StudyGrowKnow

Not Enough “Love” and Not Literal Enough?

September 18, 2012 at 3:09 PM 4 comments

There are two things I want to talk about in this blog:  being loving and being literal.

Not long ago on a social network, someone posted a picture of a group of atheists protesting and one of them was holding up a sign that said something like “If Jesus Returns, Kill Him Again!”  As you might expect, numerous people said they would pray for the man and some sadly reminded all of us that individuals like that will spend an eternity apart from God.  You know, the run of the mill type of comments that are posted in response to this type of absurdity.

However, one individual made some comments that jumped out at me and caused me to post my own comments in response.  Her comments essentially stated that it was the Christian’s fault that people think as this atheist thinks. Her argument was that Christians simply do not love enough.  We have failed miserably and the only thing that would turn that around was to LOVE, LOVE, LOVE – LOTS OF LOVE!  She even used all caps as she wrote.

I thought about that for two seconds and realized that she was dead wrong.  While it is true that some Christians are guilty of not having truly loving attitudes towards the lost, this, in and of itself, is a non-argument because the visible Church is filled with authentic and inauthentic Christians.

Most in the world can’t tell the difference between someone who simply SAYS they are a Christian and someone who actually IS a Christian.  The world doesn’t care either because in most cases, they are merely interested in pointing fingers at alleged Christians behaving badly.  Doesn’t matter to them whether or not the person at the other end of their finger is a true Christian or simply a professing one.  They are solely interested in trying to defame all Christians and Christianity.  They want to poke fun at and demoralize Christians by pointing out the people who say they are Christians but do not live as though they are Christians.  They literally expect Christians to be perfect and when we aren’t, they go off.

At the same time, authentic Christians are not perfect, even those who believe that we can (erroneously) attain to a level of sinless perfection in this life are unable to do it.  We continue to have the sin nature in this life and we deal with the weaknesses of the flesh every day.  At times – unfortunately – we fail, but most of the time, we do not wish to fail because we know that it brings dishonor to God and reminds us again why He chose to die for us – a very painful death on Calvary’s cross.  So, I’m not saying that the only people who make mistakes are the ones who merely profess to be Christians.  Authentic Christians make their share of mistakes.  That is clear and it is unfortunately, unavoidable, though in our daily walk, we should constantly die to our selfishness.

But the woman who posted her opinion was completely missing something that I felt needed to be pointed out to her.  When Jesus walked this earth, He was (and remains) the very epitome of love and perfection.  Everything He did He did from the perspective of love.  He loved (and still loves) people – all people.  He spoke with the Samaritan woman at the well though in general Jews would have not given her the time of day.  He took time to answer questions from the rich young ruler.  He dealt with thieves, demoniacs, tax collectors, treacherous people and even religious leaders.  He even put up with Judas Iscariot by treating him lovingly in spite of knowing what Judas would become:  a traitor.  Jesus dealt with all of them and He had nothing but love for them.  He never sinned and never made a mistake.  He never said the wrong thing or had a wrong thought about someone.  He never lusted after a woman. He never stole anything.  He never blasphemed.  In short, He never did anything wrong, ever.

So how did people respond to Him?  Often the same way they do now.  They hated Him then and they hate Him now and His followers.  In general, they wanted Him dead and they got their wish.  They made it happen because of their abject hatred of Him.  It didn’t matter that He healed people or raised the dead.  The religious leaders and legalists wanted to know by what authority He did those things.  Never mind that He did them and they couldn’t.  Repeatedly, time after time, Jesus removed the obstacles from people’s lives so that they could see the truth about Him.  Those who continued to reject Him grew in their hatred of Him.  The idea that if only Christians supposedly loved more, this world would not have atheists is patently absurd and it is difficult for me to understand how anyone who claims to be a Christian can actually believe that.  I can certainly understand a Christian’s heart going out to the lost of this world, but to believe that their continued rejection of God in Christ is due to my inability to love better is absurd.

