humility, meekness, servanthood are all off the table in most “christian” circles today. As you said the other day in reference to the sermon on the mount–it bears little resemblance to christian expression today.
There was a time when politicians who were caught in scandal withdrew from the race. Nowadays they either say “nothing to see here”, outright lie, or say “hey, we are all sinners”.
Absolutely! Back in the late 80s or 90s a man was running for the office of Governor of the state of Minnesota. Last name was Grunseth. Turns out there was some nasty stuff going on, and he withdrew from the race. Would this happen today?
No. At least not in the party that doesn’t seem to give a rat’s arse about
ethics and morality and is hell-bent on seizing power for power’s sake.
No wonder there’s so much dissembling and rationalization going on.
Michael’s comments and Dan from Georgia’s comments reminded me that the case that character mattered in a different way back then probably has a context and defense that may be best summed up in two words: Nixon resigned.
I have to say that after 55 years of church, I am fairly weary of pastors who are good communicators but poor theologians.
Many speak using sound bites, allegory, personal stories, typology, etc. that are interesting but lack sound theology.
I would venture to say that only about 25% of what they say is theologically sound. They describe a Jesus that never existed.
As I’ve shared here before, in my search for the historical Jesus, I’ve had to work thru some bad exegesis, and ideas of Jesus, and God that are not true and speak of a culturally relevant god.
1)Untrained pastors often teach that David was the most righteous Old Testament king.He is described as a “man after God’s own heart’. Maybe, but David
Committed adultery (2 Samuel 11:1-4)
Plotted murder (2 Samuel 11:14-27)
Initiating a census prohibited by the Lord (1 Chronicles 21:1-1)
Didn’t discipline his son (1 Kings 1:6)
So was David really the most righteous Old Testament monarch?
I don’t think so. The Bible points to Hezekiah and Josiah—descendants of David—as two of most righteous Old Testament kings (see 2 Kings 18:5-6; 23:24-25).
2) Prosperity Gospel Preachers who use Christianity to enrich themselves. Taking money from poor congregants in the form of tithes, offerings and donations. Tele evangelists are multi-millionaires.
3) God loves everyone and wants to save all who are lost. But according to Calvinism. God loves and died only for the elect. Which, in my mind makes God’s love conditional.
4) God keeps all of His promises. I realize this comment will illicit a lot of response but does He keep his promises? Do we truly understand them? It has been preached that He always fulfills his promises to us, never once denying these promises for those who believe in Jesus. But is that true? James 5 says, “ And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise them up. If they have sinned, they will be forgiven.”
Sounds pretty “promisey” to me. But I can speak honestly, i’ve prayed for hundreds of sick folks. Few recover from things like stage 4 cancer. Head ache, maybe but not a serious ailment.
1. David being “a man after Gods heart”simply meant a man that God had selected….not that he represented a standard of godliness. Commentaries ruin many an evangelical sermon…
2. I can’t stand those pastors either, but let’s be honest…people love them.
3. Don’t be a Calvinist… :-). There are a number of other ways to understand soteriology.
$. This one is difficult beyond words…I am left with nothing but trust in the person of Christ and hope for the coming age…
3 – God’s love is conditional from when he explained it. You get the sky cake if you die to yourself and become like Jesus. Frankly I can’t afford to be “like Jesus”, and further, the qualifier of eternal damnation if you don’t seems to make the choice even narrower.
The love and salvation is conditional. I have tried to perform scriptural origami to see the Universalist god, but there are too many disqualifications.
My time as a conservative Evangelical Christian was damaging to me and many others. At this point, I see that every tribe can do their own gymnastics to make their theological vision seem like the only one. Almost at the point where I think we should just choose the best story. In that sense, UNiversalism is pretty high on the list, because more people live happily ever after.
