MEN! This is difficult…

Standard

…but necessary.

Not a long post, just a challenging exhortation from my morning read.

We see this clearly in Paul’s letter to the church at Ephesus where husbands are called to love their wives as Christ loved the church, being the head of their homes like Christ is the head of the church. This means that husbands, like Jesus, are to lead their home by being first to love, first to forgive, and first to suffer and to be accountable for sin regardless of whether it is their “fault.”

Patrick, Darrin (2010-08-12). Church Planter: The Man, the Message, the Mission (p. 16). Crossway. Kindle Edition.

BIBLE SAY WHA?! The Nephilim.

Standard

Recently my pastor asked me to cobble together a blog post on the Nephilim. My church had started a series going through the book of Genesis, and there is simply NOT enough time on a Sunday morning to address all the potential questions that Genesis raises. Recently, my friend, Kris Van Houten and I talked about a few of the questions surrounding creation an the apologetics class, (you can hear us discuss them in the audio from Session Two). However, issues about creation are not the only difficulties found in the first 15 chapters of Genesis.

The fact of the matter is that sometimes we come across difficult texts, it will happen to all of us at some point. Even the Apostle Peter acknowledges that the bible can sometimes be tricky, while commenting on Paul’s letters, he says “as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand…(2 Peter 3:16 ESV)” So if some parts of the bible fill your head with more questions than answers, take a deep breath, give yourself a bit of a break, and show yourself a little grace. Now notice I said “take a bit of a break”, not “give up” entirely .

So, with all of this in mind, let’s take a little look at a tough set of verses in…

Genesis 6:1-4 ESV

When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

A text that is difficult to apply to your life is one thing, a text that is just weird, is another! This text is just weird.

WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?

Preceding these verses we see that humanity is growing and sprawling. Genesis 5 shows us this using highlights from the families of Adam and Eve, and their offspring. Specifically Adam’s son Seth. Then, before that, in Chapter 4 of Genesis, we see the story of Cain and Abel, followed by the beginning of Cain’s offspring, who was another son of Adam. One thing that may be important to see here, is that God’s covenant to reconcile the world always happens through families. This isn’t the last time we will see God’s covenant family divided by sin. There are lots of examples of this, but the most obvious would be Isaac and Ishmael.

So from there we have two separate sets of people groups, from the same sinful parents. We don’t know exactly how long has passed, or how many generations have gone buy. You can add up the numbers from the list of families and get a rough idea, but some suggest that the the genealogies listed are not complete, but just highlights of certain people. What is clear though, is that it has been long enough for tribes and cities to form, and that enough distinction in the bloodlines has happened that we are able to tell the different kinds of people apart. That is the basic set up. Then, after these strange 4 verses, we see God’s patience run out with all of humanity’s wickedness.

Genesis 6:5 ESV

The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

I will talk about what the “Sons of God”, “daughters of man” and “nephilim” could possibly be, but more important is the point of the text, and if you don’t like reading and other nerdy stuff, I will give you the point up front, and if you want some “extra credit”, you can keep reading after “The Big Idea !!!!!”

THE BIG IDEA !!!!!

Notice that Genesis condemns all of humanity, both Seth and Cain’s descendants. Both the good son (Seth), and the bad son (Cain), are guilty of sin. These four odd verses in Genesis 6,  are then primarily used to demonstrate the span of evil that has entered all of God’s perfect creation through sin.

As I mentioned before, we see humanity growing, clustering together in groups and even cities, even to the point that these groups start to become distinct from one another. These verses demonstrate, that no matter who or what they are, all people, and all created beings have been damaged by sin. Essentially, everything that is created is affected by “The Fall”. Whether material or immaterial, tangible or intangible, sin has messed it up. (Kris and I talk about this a little in one of the apologetic sessions, so go check them out!) The only thing that would be left unaffected by sin, would be something that is eternal, and not created. The only thing that fits that “not created/eternal category is God. So the conclusion we should definitely see and hold to from these verses, is that everything that is not God, is at this point in redemption history, completely corrupted by sin, and apparently God plans to do something about it!  The rest of the details, no one can say for sure.