I love as best as I am able right now.  Hopefully, I love better today than I did yesterday and I am also hopeful that tomorrow I will love greater than I love today.  However, until the day I die, I will not love as perfectly as Jesus did and does on a consistent basis.  What does that tell me?  It tells me that no matter how much I learn to love people from my heart, it will never come close to how much Jesus loved (and loves) people.  In spite of the perfection and consistency of His love, He was roundly rejected by most and killed by the religious leaders who handed Him over to Rome for crucifixion.  Oh, I’m not blaming the Jews for Jesus’ death.  We all had a hand in that – Jew and Gentile.  Ultimately, it was God’s plan to showcase for the entire universe the exact definition of LOVE.  He scored big on that one.  The entire Creation itself will one day come to fully understand that what Jesus did, He did because He is perfect love.  That will bring Him glory to the highest degree.  Though redemption is good for humanity and the Creation itself, there is a much higher purpose for redemption than merely saving souls (as wonderful as that is).  It is in showcasing the absolute perfection of God in His love, His purity, His holiness, and His justice.  All of these things and much more are perfectly displayed through the plan of redemption.  People who think that God’s highest purpose is found in redemption miss the point entirely, in my opinion.  That stems from egocentric thinking.  God’s highest purpose is in using redemption to call attention to His perfect and far-reaching attributes.  Redemption does this better than anything else, but redemption is not an end in and of itself.  It points to God and His marvelous attributes and characteristics.

So when Jesus walked this earth, the world hated Him and the world continues to hate Him and those who follow Him.  Should that surprise me?  No, not if I take His Words as they are meant.  Matthew 10:22 states, “You will be hated by all because of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved.”  Really?  Hated?  Yep.  You mean no matter how much I love people because of what Jesus did for me (and them), the world will still continue to hate me and want me dead?  Yep.  It’s that simple really.  So the woman who posted her drivel is all wet.  She simply proves what she does not know about Jesus and the Bible.  She is running on some emotion that she believes is love, but in the end, is merely an emotion.  Love is not an emotion.  It is something far greater than that.  While it can cause us to feel emotions, love itself is not an emotion.  It is a mindset.  A direction.  A distinct way of living so that others benefit.  Jesus loved when He did not “feel” like it.  He loved because He is God and He could do nothing less.

So then how does a person become saved if they are so desirous of hating authentic Christians?  It happens when God chooses to open a person’s eyes to the truth.  When He does that, they have a great chance to become saved.  They are given a tremendous opportunity to embrace that truth that they are now able to see.  Once they embrace it, they become a true child of God, having entered into a relationship with Jesus Christ Himself.  That is the definition of salvation!  That IS salvation.  It is only in our union with Christ – our living relationship with Him – that IS salvation.  It’s not a set of rules.  It’s not a list of doing or not doing.  It is an honest-to-goodness quality relationship with Jesus that brings to us salvation.

I am married to a wonderful woman and have been for going on 26 years.  I am in relationship with her.  Because of that, I am no longer single and no longer on my own, for as long as the Lord gives both of us life.  Because of this relationship, I am “saved” from being single (I don’t mean that in any negative sense).  I can live as if I am single, but then what would be the point to that?  It would be living a lie because I am not single.  Being married has placed me in a relationship; a relationship that I do not want to be without.

I am in a relationship with Jesus and it is through the indwelling Holy Spirit that the relationship I have with Him comes alive.  It is what saves me from myself and from eternal death.

Jesus loved and He loved perfectly, unconditionally, and without fail.  Yet, He was hated and killed.  How can anyone think that somehow if Christians could simply love better, the world would be a better place with fewer atheists?  There is nothing that I can find in Scripture that teaches that.  In fact, I see just the opposite throughout His Word.  Satan hates authentic Christians because he hates Jesus and he (Satan) gets the lost of this world to do his dirty work!  It’s that simple.  The religious righteous of Jesus’ day likely thought they were behaving as something Moses would have been proud of, but in the end, they were being used by the enemy of God – Satan – because they had no relationship with God in the first place.  This is the way it is with the world.  Satan, the great deceiver comes alongside of the lost and urges them to work within the law to remove prayer in school, to tear down the Ten Commandments from government buildings, to not allow some valedictorian to use the Name of Jesus in their speech and much, much more.  It has nothing to do with the way authentic Christians love and everything to do with the way Satan hates.

