stated differently the second time God gave it
(compare exodus 20.8-11 with deuteronomy 5.12-5)
for example, exodus cites creation as the reason that israel is called to rest on the sabbath,
while deuteronomy gives redemption as the reason.

if such important utterances as peter's confession of Christ and the inscription on the cross
(see matthew 27.37; mark 15.26; luke 23.38; john 19.19),
and such permanent and special laws as the one 'written by the finger of God'
can be stated in different ways,
then there should be no problem extending the concept of inerrancy to
the diversity of expression in the rest of scripture.

     2d GOD USED DIFFERENT PERSONALITIES AND STYLES
 inspiration can also include God's use of different personalities
-with their own literary styles and idiosyncrasies
-to record His word.
one need only compare the powerful style of isaiah
with the mournful tone of jeremiah in the old testament.
in the new testament, luke manifests a marked medical interest,
while james is distinctly practical,
paul is theological and polemical (involving disputation, controversy)
and john writes with simplicity.
God has communicated through a multiplicity of human personalities,
each having unique literary characteristics.

the traditional biblical authors include
a lawgiver (moses), a general (joshua), prophets (samuel, isaiah, et al.), kings (david and solomon),
a musician (asaph), a herdsman (amos), a prince and statesman (daniel), a priest (ezra),
a taxcollector (matthew), a physician (luke), a scholar (paul), and fisherman (peter and john).
god used the variety of occupations and circumstances represented by biblical writers,
as well as their unique personal interests and character traits, to reflect His timeless truths.

    3d GOD SOMETIMES USED NON-BIBLICAL SOURCES
undoubtedly the doctrine of inspiration does not exclude the sue of human documents
as a source of divine truth.
such use is exactly what the bible does claim.
luke's gospel was based on research he had done using written sources of his day (l.1-4)
the writer of joshua used the book of jasher for his famous quotation about the sun's standing still
joshua 10.13
the apostle paul quoted freely from a heathen poet acts 17.28 in his well known mars hill address.
jude cited a noncanonical saying about the prophecy of enoch v14.

the use of nonbiblical sources should not be thought incongruous with inspiration
-it is to be remembered that 'all truth is God's truth'.
the God who commanded 'light to shine out of darkness' II corinthians 4.6
is able to speak truth through
a pagan prophet numbers 24.17,
an unwitting high priest john 11.50
and even a stubborn donkey. numbers 22.28.

  3c. WHAT INERRANCY IS NOT

     1d NOT STRICT GRAMMAR
inerrancy is defined in terms of truth
and truth is a property of words organized in sentences.
therefore, a modern grammatical error does not preclude an inerrant bible.
this is as it should be.
the rules of grammar merely represent normal usage of language.
every day skilled writers break these rules in interest of superior communication.
why should we deny the writers of scripture this privilege?

     2d FIGURES OF SPEECH ARE PRESENT
we should not assume that an 'inspired' book must have been written in one-and only one-
literary mold.
humankind is not limited in our modes of expression;
there is no reason to suppose that God is limited to
one style or literary genre in His communication to man.

the bible reveals a number of literary devices.
several whole books are written in the poetic style (eg. job, psalms, proverbs).
the synoptic gospels are filled with parables.
in galatians 4, paul uses allegory.
the new testament abounds with metaphors (II corinthians 3.2-3;james 3.6)
and similes (matthew 20.1; james 1.6);
hyperboles may also be found (colossians 1.23; john 21.25; II corinthians 3.2)/\Jesus Himself on occasion used satire (compare matthew 19.24 with 23.24)

the claim for inspiration, as understood in the light of the character of the inspired record itself,
reveals that 'inspiration' must not bve viewed as a mechanical or wooden process.
it is a dynamic and personal process that results in a divinely authoritative and inerrant product
-the written word of God.