EXTRA CREDIT

For those of you nerdy types who want a little more detail, kudos for you! Keep in mind however, that what follows is what we would call an “open-handed” issue. That means, that no matter what you believe on this point, it is NOT a point that would either affirm or deny someone’s salvation. You can believe any of these views any still be a very orthodox and true Christian. What IS for certain is what I have already addressed under the “BIG IDEA” heading.

There are many, including theories about aliens, views on who the players are in the beginning of Genesis 6. (Sons of God, Daughters of Man, Nephilim) However, only two are on a popular level, or commonly used, so these are the only two I’ll address.

(View One)
1. THE ANGELS DID IT!
This may be the earliest view I could find, but the second view isn’t much later in date to this one.

Essentially, this view claims that the “Sons of God” found here are fallen angels, the Nephilim are thus the offspring of these fallen angels with human women. This would explain their “renown” and super human like abilities. God was not pleased with this new Giant creature (nephilim translates most closely to Giant ), and getting rid of them was his primary motivator for the “Great Deluge”, or as we call it, “The Flood.” God’s intent was to wipe out this abomination and those who created it as a sign of His Justice, and also His mercy.

There are some extra biblical sources that shed some light on this theory. Extra biblical means a source outside of the bible. Historically, the Jews do not, nor do Christians, view these books as “inspired” like scripture. They would consider them valuable religious writings. For example, today we may recommend a book by John Piper, and say this book is valuable for teaching, but it is not on the same level as scripture. This means that these extra biblical writings are cool, helpful, interesting, but are not infallible like the bible. They, like all other religious writings, must submit to scripture.

Phew! That being said, there is a very neat bit from one of those extra books called the Book of Enoch (Noah’s grandpappy).

“And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: ‘Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.’ And Semjaza, who was their leader, said unto them: ‘I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.’ And they all answered him and said: ‘Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.’ Then sware they all together and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it…”

Remember, this IS NOT authoritative at all! It’s just interesting.

THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO “WHA?”

1. You want me to believe that angels had sex with women?

A) No, I want you to believe that Jesus Christ was God in flesh, lived a perfect life, was murder as a traitor, buried in a tomb, rose three days later. Thus dying for all the real traitors, you and me, and offering us new life and forgiveness if we would place our hope and trust in him.

What you believe about Jesus is infinitely more important than what you think about the Nephilim.

B) But now that i mention it… looking at what we believe about Jesus makes the idea of this first view of the Nephilim seem a little less far fetched, doesn’t it? If God can die and rise, why can’t angels mix it up with people?

C) Imagine heaven. Do we live and dwell there with angels? It would appear that we one day will live in the new creation with Jesus, as well as all sorts of heavenly creatures. So it is possible to assume that maybe, at the beginning, before sin messed everything up, that angels and humanity had some sort of relationship. Not necessarily a sexual one, but as my wife, Mary, points out, I married an angel, and we have six kids, so take that as you will.

D) John MacArthur makes two points of clarification that make this view a little more believable.

D-1) That the Nephilim are NOT a race of people, but a type of people. That is, that these relationships produced a particular type of person who was strong, brutish, prone to war types.Think Attila the Hun, or Goliath. He suggest that the Nephilim were not some new creation in some weird crossbreed scenario, but a particular kind of wicked people. I’m not saying that’s true, but that’s his take.

D-2) Secondly, that the Demons (fallen angels) were not physically having sex with women, but that they possessed men, who then had sex with women. Then the offspring from this “demonic” union would be even more evil. I don’t know about you, but this is a little more believable for me. Again, this is John MacArthur’s take.

Keep in mind that demons don’t often act in extraordinary ways like in the movies, often they are very ordinary. So for example, if I were counseling a young man who was sleeping with his girlfriend, impregnated her, had no intentions to marry her, or to raise his family according to righteousness, and was most likely going to continue this pattern with other women. I would describe his actions as demonic, just ordinary. After all, it’s obvious that he isn’t playing for Jesus team, and if you’re not on team Jesus, you are on team Satan.

Again, IF this is the case, it might be possible that these demons possessed the already wicked men, these men then, would in turn, produce an offspring that would multiply that wickedness on the earth.

(View Two)
2. WE DID IT! (HUMANS)

So remember at the very beginning of the blog when we looked at Genesis 4 and 5 as set up for Genesis 6? Me neither, I’ll wait why you go read it again….