It makes no sense to say that the reason atheists exist as they do is because Christians are not as loving as they ought to be and it certainly does not coincide with what we are taught in Scripture.  At the same time, I need to continue loving people (however imperfectly I can manage in His strength) in spite of the fact that they will continue to hate me and all Christians.  It’s not an option.

Now, regarding the other point – not being literal enough – I read a comment by someone today who denigrated Dispensationalists.  He stated, “If it’s one thing dispensationalists don’t do is interpret the Bible literally. They don’t take the time texts (near, shortly, and quickly) literally or the way Jesus uses “this generation.” I’ve read a lot of dispensational works on Ezekiel 38 and 39, and few understand horses, shields, chariots, bows and arrows in a literal way. Bows and arrows are missile launchers and missiles, and horses are “horse power.”

Let me just say that this individual is confusing being literal with being literalistic.  He does this a lot in many of his musings.  As just one example, with respect to his assertion regarding Ezekiel 38-39, he’s arguing that the text should be taken literalistically, not literally, though he would deny that.  When we look at the text in question, it is clear (at least to me) that the terms used by God to the prophet Ezekiel – shields and bucklers, horses, chariots, etc. – are to be understood as instruments of warfare, plain and simple.

The text refers to the Northern Invasion and this event has not occurred yet, in my view.  It is still future.  The gist of it is that Gog (the leader of the Northern Invasion troops) will one day decide to attack Israel.  Ultimately, God is telling Ezekiel that Gog will do this because it is He – God – who puts the idea in Gog’s head.  Nonetheless, Gog thinks it’s his plan and goes with it.  As he gathers all of his armies, they cross the land moving toward Israel and wind up forming a tremendous cloud because of all their horses and armies.  Once they arrive and step foot on the very Mountains of Israel, God opens fire with a tremendously huge earthquake that every living creature on the earth notices (including those creatures in the sea and in the air).  On a side note, could this earthquake be so large (the text says it will bring mountains down) that the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa mosques will be knocked down as well?  I think it’s a very real possibility.  God then takes out Gog’s armies with pestilence, fire, brimstone, and even causes the armies to turn on one another.

After it is all over and thousands upon thousands of troops lie dead and dying, God calls the carrion and beasts of the field to fill themselves on the bodies and to drink their fill of their blood.  Why?  Well, as God tells Ezekiel (and in Revelation 16), the world will have persecuted His faithful with their blood running like rivers during the history of the world and into the final period just prior to Jesus’ return, so God repays them by sacrificing them for the animals.

But it is interesting to me that the poster’s comments are as they are and he cannot see that in cases like this, it is actually understanding the text in the literal sense when it is simply referring to weapons of warfare, not specific armaments.  For one thing, the text is clearly prophetic.  It has not happened yet, but it is still yet future from 2012.  Do I think that Gog – whoever he turns out to be – is going to use horses and chariots in his Northern Invasion campaign?  Hardly.  So, if I do not interpret the word “horse” to mean “horse,” I am not taking the text literally?  It all depends on the way it is used and its context.

Can you imagine if God had tried to describe through Ezekiel the specific armaments that would be used by the future Gog?  We would be reading about grenade launchers, ground-to-air missiles, armored tanks, grenade rifles or .50 caliber weapons and other things?  Why would there have been a need for God to include references to these types of modern weaponry?  That was not the purpose of what God was trying to say.  It is enough that God was informing Ezekiel that Gog and his armies would come to a terrible end.  That is the point of the text, not which specific armaments Gog would use.  Not to mention, if Almighty God did list the exact weaponry that the future Gog will have in his arsenal, people would be having a field day trying to zero in on the exact time frame of the event.  God used general terminology that means implements of war.

This type of general language representing warfare would be easily and clearly understood by readers throughout the generations.  The poster is making a mountain out of nothing, not even a molehill.  He assumes many things and I believe he is wrong.  I’ve even exchanged emails with him about these things, but he’s immovable.  He happens to be a Preterist and does not believe that Jesus will return for a literal 1,000-year reign either.  Such is life and he is entitled to his opinion.  The problem is when he confuses terms like literal for literalistic.