      3d HISTORICAL PRECISION?
it is often asserted that the doctrine of inerrancy cannot be accepted
because the bible does not reflect the canons of historical and linguistic precision
recognized and required in the modern world.
like so many words used in the debate between inerrantists and errantists,
the definition of precision is ambiguous.
to some, imprecision implies error.
this surely need not be so.
as some of the wise men of past ages put it,
all that is necessary is that statements be adequate.
i interpret this  in terms of truth.
almost any statement could be expressed more precisely than it appears
any historiography, even a detailed chronicle, is still only an approximation.

let me illustrate.
if we record an event as having transpired in 1978,
we could obviously have said it more precisely
-in the month of may, on the fifteenth day, at the hour of 10 pm, and so on.
but the original, simpler statement would still be true.
the essential criterion, as i see it, for inerrancy is this:
is the sentence as stated true?
if so, there is no problem for the doctrine.
why should the modern criterion of precision be absolutized:
should we not expect scripture to reflect the standards of its day?
is it not arrogant to think that our standards are right and theirs wrong?

      4d  THE BIBLE USES NONSCIENTIFIC LANGUAGE

inspiration certainly does not require the use of scholarly, technical, or scientific language.
thebible is written for the common people of every generation
and it therefore uses common, everyday language.
the use of observational, nonscientific language is not unscientific; it is merely prescientific.

the scriptures wee recorded in ANCIENT times using ancient standards.
it would be anachronistic to superimjpose modern scientific standards upon the biblical texts.
it is no more unscientific to speak of the sun standing still (joshua 10.12)
than it is to refer to the sun rising. (joshua 1.16
contemporary meteorologists still speak daily of the times of 'sunrise' and 'sunset'.
the scritpures say that the queen of sheba 'came from the ends of the earth' matthew 12.42
since 'the ends of the earth' were only several hundred miles away, in arabia,
it appears that this is observational language.
in like manner, the scripture records that on the day of pentecost
there were people 'from every nation under heaven' acts 2.5
these nations are identified in acts 2.9-11,
and the do not include all the world (eg, north and south america are excludedd.

thus universal language is used in a geographical sense and is to be taken generally to mean
'the then known world.'
the bible was written for a nonscientific people in a prescientific age.
it is not reasonable for one to say the bible is scientifically INCORRECT;
it simply does not use modern scientific  vernacular.
but, in sacrificing scientific jargon, the bible has gained a perfection
in view of its universality and its simplicity of style.

the bible also uses round numbers. I chronicales 19.18; 21.5
it may be imprecise from the stanpoint of a contemporary technological society
to speak of the number 3.14159265 as the number three,
but this is not incorrect for an ancient nontechnological people.
three and fourteen hundredths can be rounded off to three.
this is sufficient for a 'cast bronze sea' II chronicles 4.2 in an ancienty hebrew temple,
even though it would not suffice for a computer in a rocket.
but one should not expect scientific precision in a prescientific age.

the bible speaks in the language of its day, in the mode that the people of that day will understand.
it must be judged by the very nature of the divine revelation.
the revelation came from God through men speaking human language and living in a cultural context.


to be meaningful, it had to come in the language of the prophets and apostles
and employ the cultural background of figures, illustrations, analogies, and other elements
generallyh associated with linguistic communication.
no artificial or abstract theory of inerrancy that imposes modem scientific or technical precision
upon the scriptures is warranted.

       5D EXACT WORDS?
inerrancy does not demand that the logia jesu (the sayings of Jesus)
contain the ipsissima verba (the exact voice).
this point is closely akin to the one just made about historical precision.
when a vew testament writer cites the sayings of Jesus,
it is not necessary that Jesus used those exact words.
undoubtedly the exact words of Jesus are to be found in the new testament,
but they need not be exact in every instance.

many of Jesus' sayings were spoken in aramaic and therefore had to be translated into greek.
moreover, as mentioned above, the writers of the new testament did not have available to them
the lingustic conventions that we apply today.
thus it is impossible for us to know which of the sayings are direct quotes,
which are indirect discourse,
and which are even freer renderings.
with regard to the sayings of Jesus, what, in light of these facts, would count against inerrancy?
if the sense of the words attributed to Jesus by the writers was not intended by Jesus,
or if the exact words of Jesus are so construed that they have a sense never intended by Him,
then inerrancy would be threatened.

an example of God's desire to communicate an accurate MEANING  to us
(rather than just mechanically precise words) is the fact that He gave us four gospels.
the slight variations in Jesus' words actually help us capture the accurate meaning He intended.
had each writer simply parroted the others, the text might be precise but the meaning might be misconstrued.