In that setup, we see two distinct bloodlines that come from Adam. The Line of Cain, who we could call unrighteousness, and the line from Seth, who we could call the line of the covenant. This second view asserts that the “Sons of God” were men from Seth’s line, and the “Daughters of Man”, were from Cain’s line. They coupled together, and from that we get this sort of bastard offspring, the Nephilim. (Pardon the use of “bastard”, please notice that I use it with the correct intention, not as a curse word.)

OKAY SAM, THIS ONE MAKES MORE SENSE, I GUESS, BUT STILL, “WHA?”

I know, while on the surface it’s a little easier to go with, at least there are no Angels in this one, but it still has a lot of questions. Of those questions, I’ll try to answer the few that immediately pop in my head.

1.How do you explain their supernatural strength?

A) In one word, Samson. Samson had supernatural strength from God, and it’s not to far fetched to assume that maybe Seth’s line, the righteous offspring, had some supernatural abilities that could’ve been passed down to their offspring.

2. What makes Seth and his kids so special?

A) In themselves? Nothing. By God’s grace? A lot. One of the overarching motifs in scripture is God keeps his covenant when we don’t keep ours. You can literally trace that covenant through the bible. Adam to Noah, Noah to Abraham, Abraham to Moses, Moses to David, David to Christ, Christ to fullfilled! This covenant is passed through families, which is what God was wanting all of us to be in the first place. So it’s through Seth’s line that the covenant is passed from Adam to Noah, not because he was particularly good, but because God chose him.

Fast forward to the New Testament, Christ’s lineage is traced all the way back to Adam by way of Seth’s line. This demonstrates that God has kept his promise to us since Adam fell. That my friends is pretty awesome. Like seriously…AWESOME!

3. Why is God all butt hurt that they took wives from Cain’s line?

A) God has always strived to keep us (his people) set apart from the world. Through out scripture, we see God, and Christ, warn us about mingling, especially romantically, and even more so, in marriage, with unbelievers. He knows that the influence that a husband and wife have over each other is powerful, and that according to his purpose, the influence should be for mutual godliness. This purpose is broken when one is an unbeliever, the influence for godliness is ruined. That’s why at The Village, if you asked us to marry you, and your significant other was an unbeliever, we would not perform the ceremony. In fact, I rebuked a young man in a community group for even considering a romantic relationship with an unbeliever. What is demonstrated when we ignore this command, is that we think we know how our relationships work best instead of God. Now do you really think you know better than God? Me neither, let’s move on.

4.) So should we cut ourselves off from all contact with unbelievers?

A) Whoa! Slow down there. Obviously Seth and Cain’s line lived in close enough proximity to where they could see each other, and were aware of each other. So no, total withdraw is unnecessary, and we never see God command it. What is necessary is wisdom, and that Christ direct all of your relationships, even if it’s with an unbeliever.

SO EITHER WAY, WHAT HAPPENED TO THE NEPHILIM?

It would appear that God destroyed them in the flood, some suggest that this may of been God’s primary goal.

DO WE HEAR ABOUT THEM ANYWHERE ELSE IN SCRIPTURE?

Sure, kind of. Remember, the word translates most closely to “Giant”. So we see the word reappear, but it does not necessarily refer to the same Nephilim that existed before the flood. All Nephilim are giants, but not all giants are Nephilim.

One particular instant is recorded in Numbers. Joshua leads the Israelite people to the promise land. He sends in some spies to check things out. They return saying the city is full of “Nephilim” and report that they can’t take the city.

I think the most likely scenario is that the people were NOT the same Nephilim, but that they were so impressive and imposing enough to scare the spies, so to emphasize their point, they used the word “nephilim” to stress how hopeless they thought the battle would be. This is similar to today. We may look at a particular athlete and say “that guy is a beast!” We don’t literally mean he is a “beast.” Jesus uses a similar way when describing “hell” to a group of people. He describes the actual garbage dump that was outside of town. All the waste from the city was brought there, as well as dead bodies, and set on fire. Now of course Jesus did not mean that the garbage dump outside the city WAS hell, but rather that hell WAS as bad as that dump.

There are some other places in scripture that may or may not be talking about the same Nephilim that we see here in Genesis 6, but I have to leave some of the work to you. So go trace down those leads, tell me what you find, and I’ll be happy to discuss it with you.