There is no way to cut and paste scripture to come to any other conclusion that the entire core of salvation is based on the irrefutable fact that we are created sick and ordered by eternal threat to be well. We take this from a Jesus who appears to be almost Communist, but the dictatorship sends it off the utopian path. The celestial North Korea. Or in more modern terms, the celestial China. It had all the markings of good intentions, but the execution is accomplished by force. Will there be anyone left who is worthy? The remnants? They scripturally can not exist. For ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of god, because nobody is righteous, no NOT ONE. Even to the “righteous” it is said the heart is deceitful and desperately wicked, and the Lord judges the heart. And as Steve indicated, unless you are a dispensationalist, the god man has no impulse, let alone mandate to answer any prayer, because we are a stench in the nostrils of god. Even the Old Testament example of the Passover, it “only” required the slaughter of innocents to make the point. Salvation comes by death, and it never ended with Christ alone. Even after salvation, our death is required in order that Christ may live. We are to have the mindset of Esther, and if I perish, I perish. We are to have the mindset of Paul, nor do I count my life dear unto myself. He was forced to beat his own flesh in pursuit of something he could not obtain. He emphatically explains that his very being is the enemy. He can no longer be the creation or he is eternally damned.
I don’t have the strength for a full on discussion of the issues raised…but because of Jesus, salvation is more than possible…anything that moves off the person and work of Christ makes things seem impossible…
David’s fulfillment of “man after God’s heart” has nothing to do with his piety or moral purity. It is however a concept that the scriptures reveal rather than conceal. Here is how it can work out without twisting anything.
To be after someone’s heart is pretty simple. It means to give that person what their heart desires. That is how relationships are made – especially great marriages.
God’s heart was to be Israel’s true king. Thus when Samuel said that he was ‘rejected’ by the people God said no, that when the people asked for a king they were rejecting him. (I Sa 8:6-7) Thus it was no surprise that their first king was just like them. He was relatively disinterested in God. He, Saul was the king. And he acted like it. God even helped his crooked heart but Saul did not steward the gift. (I Sa 10:9-11) and God rejected him – announcing that he wanted a man ‘after his own heart” (I Sa 13:11-14)
‘But God sought a man after His own heart.’ That would be a man that wanted what God wanted. In David we find precisely that. Not a righteous pure soul but a man who truly honored God. He honored God as Israel’s true king.
All we need do is follow the story of David stripping his royal robes in favor of a priestly garment and before all the people having a coronation procession for God by bringing the throne of God to Mt Zion. (II Sa 6) A ceremony that caused Saul’s daughter to despise him. Complete with a Psalm likely presented in antiphonal praise “Who is the king of glory’ – ‘The LORD strong and mighty, the LORD mighty in battle. HE IS THE KING OF GLORY. Ps 24
That was the heart of God – in the act David made himself of no reputation, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, humbled himself and became a servant. Then in I Sa 7 Nathan prophecies the son of David will sit on the throne for ever. A Son with the Father’s heart…
This drama has no doubt been mangled by preachers but the actual text is powerful vindication of the Gospel and of the God of our salvation. God alone is king, David knew it.
That’s an interesting and possible interpretation.
I still lean to it simply meaning a person who God had selected…but find your slant compelling as well.
I actually believe the salvation narrative of scripture and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I believe God was able through these flawed humans and their exploits to weave the tapestry of his glory. I believe that same God is at work now in our confusion, rebellion and corruption. But I cannot trace his steps.
The Gospel – the Good News of King Jesus is what I fully believe. And he must reign until all his enemies are his footstool.
Those comments are not serious Josh you can answer your own questions better than that. They clearly represent present frames of mind and I won’t entertain them. Best I return to my studies and work.
It’s all yours today…
I don’t know who this fellow is, but he nailed it…
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1581057631216893952.html
humility, meekness, servanthood are all off the table in most “christian” circles today. As you said the other day in reference to the sermon on the mount–it bears little resemblance to christian expression today.
fil,
The most troubling thing is that a rejection of traditional biblical virtues is becoming the norm…American orthodoxy…
There was a time when politicians who were caught in scandal withdrew from the race. Nowadays they either say “nothing to see here”, outright lie, or say “hey, we are all sinners”.
Dan
Two words: Herschel Walker
Absolutely! Back in the late 80s or 90s a man was running for the office of Governor of the state of Minnesota. Last name was Grunseth. Turns out there was some nasty stuff going on, and he withdrew from the race. Would this happen today?