       6D COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNTS?

inerrancy does not guarantee the exhaustive comprehensiveness of any single account
or of combined accounts where those are involved.
this point is also somewhat related to the earlier statement on precision.
it must be remembered that from the stanpoint of any discipline, even theology, the scriptures are partial.
the word 'partial' is often taken to mean incorrect or false.
but this idea is false.
the bible is a complete revelation of all that man needs for faith and practice.
that is, there are many things we might like to know but that God has not seen fit to reveal.
it is also true that god has not seen fit to record evry detail of every account.

i think that this point has implications also for the gospel accounts.
the problems in the gospels can often be resolved when one realizes that
none of the evangelists was obligated to give an exhaustive account of any one event.
he had the right to record an event in light of his purposes in writing his gospel.
moreover, it must be remembered that the accounts of all four gospel writers together
do not exhaust the details of any one event.
there may be some unknown bit of information that would resolve seeming conflicts.
all that is required is that the sentences used by each writer be true.

       7D THE AUTOGRAPHS

inerrancy does not apply to every copy, only to the original text.
the view that has persisted throughout the centuries and is common among evangelicals today is
that inerrancy (or infallibility, inspiration) of the scriptures pertains only to the text of the original autographs.

in a letter to jerome (letter 82) concedrning anything he found in the biblical books
that seemed contrary to the truth, augustine wrote:
'i decide that either the text is corrupt,
or thee translator did not follow what was really said,
or that i failed to understand it.'

scripture has scattered indications of interest in or recognition of copies and translations of God's word
in distinction from the original manuscripts.
we can also draw useful inferences from various passages that tell us something of the scriptural attitude toward the then existing copies and subsequent translations.
what we primarily learn is that these nonautographical manuscripts were deemed adequate to perform
the purposes for which God originally gave the scriptures.
King solomon possessed a copy of the original mosaic law deuteronomy 17.18
and yet it was considered to contain,truly and genuinely,
'the charg of jehovah...according to that which was written in the law of moses' I kings 2.3.

the law of God that was in the hand of ezra was clearly a copy,
but nevertheless it functioned as authoritative in his ministry. ezra 7.14
when ezra read from this law to the people so that divine guidance might be given for their lives,
he apparently read to them by way of trnslation so they could understand  the sense in the aramaic
to which they had become accustomed in exile:
'and they read in the book, in the law of god, distinctly (with interpretation);
and they gave the sense, so that they understood the reading' nehemiah 8.8
in all of these examples the secondary text performs the work of God's written word
and shares it original authority in a practical sense.

it needs to be reiterated quite unambiguously that evangelical restriction of inerrancy to the autographs
1. is a restriction to the autographic textg, thereby guarding the uniqueness of God's verbal message, and
2. does not imply that present bibles, because they are not fully inerrant, fail to be the word of God.
the evangelical view does not mean that the inerrancy, or inspiration, of present bibles
is an all or nothing matter.

so if only the autographs are inspired, what about the translations?
if only the errorless autographs were God breathed,
and the translators were not preserved from error,
how can there be certainty about any passage of scripture?
perhaps the very passage that comes undr quiestion is a mistaken transcription or copy.
the scholarly procedure of textual criticism trats this problem
by showing the accuracy of the copies of the originals.
to borrow this conclusion in advance, the copies are known to be accurate and sufficient
in all matters except possibly minor details.
the resulting situation exists, then, that although only the autographs are inspired,
it may be said nevrtheless that all good copies or translations are adequate.
although no one in modern times has ever seen an infallible original,
it is also true that no one has ever seen a fallible one.

just why god did not see fit to preserve the autographs is unknown,
although man's tendency to worship religious relics is certainly a posible determining factor II kings 18.4

others have noted that God could have avoided the worship of the originals
by simply preserving a perfect copy.
but He has not seen fit to do even this.
it seems more likely that god did not preserve the originals
so no one could tamper with them.
it is practically impossible for anyone to make changes in the thousands of existing copies.

in seeking to avoid the two extremes  of either an unattainable original or a fallible one,
it must be asserted that a good copy or translation of the autographs
is for all practical purposes the inspired word of God.