Okay family, I think I covered most of the basics. Ask a question and I’ll try to lead you down the right path. I’ll post some links below that might be helpful. Remember that the big deal with these four odd verses is not so much the specifics, but the point of the verses….

WHAT WE SHOULD TAKE AWAY FROM THIS STUFF.

1. That sin had literally messed up everything.
2. That humanity was hell bent on continuing in their fallenness.
3. That in spite of all of this, God preserves and keeps his covenant with us.

R.C. SPROUL (WE DID IT)
http://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/nephilim/

JOHN MACARTHUR  (ANGELS DID IT)
http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-254/demonic-invasion

DOUG WILSON ON NEPHILIM (A VIDEO, YAY! NO MORE READING)
Ask Doug: who were the nephalim?: http://youtu.be/RLiOqUR5Ma0

ANSWERS IN GENESIS (ESSENTIALLY SAYS WHAT I JUST SAID BUT WITH A COUPLEMORE VIEWS AND THOUGHTS EXPRESSED, AND I’M SURE MY BEARD IS BETTER)
https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/battle-over-the-nephilim/

WWW.CARM.ORG (CARM IS GREAT FOR QUICK WIKIPEDIA TYPE INFO ON THESETYPES OF TOPICS)
https://carm.org/what-are-nephilim

Raising a Glass to Freedom.

Standard

I have a lot to say on the subject of alcohol. I mean, I normally have a lot to say about anything, but for whatever reason, a few articles posted by friends on social media feeds have been centered around this topic, specifically on whether Christians should or should not imbibe. So here is my two cents, which probably isn’t worth anywhere near two cents, but take it if you will.

I think that there are fair points on both sides, and at the same time, both sides fail to get to the heart. That’s my hope, to get to the heart of this issue. One side says “no” and give a long list of warnings, the other side says “yes”, and says that we are free in Christ. Both are true, but again, fail to go deep enough. So, I’ll do my best to be brief and to the point, but if you know me, you might as well get comfortable.

The Error of Comparing Percentages

The articles on my feed, and one ridiculous video, all stand opposed to Christian drinking. The video is over the top, and its valid points are overshadowed by red herring arguments, circular reasoning, and clear slippery slope fallacies. However, it did make many of the arguments that I grew up with in church. Most of these arguments are besides the point, a popular one being that the alcohol content of wine was so low that it was more like grape juice.

Okay…I guess, but the issue is not about the quantity or % of alcohol in the juice, but whether it is consumed at all. The argument is off topic, and besides the point. In this argument, even though it is used to discourage drinking, the point is made on the fact the alcohol was still consumed, just with really low content. So my questions is “Are you saying that as long as my alcohol content is really small is still okay?” Surely this is not what the proponents of this argument mean.

The sin problem associated with alcohol is not the alcohol or the content of alcohol in a drink itself, but drunkenness. And even though the content was lower, drunkenness was still a problem frequently addressed by the bible. So we can infer two things. 1. The drunkards were either making there own wine with higher alcohol content, or not mixing it with water as to dilute it. Or, 2. They just drank lots more of the diluted .0001% alcohol content wine.

Either one or both of these things was taking place, but either way people were still getting trashed, and so you still had a drunkenness problem even with heavily diluted grape juice wine. What we can then gather is that the problem is not with the booze itself, but with the people. Objects are not evil, its what people do with them that’s evil.

External Righteousness vs Internal Un-righteousness

This is the type of arguement that frustrates me. It only addresses the act, focusing on externals, and never gets to the heart. It is how a Pharisees would approach the problem, not how Jesus would address the heart of the problem. Evil religious men measure quantities, they never go beyond specific borders that they make up for themselves, and admonish those who do go beyond those borders. Opposing them, righteous religious men heed the council of scripture, and where scripture is unclear, they use wisdom and discernment over every action. Which is what we need to exercise around this issue.

There is a story in the bible of two men who go to the temple to pray. The first man watches his percentages very closely, he gives 10%, as was the law, and even tithes off his spice rack. The second man comes to pray and realizes that he is 100% in need of God’s mercy. Jesus says that the second man gets it, and that the first man misses the point. The problem is not the % of alcohol, or how well you tow the line, but the heart of the person who chooses to sin with alcohol. 