My wife has had many years of teaching students with special needs.  I have some experience myself in that area, but she has far more.  She has dealt with students who are very literalistic in their understanding.  If you tell one of those students – as an example – to go and change his socks, he is apt to simply remove his socks and put the one that was on the right foot on the left and the one that was on the left on the right.  He has “changed” his socks.  It never occurred to him to get a new pair out of the dresser and put that clean pair on.

People who accuse people like me of not really taking the Bible literally use faulty definitions to start with and then go further wrong from that point.  If you see a sign on the highway that says “Fine for Littering,” you will understand that to mean that if you toss something out the window and a law enforcement official sees you do it, you will likely be pulled over and presented with a piece of paper that says you will have to pay a fine.  In other words, you pay a fine for littering.

However, some on the Autism Spectrum would understand that sign to mean that “it is perfectly fine to litter.” My first example in the previous paragraph highlights what it means to understand the sign literally.  The second example in this paragraph highlights what it means to understand the same sign literalistically.

When it comes to Scripture – like anything else – my interest in is gaining the literal meaning of the text.  That’s what I’m shooting for.  What the poster is pointing to is that the text says horses, chariots, shields and bucklers, so it must be literalistically those items.  He’s ignoring the context and the many other uses of this type of text within Scripture as related to warfare armaments.  Therefore, if this event has not occurred yet and is still future, we should expect to see Gog leading multitudes of troops on horseback as they cross the sands of the Middle East deserts for the purpose of invading Israel.  If we do not see it that way, then we are not interpreting Scripture literally.  I’m sorry, but that is absurd.

There is no such restriction on the text.  If we do it his way, we would actually be interpreting Scripture literalistically. However, the reason that he chooses to insist on that level of interpretation is because he personally believes that the events of Ezekiel 38-39 are in the past and not the future.  He’s one of those who (wrongly) believe that life is going to get better and better and if Christians would just work harder at converting the lost, Jesus will be able to return sooner.  I don’t see this taught in Scripture at all and the only way you can arrive to that conclusion is by allegorizing the biblical text.

So his real point is that because Dispensationalists do not (allegedly) take Scripture literally at all points, he is free to allegorize Scripture as he sees fit so no one should point out to him that potential for error.  It doesn’t work that way at all, but shhh…don’t tell him that.  Those who allegorize Scripture appear to do so at their whim.  As someone who interprets Scripture literally (again, not literalistically), I understand when I arrive at a point in the text where it is obviously symbolic.  However, even in symbolism, there is essentially one meaning and most of the time, the symbolism is defined right in the text of that same chapter.  On rare occasions, you have to go to other books in Scripture to determine meaning.  Because I understand Scripture literally, that does not mean that I discount symbolism or metaphors.  I don’t do that in normal, daily conversation.  Why would I do that with Scripture?

If I said, “Hey, cat got your tongue?” you would know what I literally meant by that, wouldn’t you?  You would not thinking that I actually (or literalistically) thought that a cat really had hold of your tongue, would you?  Of course not.  You understand metaphors, similes, and other forms of symbolic speech and allegory.  It occurs every day in discourse and we don’t bat an eye because we understand the literal meaning.

I’ve written a book about understanding the Bible literally and in fact, it was the very first book I wrote called Interpreting the Bible Literally is Not as Confusing as it Sounds.  You can download a completely free PDF copy of it here, if you like:  http://studygrowknow.com/interpreting.html

Entry filed under: 9/11, alienology, Atheism and religion, Communism, Demonic, dispensationalism, Eastern Mysticism, emergent church, Gun Control, Islam, Islamofascism, israel, Judaism, Life in America, Maitreya, new age movement, Posttribulational Rapture, Pretribulational Rapture, Radical Islam, rapture, Religious - Christian - End Times, Religious - Christian - Prophecy, Religious - Christian - Theology, salvation, Satanism, second coming, Sharia Law, Socialism, temple mount, Transhumanism, ufology. Tags: atheist says if jesus returns kill him again, christians are not loving enough, gary demar, understanding the bible literalistically, understanding the bible literally.