2A OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS

the bible certainly claims to be the inspired word of god.
but some people object to the idea that the bible is the word of God and that it is inerrant.
in this section some of the major objections to inspiration and inerrancy will be addressed.


1B  ARGUING IN CIRCLES

some assert that to believe in inerrancy you have to argue in circles.
'you believe in inerrancy because you believe the bible teaches it,
but you believe the bible because you beleive in inerrancy', some will say.

but this is not the case. a logical presentation of the case for inerrancy is not circular.

the bible is a reliable and trustworthy document.
this is estaished by treating it as any other historical record, as, for inhstance ,
the works of josephus or the accouhnts of war by julius caesar.

on the basis of history recored by the bible,
we have sufficient grounds for beleiving tha the central character of the bible, Jesus Chrtist,
did what He is claimed to have done and therefore is who He claimed to be.
He claimed to be the unique Son of God
-in fact, God in human flesh.
as the unique son of god, the Lord Jesus Christ is an infallible authority.

Jesus Christ not only assumed the authority of the bible existing in His day, the old testament;
He taught it, going so far as to say that the scriptures are entirely without error and eternal,
being the word of God.

if the scriptures are the word of god, as Jesus taught,
they must for this reason alone be entirely trustworthy and inerrant, for God is a God of truth.

therefore, on the basis of the teaching of Jesus Christ, the infallible Son of God,
the church believes the bible also to be infallible.

this argument begins with the nature of the bible in general,
proceeds to the person and teaching of Jesus Christ,
and concludes by adopting His teaching concderning the nature of the bible.

2B INERRANCY IS NOT TAUGHT IN THE BIBLE
'inerrancy is not taught in the bible' is the claim by those opposed to inerrancy.
they say that the bible does not teach its own inerrancy, but only teaches that it is inspired.

this claim is as incorrect as saying the bible does not teach the doctrine of the trinity.
true, nowhere does the bible say in so many words,
'there are three persons in one God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.'
but despite tghis fact, the doctine of the trinity is clearly and emphatically taught in scripture.
how does one arrive at this?
by a logical deduction from two principles that are clearly taught in scripture:

1. there are three persons who are called God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; and

2. there is only one God.
simple logic demands that from these two truths only one conclusion follows,
a conclusion that no orthodox christian fails to draw:
there are three persons in the one God.

now, by this same logic the bible also teaches its own inerrancy.
like the doctine of the trinity, nowhere do the scriptures explicitly say,
'the bible is inerrant in all that it affirms.'
nevertheless, the bible does clearly and emphatically teach two truths from which this conclusion is inevitable:

1. the very words of scripture, all of them, are the revelation of God.
paul wrote , 'all scripture is given by inspiration of god' II timothy 3.16
the word 'scripture' means 'writings'.
over and over the biblical prophets were comanded to record the very 'words' of God. ex. 24.4; rev. 22.19
david confessed on his deathbed, 'the Spirit of the Lord spoke by me and His word was on my tongue'
II samuel 23.2
jeremiah was told 'do not diminish a word' of God's  prophecy. jeremiah 26.2
the apostle paul claimed to teach 'words ...which the holy Spirit teaches' I corinthians 2.13.