So…

What is the Christian Position?

Moving away from the video, the articles were much more gracious, even tempered, and fair minded. The attitude was certainly against alcohol, but the approach was simply asking Christians who do drink, to consider a few issues first. I think this is wise counsel. To simply rethink and evaluate your position, something Christians are constantly supposed to be doing anyway, in order to let our minds constantly be renewed by God’s spirit. This is a completely fair and just request.

The articles are quick to point out that there is no one verse that outright tells Christians not to drink. They are right. However, there are verses condemning drunkenness and encouraging those in leadership to heavier control, and even in some cases, complete avoidance. To this, I think both sides would agree.

Christians are, according to the authority of God’s law in scripture, permitted to drink, in moderation, below drunkenness. That is the plain understanding shared by the majority of Christendom. Those in favor say “yay!” and go on their merry way, those opposed have a few “howevers” that they want us to consider; and I, a guy in the “in favor” camp, think that we absolutely should consider these “however” points.

HOWEVER, You Should Watch Your Witness

There are two main “howevers”, of which, both have their merit, and I think only a fool would completely dismiss them. The first is a matter of witness.

The agreement normally asserts that even though drinking is permissible it could possibly ruin our witness, or sully our character in such a way, that people may be turned off to Christianity. They may say something like “We are supposed to be set apart from the world, and if we look like the world, then the image of Christ that we are supposed to display, will be marred by our poor example.” I think this is true, but it doesn’t exactly follow all the way through.

Christian character and life should stand apart from the world, but this does not automatically mean that drinking is worldly. Remember the problem is not the drink, its the heart that sins with the drink. Maybe in your particular culture, city, state, or circle of influence, it is seen as particularly evil. So we have to apply the witness rule to these particular situations or context. However, just because it applies to one particular situations, even if it’s the majority of situations, it doesn’t mean that it is then the prescribed method for ALL situations.

The “however” point of ” watch your witness” cuts both ways. In some instances refusing the drink could also hurt your witness. For example, I had a friend in college, back when I falsely believed that drinking was sinful, who went on a mission trip to Vietnam. While there he told me that he had a traditional alcoholic drink with some of the members of the group he was witnessing too. I immediately cautioned him about his witness, he replied explaining that he could of refused the drink over some personal conviction that the people he was witnessing to would not of understood, causing an unnecessary hurdle to the cultural barrier already there. Or he could take the drink with kindness and grow closer to the people that he wanted to share Jesus with. He’s right. Those people would not of been impressed by his refusal of the drink, but instead, they were filled with some gladness that he graciously accepted their favor.

Our witness as Christians is frightfully important. The deeds that sully our witness have more to do with our character. So then where does our character flow from? It flows from what we believe deeply in our hearts.

So a drunken Christian surely is a horrible witness, not just because of the dangers that come with his drunkenness, but about what is revealed about his character and heart when he is drunk. Let me point out that most Christians show their rude behavior or poor character whether or not alcohol is present, and again, for both the drunk and the unkind person, the problem is in their hearts.

HOWEVER, Watch the Weaker Brothers

The second “however” concern revolves around how your actions may cause a weaker Christian brother to fall. The argument suggest that even though you don’t struggle with drunkenness, your brother in Christ might, and by your permission of alcohol you may open them to drunkenness that may lead to them destroying their lives. Or, a little less destructive, someone who opposes alcohol use, may be offended by your use.

To the second part of this argument, it is just simply impossible to never offend anyone, people get offended by all sorts of silliness. Now you should be sensitive of course, but without getting into the particulars, being sensitive to the feelings of others still doesn’t follow that you should completely abstain from alcohol. On top of this, it is never good to misrepresent yourself, which if you are going to avoid all offenses, you will surely have to eventually do. Further, someone’s offense is not a proper condemnation on the act itself, God’s offenses, however, is.

Be Ye Not Offended

I have a couple of examples to this second point of the “weaker brother” argument. First, my aunt is one of the greatest Christians I know, she knew that I used to have issues with drinking, and once at a family dinner she asked my wife if I would be offended if she got a drink. There you go, its that easy. Her freedom to drink wasn’t worth knowingly offending me and upsetting our relationship. It, like most of these opposing arguments, cuts both ways. At the same time, my freedom not to drink, over her freedom too drink is not worth upsetting our relationship, so I should not lord my preference over hers. Now if her attitude was to love the drink over her nephew, and she said to me that I “should get over it”, well then this does reveal a problem, but again with her heart, not the booze.