Would this happen today?
No. At least not in the party that doesn’t seem to give a rat’s arse about
ethics and morality and is hell-bent on seizing power for power’s sake.
No wonder there’s so much dissembling and rationalization going on.
Mike Itkis, a self-described “liberal independent candidate,” Running for congress in NY just made a porno movie.
Neither side is interested in Christian ethics…both have the same goals from different directions.
True! I didn’t know which party bob was referencing!
Michael’s comments and Dan from Georgia’s comments reminded me that the case that character mattered in a different way back then probably has a context and defense that may be best summed up in two words: Nixon resigned.
That Tweet was gold! Shallenberger gets it!
I have to say that after 55 years of church, I am fairly weary of pastors who are good communicators but poor theologians.
Many speak using sound bites, allegory, personal stories, typology, etc. that are interesting but lack sound theology.
I would venture to say that only about 25% of what they say is theologically sound. They describe a Jesus that never existed.
As I’ve shared here before, in my search for the historical Jesus, I’ve had to work thru some bad exegesis, and ideas of Jesus, and God that are not true and speak of a culturally relevant god.
At least that’s my starting point
Officerhoppy,
You’ve brought this up a number of times.
Can you give examples of the Jesus who isn’t?
Here’s just a few
1)Untrained pastors often teach that David was the most righteous Old Testament king.He is described as a “man after God’s own heart’. Maybe, but David
Committed adultery (2 Samuel 11:1-4)
Plotted murder (2 Samuel 11:14-27)
Initiating a census prohibited by the Lord (1 Chronicles 21:1-1)
Didn’t discipline his son (1 Kings 1:6)
So was David really the most righteous Old Testament monarch?
I don’t think so. The Bible points to Hezekiah and Josiah—descendants of David—as two of most righteous Old Testament kings (see 2 Kings 18:5-6; 23:24-25).
2) Prosperity Gospel Preachers who use Christianity to enrich themselves. Taking money from poor congregants in the form of tithes, offerings and donations. Tele evangelists are multi-millionaires.
3) God loves everyone and wants to save all who are lost. But according to Calvinism. God loves and died only for the elect. Which, in my mind makes God’s love conditional.
4) God keeps all of His promises. I realize this comment will illicit a lot of response but does He keep his promises? Do we truly understand them? It has been preached that He always fulfills his promises to us, never once denying these promises for those who believe in Jesus. But is that true? James 5 says, “ And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise them up. If they have sinned, they will be forgiven.”
Sounds pretty “promisey” to me. But I can speak honestly, i’ve prayed for hundreds of sick folks. Few recover from things like stage 4 cancer. Head ache, maybe but not a serious ailment.
1. David being “a man after Gods heart”simply meant a man that God had selected….not that he represented a standard of godliness. Commentaries ruin many an evangelical sermon…
2. I can’t stand those pastors either, but let’s be honest…people love them.
3. Don’t be a Calvinist… :-). There are a number of other ways to understand soteriology.
$. This one is difficult beyond words…I am left with nothing but trust in the person of Christ and hope for the coming age…
3 – God’s love is conditional from when he explained it. You get the sky cake if you die to yourself and become like Jesus. Frankly I can’t afford to be “like Jesus”, and further, the qualifier of eternal damnation if you don’t seems to make the choice even narrower.
The love and salvation is conditional. I have tried to perform scriptural origami to see the Universalist god, but there are too many disqualifications.
My time as a conservative Evangelical Christian was damaging to me and many others. At this point, I see that every tribe can do their own gymnastics to make their theological vision seem like the only one. Almost at the point where I think we should just choose the best story. In that sense, UNiversalism is pretty high on the list, because more people live happily ever after.