2. the bible emphatically teaches that everything that God utters is true and completely without error.
Jesus said to the Fathe, 'Your word is truth. john 17.17
the psalmist declared, 'Your word is truth. psalm 119.160
the writer of hebrews stated emphatically, 'it is impossible for God to lie. hebrews 6.18
paul told titus that 'God..cannot lie' 1.2
proverbs assures us that 'every word of God proves true. 30.5
in short, the very character of God as true demands that when He speaks He must speak the truth.
at the same time, the scriptures are the very utterance of God.
hence, from these two clearly taught truths of scripture
one and only one conclusion logically follows:
everything the bible teaches is the unerring truth of God.

thus it is that inerrancey follows logically from inspiration.
if the bible is God's word, then it must be without error.
christians have often summarized the doctrine of inerrancy this way:
'what the bible says, God says.'
indeed the words 'God and 'scripture' are often used interchangeably in this regard.
for example, hebrews 3.7 declares 'the Holy Spirit says' with a reference to the old testament scripture.
psalm 95.7
this pattern is repeated elsewhere. acts 2.17; galatians 3.8; hebrews 9.8

the bible does indeed claim its own inerrancy as surely as it teaches that God is a trinity.

3B  INERRANCY IS NOT IMPORTANT

'inerrancy is not important' is the cry of some.
they believe that the bible does not have to be without error to be authoritative.

this objection raised by the opponents of inerrancy is easily dismissed in view of the point just made.
they argue that inerrancy is not an important doctrine.
inspiration is important, they claim, but not inerrancy.
but if whatever the bible teaches clearly and emphatically is important,
and the bible does teach its own inerrancy clearly and emphatically,
it follows that inerrancy is important.

to say that inerrancy is not important is like claiming that it is not important
whether or not God utters only the truth
the Lord Jesus taught that the bible was true right down to the smallest part:
'till heaven and earth pass away,
one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfulled' matthew 5.18
elsewhere Jesus declared,
'the scripture cannot be broken'. john 10.35
hence, inerrancy will be important as long as Jesuss is Lord?

(note: this whole subject is focusing on just one of many ways to get out of obeying,
one of many 'dodges' to justify ongoing rebellion against God...i refuse to do what You say.
in this case because i decide that what You have to say is either
1. mistaken and therefore false or
2. a lie or a whole pack of lies.)

4B   INERRANCY IS A RECENT INVENTION

those denying inerrancy often claim that inerrancy is a recent invention.
some say it originated with b.b. warfield at princeton in the late 1800s.
others, such as jack rogers of fuller, trace it back to the lutheraln theologian turretin
just after the reformation.

both of these views are mistaken.
inerrancy was taught in the bible long before luther or calvin.
and there is evidence that the earliest church fathers held to the doctrine of inerrancy.
augustine said, 'i have teamed to yield this respect and honor
only to the canonical books of scripture.
of these alone do i most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error.

the great medieval theologian thomas aquinas said,
'nothing false can underlie the literal sense of scripture.
the great reformer martin luther repeated over and over,
'the scriptures have never erred'
and 'the scriptures cannot err'.
john calvin clearly endorsed the inerrrancy of scripture in his institutes when he wrote,
'error never can be eradicated from the heart of man until the true knowledge of God
(through scripture) has been implanted in it ( book I, chapter 6)
hohn wesley, the founder of methodism, was emphatic about the inerrandcy of  scripture.
'nay, if there be any mistakes in the bible there may as well be a thousand.
if there is one falsehood in that book it did not come from the God of truth. (journal VI, 117)

these clear statements of the church fathers and reformers clearly indicate that inerrancy
was not a late invention of the post reformation period or of nineteenth century
american theologians.

5B   THERE ARE ERRORS IN THE BIBLE

some claim that we must give up the belief in inerrancy because there are errors in the bible.
davis offers as an example of error God's command to joshua to kill the canaanites.
what is his basis for calling this an error?
..'i speak for no one except myself, but i believe that killing innocent people is morally wrong.'

but davis forgets several points.
first, the canaanites were far from innocent. leviticus 18.25; deuteronomy 9.5
the practices of child sacrifice and other inhumane behavior were rampant in their land.
second, this command was unique.
it is not a biblical doctrine meant for all times,
but was a specific command for a specific  occasion at a unique time in history.
third, God is sovereign over all of life.
He gave life and He has the right to take it away. job 1.21; deuteronomy 32.39

there is an error here, but it is not in God's action or His word to joshua.
the mistake is in using human reason or sentiment as the basis for determining
what is true in the word of God and what is not.
as God spoke in isaiah 55.8,
'for My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways, says the Lord.