What is funny in this example is that I am the weaker brother, however, at the time, I would of considered my aunt the weaker one because I abstained and she didn’t. I thought my position, and discipline on the matter made me superior. Now I realize I was the weak and immature one, and that my pride in that moment was a worse sin, and offense than anyone having a drink.

Causing Others to Stumble

What I am trying to make clear is that removing alcohol from the equation does not eliminate the sin taking place in the heart. I hope that we all understand that if someone has a particular sin issue, in this case, with drinking, that there problem is not that they had a beer, or even that they had too many beers, the problem is their heart. If we understand this then when can begin to discuss the first part of the weaker brother argument.

Jesus’ bold little brother, James, makes it clear in his book that when we sin it is because we are enticed by our own desires. The assumption in the second half of the weaker brother argument, is that my drinking may encourage someone else to drink, maybe even my own son, and what if they have a particular preposition to addiction, and then they drink because of me, and now they are an alcoholic? Well other than the fear based motive instead of trust in Jesus motive of this argument, it completely ignores what we know about sin from James, and there are a couple ways to look at this if we are going to go after the heart.

First off, my partaking is not an encouragement for drunkenness, anymore than giving my wife a kiss is an encouragement for someone else to lust. If they see my acts of permission to justify their own sin, then their hearts have already crossed that line long before they ever looked to me for justification. So in the context of my son, I want him to see how a mature Christian disciplined man is supposed to treat his wife, and further, how he should handle his drink. Appropriate, proper, and controlled exposure is where I want him to learn and see my example.

If I remove all alcohol from my house, and my child’s only exposure to the concept is “we don’t do that, its a sin.” Then I am most likely setting him up for failure by giving him no context in which to understand something like alcohol. Something that he will inevitably be exposed to. So I prefer his exposure to be from his dad who loves him, not his knuckle-headed buddies who just want to have a good time.

So my son heads off to college were the only attitude towards drinking he knows, is that it is sinful, and he has only been taught two options. Either don’t drink, or you sin. Now my son, faced with adjusting to a new life situation, trying to fit in with new peers, no matter how holy he had been living previously, is very likely to choose the sin option. Now what if I had raised my son in a context where the subject of alcohol was talked about when appropriate, and his exposure to it was proper and disciplined? What if I told him that there were actually three options? You can either avoid drinking, sin with drinking, or worship with drinking.

Worship The Creator, not the Creation

The heart problem with drunkenness is here. There may be factors that play a part, and I don’t doubt that there are, but when someone struggles with drunkenness the root problem is that they have began to worship the alcohol as god, and exchanged it for the God who created alcohol. This applies to every sin. Those who struggle with lust elevate the created act of sex over the creator of sex. Those who struggle with gluttony elevate the creation of food over the creator of food, etc.

So for my son, I always want him to know the third option to all of life’s situations. That it is not always a simple “do I” or “don’t I”, but “How can I worship God in this?” We do this by first teaching clearly what the bible instructs us to do on all matters, but also, along side, we proclaim the supremacy of God above all things.

“So my son, some people drink to feel alive, but God is the author of life and has given us new life in his son, not through some beverage. Others try to numb out pain by drinking to forget their problems, but God has given us a better solution than numbness, inviting us to heap all of our woes on the cross of his son, that he may redeem all of our failures and pain without dulling our senses. This means, my son, that when it comes to alcohol you can drink or not drink, because if Christ is truly your master then alcohol won’t master you. Do whatever you do for the Glory of God, then be satisfied in him and you won’t have to look for satisfaction in a bottle.”

Unnecessary Walls

The difficulty of the Christian life is that the Christian message we are to proclaim is intrinsically exclusive. On one hand, it is radically inclusive, that it is offered freely to everyone. At the same time, it is extremely exclusive for those who reject it, they will ultimately lose the hope of Jesus and salvation in it.

It is for this reason that I caution anyone to tread lightly over issues of personal conviction. When we insist that the very act of drinking is sinful we wrongfully add to the prescription that the bible actually gives. The problem with a person’s drunkenness is that the act was probably preceded by a host of other poor decisions. Poor friends that make bad choices perhaps. Overall immaturity or lack of discipline would be a potential sign. Somewhere, someone could of stepped in along the way and spoke the truth to this person.