There is no way to cut and paste scripture to come to any other conclusion that the entire core of salvation is based on the irrefutable fact that we are created sick and ordered by eternal threat to be well. We take this from a Jesus who appears to be almost Communist, but the dictatorship sends it off the utopian path. The celestial North Korea. Or in more modern terms, the celestial China. It had all the markings of good intentions, but the execution is accomplished by force. Will there be anyone left who is worthy? The remnants? They scripturally can not exist. For ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of god, because nobody is righteous, no NOT ONE. Even to the “righteous” it is said the heart is deceitful and desperately wicked, and the Lord judges the heart. And as Steve indicated, unless you are a dispensationalist, the god man has no impulse, let alone mandate to answer any prayer, because we are a stench in the nostrils of god. Even the Old Testament example of the Passover, it “only” required the slaughter of innocents to make the point. Salvation comes by death, and it never ended with Christ alone. Even after salvation, our death is required in order that Christ may live. We are to have the mindset of Esther, and if I perish, I perish. We are to have the mindset of Paul, nor do I count my life dear unto myself. He was forced to beat his own flesh in pursuit of something he could not obtain. He emphatically explains that his very being is the enemy. He can no longer be the creation or he is eternally damned.
Salvation is impossible.
I don’t have the strength for a full on discussion of the issues raised…but because of Jesus, salvation is more than possible…anything that moves off the person and work of Christ makes things seem impossible…
All we have to be is the person and work of Jesus. Sinless in every way. I have never met that person.
Jesus has done the work on our behalf…
David’s fulfillment of “man after God’s heart” has nothing to do with his piety or moral purity. It is however a concept that the scriptures reveal rather than conceal. Here is how it can work out without twisting anything.
To be after someone’s heart is pretty simple. It means to give that person what their heart desires. That is how relationships are made – especially great marriages.
God’s heart was to be Israel’s true king. Thus when Samuel said that he was ‘rejected’ by the people God said no, that when the people asked for a king they were rejecting him. (I Sa 8:6-7) Thus it was no surprise that their first king was just like them. He was relatively disinterested in God. He, Saul was the king. And he acted like it. God even helped his crooked heart but Saul did not steward the gift. (I Sa 10:9-11) and God rejected him – announcing that he wanted a man ‘after his own heart” (I Sa 13:11-14)
‘But God sought a man after His own heart.’ That would be a man that wanted what God wanted. In David we find precisely that. Not a righteous pure soul but a man who truly honored God. He honored God as Israel’s true king.
All we need do is follow the story of David stripping his royal robes in favor of a priestly garment and before all the people having a coronation procession for God by bringing the throne of God to Mt Zion. (II Sa 6) A ceremony that caused Saul’s daughter to despise him. Complete with a Psalm likely presented in antiphonal praise “Who is the king of glory’ – ‘The LORD strong and mighty, the LORD mighty in battle. HE IS THE KING OF GLORY. Ps 24
That was the heart of God – in the act David made himself of no reputation, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, humbled himself and became a servant. Then in I Sa 7 Nathan prophecies the son of David will sit on the throne for ever. A Son with the Father’s heart…
This drama has no doubt been mangled by preachers but the actual text is powerful vindication of the Gospel and of the God of our salvation. God alone is king, David knew it.
Dread,
That’s an interesting and possible interpretation.
I still lean to it simply meaning a person who God had selected…but find your slant compelling as well.
You guys don’t just think that was an ancient culture deifying its leader like the rest did?
Josh,
I don’t.
I don’t deny though, that there is a reasonable argument to be made from the sciences for that position if one doesn’t believe in God.
I actually believe the salvation narrative of scripture and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I believe God was able through these flawed humans and their exploits to weave the tapestry of his glory. I believe that same God is at work now in our confusion, rebellion and corruption. But I cannot trace his steps.
The Gospel – the Good News of King Jesus is what I fully believe. And he must reign until all his enemies are his footstool.
The old testament is so messed up though. I love the story from Jesus on. Before that it is a muddled mess.
“And he must reign until all his enemies are his footstool.”
In the real world, that makes no sense to me. Who are these enemies? Did he create his own enemies for the purpose of beating them up?!? What?
Those comments are not serious Josh you can answer your own questions better than that. They clearly represent present frames of mind and I won’t entertain them. Best I return to my studies and work.