some alleged errors turn out to be discrepancies
introduced by the copyists who made handwritten copies of bible manuscripts .
an example is the age of ahaziah when he began to reign
(age 22 according to II kings 8.26, but age 42 according to II chronicales 22.2)
other supposed 'errors' are divergent but not contradictory accounts.
luke records that there were two angels at the tomb after the resurrection (24.4),
but matthew mentions only one. (28.2)
this is, of course, divergent, but it would be contradictory only if matthew had said
there was ONLY one angel at the tomb AT ONE AND THE SAME TIME that luke
declared two to be present.

such alleged contradictions are not new.
they have been recognized by biblical scholars down through the centureies.
and yet one gets the impression from reading current scholars who deny inerrancy
that some recent factual finds have forced them to the conclusion that they must now give up
inerrancy.
just the contrary is true.
more of the bible stands confirmed today
and more problems are explainable thana has been the case in centureies.
discoveries from the dead sea, from sumeria, from nag hammadi, and more recently from ebla
provide more support than ever before for the positions that evangelicals have long held.

why, then, is the impression left that 'facts' are just now leading men to
give up this crtucial doctrine of the christian faith?
i am convinced that it is not a FACTUAL matter at all;
it is a PHILOSOPHICAL issue.
paul warned,
'beware lest any man cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit' colossian 2.8
what has happened, i suggest, is that many of these fine christian scholars
have been seduced by philosophical presuppositions,
often adopted unconsciously during their graduate studies,
so that their conclusions are determined in part by rationalistic and existential thinking
rather than by the word of God.

davis unwittingly analyzed the problem of those who deny inerrancy when he wrote,
'what leads them to liberalism...is their acceptance of certain philosophical or scientific assumptions
that are inimical (adverse in tendency or effect) to evangelical theology
-eg, assumptions about what is 'believable to modern people'.

6B  LIMITED SCOPE

another objection to inerrancy is the claim that inspiration
covers only the doctrinal or moral areas of scripture,
but not necessarily the historical and the scientific areas.
'all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine'. Ii timothy 3.16

there are several serious flaws in the view of 'limited inspiration'.
first, the bible makes no such distinction between doctrinal and historical matters.
EVERYTHING  affirmed in the bible is true.
secondly, in many biblical teaching ther is no way
to separate the spiritual from the physical or historical.
for instance, Jesus' teaching about divorce is inseparable from His affirmation
that god created a literal adam and eve.  matthew 19.4
and how can one separate the spiritual and the historical in the cross or the resurrection?

thirdly, this false dichotomy between the spiritual and historical
shows no awareness of our Lord's statement to nicodemus,
'if I have told you earthly things and you do not believe,
how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?' john 3.12
that is, if we cannot trust the bible and our Lord when they speak of historical events,
how can we trust them when they speak of spiritual matters?

finally, those evangelicals who deny the inerrancy of the bible do not limit their denial
to purely scientific, chronological, and historical matters.
paul jewett denied the truthfulness of paul's teaching on women.
davis denied the validity of God's command to drive out the canaanites-a moral matter.
to allow for and errant bible is to allow anyone and everyone
to choose which parts of God's commands jthey are willing to accept and which they will refect.

7B  NONEXISTENT ORIGINALS

this objection contends that evangelicals who believe in inerrancy
retreat into an unfalsifiable position that rests in nonexistent originals. 
since only the original manuscripts were inspired by God
ans since there are no original manuscripts around today,
there is no way to prove an error in them.

in response, we do have highly accurate copies
that are perfectly adequate for christian teaching and life.
in fact, no major (or even minor) biblical doctrine is undermined by any copyist's mistakes.

the bible contains very little that evangelicals would say is in error due to copyist mistakes.
there is plenty in the bible for which critics are able to blast christians.

in short, the originals are not nonexistent for all practical purposes.
all essential teachings are preserved in the copies we possess.
just as no american's liberties would be jeopardized were the original constitution to be destroyed
-as long as we possess good copies of it
-so no christian need fear because we don't have the original texts of scripture.