Instead, if we choose to promote the negative uses of alcohol and insist that complete abstaining is biblical and anything less is a sin, or less than perfectly holy, then we build extra-biblical walls of division. There are certainly biblical things to divide over, but drinking should not be one of them. It discourages open dialogue, and, as in my own case, promotes self-righteousness. So when a young person falls into this particular sin they keep it hidden, and avoid help because of the guilt, scorn, and disappointment they may receive. They feel that they are unable to openly confess, as was the case in the context I grew up in, that they may have somehow messed up Gods plan for their life. Or on the other hand, it may lead some unbelievers to falsely believe that their alcohol use, even if it is proper use, is a point of division between them and the church, or even worse, them and Jesus.

I didn’t have my first drink of anything until I was 28. I only drink with people I trust, normally with other dudes that have the same values as I do, men that are married, love Jesus and are disciplined themselves. I can not think of a time that I’ve had more than two beers in one sitting, I’ve never even been tipsy, and if that ever where to happen, the friends I surround myself with would have no problem cutting me off. I make wise decisions that surround my consumption so to help prevent me from failing, even though sinning with alcohol is not something I particularly struggle with. Isn’t this how we should guard all of our activities?

Worshipping with Beer

Let me wrap up with a personal account. My dad has had it pretty tough. A good dad, I am super grateful for, still his life has not turned out the way he expected. When I was a freshman in high school my parents got divorced. In my opinion my dad hasn’t been the same since. He left the church feeling that the church had failed to intervene and help my parents when they needed it most, my mom would agree on this. Feeling rejected my dad became more and more careless with own personal discipline, especially around alcohol. To him, this became part of the ever-widening barrier between him and religion, and where people on the religious side took issue, he found a group of people who took no issue, and were even permissive. We are built for community, and my dad found a new community centered around a bar stool.

Fast forward to this past Christmas. I get a call from my dad, “Hey come down to Willie’s (a local sports bar), your brother is down here and I want to give you some money to spend on the girls (my five daughters) for Christmas.” “Sure”, I thought, ” I need to get some shopping done anyway.” My brother was the first to greet me and ordered me a Black & Tan, he had known about my recent change in convictions, whereas my dad had not. We sat and ate a meal, caught up and hung out. If I still held to my previous more conservative convictions, this moment would of never happened, I wouldn’t of been invited for fear of offending me. It was great, I, the pious religious son, got to connect with my dad in a way that we hadn’t in a long time.

I started to excuse myself to leave when my dad said “Hey, before you go do a Christmas shot with me.” I hadn’t even finished my Black & Tan so I was more than okay, “Sure dad!” He ordered a shot for both of us and as we began to tip them back, he said to me “I never thought I’d have a beer and share a shot with you.” My reply, “Well dad, people change.”

It was a God moment. What my dad previously thought impossible, was now possible. “People change”, and its true, if God can change your religious son’s self-righteous heart, he can change yours as well. In that moment, the truth of the gospel that I want my dad, and others like him to know, is that “This drink in my hand is not a barrier between our relationship as father and son, and it is also not a barrier between you and God.” I left giving my dad a hug and telling him to come visit us at church. He said he would, but I’m sure we may have to share a few more shots before that happens.

image

Grace&Peace.

I’m a Theist, and I have a beard.

Standard

So watch out! I don’t know whats wrong with me, I’m not sure what shape this blog is about to take. I’ve written things before and people seem to enjoy them, so I figured its time to get organized about it. I’m no one special, I don’t think my thoughts and ideas are exceptional, but just maybe they are worth exploring. So explore, rant with me, dive in with me, help me work this out.

I hope this blog is personal, thought provoking and informative. I am going to try my best to be genuine and honest. I am going to try my best to communicate clearly, effectively and thoroughly. I’m going to try and engage respectfully anyone who differs from my opinion and see what happens. I hope that I display Christ, I hope that you will believe in him.

My biggest problem is what should my first post be, other than this intro. Do I do an autobiographical sketch, or do I tackle a huge topic, or something soft and easy? I don’t know, stay tuned and find out.