8A  DOES GOD CARE?

some claim that if God did not provide error free copies,
He could hardly be concerned that the originals were without error?
or else, why did not God either keep the errorless originals from disappearing,
or keep the copyists from making any errors?

the answer to the first part of this question has to do with consistency in God's nature.
because God is perfect, whatever comes directly from His hand must be pedrfect.
an original bible with errors would imply that God can err.
this would be like saying that God created adam in an imperfect state.
the second part of the question can bed answered with another question:
why did God not preserve preserve adam from sinning?
humankind tends to corrupt what we touch, whether the bible or ourselves.
of course, God preserved both 'originals',
the bible and humankind,
from becoming distorted beyond recognition.
man is still substantially in God's image (though imperfect),
and the bible is essentially God's word
(though tere are minor errors in the copies.).

there are important reasons why God did not preserve the original manuscripts.
first humankind has a propensity to worship the creature rather than the creator. roman 1.25
remember the brazen serpent God appointed for israel's deliverance?
it was later worshiped. II kings 18.4
how much more would we worship the very original words from God
appointed for our salvation?
furthermore, by not preserving the originals
there is no way for sinful people to tamper with their contents.

9B  TOO MANY QUALIFICATIONS

a final claim is that defenders of inerrancy place so many limitations on the doctrine
that it dies the 'death by a thousand qualifications'.

this point is very much overstated.
basically there are only two qualifications to inerrancy:
1. only the ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS are inerrant, not the copies;
2. only what the bible AFFIRMS is inerrant, not everything it contains.

to be sure, many complicated issues are involved in determining
precisely what the bible affirms in any given passage,
including meaning, context and literary form.
this, however, is not aquestion of inspiration but of interpretation.
allwould agree, for example, that the bible contains lies, including satan's lies.
but the bible does not affirm that these lies are true.
all inerrancy claims is that THE RECORD OF these lies is true.

not everyone would agree, on the other hand,
that everything contained in the book of ecclesiastes is true.
many christian interpreters of ecclesiastes view the statements in the middle of the book
as simply A TRUE RECORD OF THE FALSE VIEWS of natural man 'under the sun'.

there seems to be room for difference of opinion here and in other like situations
(the speeches of job's friends, for example).
christians may differ as to what the bible actually affirms in a given passage
and what it merely records,
but there should be no disagreement among us that what the bible does affirm is inerrant.
God cannot err.

along with the question of how to interpret scripture
there is nothing in the doctrine of inerrancy that dictates,
as has sometimes been charged, that every passage be taken literally.
it is surely wrong to take an allegory as literal. galatians 4.24-5
likewise, the bible no doubt speaks in round numbers at times.
but imprecision is not error.
math teachers do not consider their students in error
simply because they used 22/7 or 3.1416 as the value of pi.
but both are imprecise.

also, biblical authors spoke in the same manner in which
people speak today-even scientists-that is, in observational language.
it appears as though the sun 'sets',
and even a scientist will say, 'look at the beautiful sunset'.
but these are questions of interpretation, not of inspiration.
the real crux of the inerrnacy issue is this:
is it the case or is it not that WHATEVER the bible affirms is without error?
is the biblical teaching without error
whether or not
God created adam and eve,
a flood destroyed the world in noah's day,
jonah was three days in a great fish,
or Jesus rose from the dead?

3A CONCLUSION

what does the above discussion mean for the average person today?
do i or do i not have a bible that is the inspired and inerrant word of God?
can i be confident that what i read in the bible is truly from God?

the answer is a hearth 'Yes!
the bible that we have today is the inspired word of God.
recent archaeological discoveries have confirmed that the bibles we have today
are accurate transmissions of what exiwsted two thouswand years ago.
we simply have a translation in our current language of the God breathed scriptures
that were originally written in aramaic, hebrew and greek.

remember that the doctrine of inerrancy applies only to the original copies of the bible.
until the printing pres was invented
the bible  had to be copied by hand for at least one thousand years.
it is therefore possible that some transmissional errors crept into the text.
the abundance of manuscripts, however,
along with archaeological finds, textual notes and other devices,
have all helped to ensure an accurate translation of the inerrant word of God.