Insights from James - Part 3

This week our men's Bible study group looked at the third chapter of the book of James. As usual it was a great time of learning and fellowship. Not only did we discuss cars, rifles, unusual forms of dancing, and philosophy, we also strove to understand how tame the tongue and what it means to seek wisdom. The focus of our discussion yesterday was verses 13-18, about wisdom.

"[13] Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. [14] But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. [15] Such “wisdom” does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. [16] For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice. [17] But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere. [18] Peacemakers who sow in peace reap a harvest of righteousness."  (James 3:13-18, NIV)

I won't try to give an expository sermon here, but these are some key insights from our study:

• In essence wisdom = seeing things from God's perspective
• Likewise humility = a right view of yourself
• v13: Understanding God's view gives us a right view of ourselves, helps us see others as God does, and compels us from His love to care for them.
• Wisdom then is not a body of safe information you get (like accumulation of knowledge) but rather an ongoing sensitivity to the Holy Spirit which tunes us in to how God sees us and the world
• Envy demonstrates a misunderstanding of God's view, and selfish ambition displays a wrong view about ourselves
• Why is it key that wisdom is pure? You can understand and live out several of these virtues from a very wrong motive (as legalists) without being wise.
• Peace-loving, being a peacemaker, is not being a doormat. It's not a worldly peace defined by a lack of an external conflict, rather a Jewish peace of Shalom - a deeper harmony based on unity in God.
• Note the other attributes of godly wisdom: considerate, submissive, full of mercy - these are all characteristics that place other people as equal or more important than yourself. That's the key to Christ-like humility, and a faith that honors God. 

Are there other insights or takeaways you have from this passage?

Public service announcement on cooking pork

I read this over at 22 words and just had to pass it along...

The USDA has changed its stance on how to cook pork, and now asserting that it's ok if pork is a bit pink. More specifically, 145 degrees for whole meats including pork steaks, roasts and chops. (Why is this? The main risk for pork was the parasite trichinosis, but that really hasn't been seen since the 1950's.)

The Huffington post has another article confirming the change and hailing the new guidelines, as they note the old ones were "waaaay out of date and universally ignored by Chefs and skilled cooks."

What about chicken you ask? Great question! The safe temperature for cooking chicken remains the same, 165 degrees F, due to the very real threat of salmonella which is common in commercial chicken. Good hygiene and proper temperatures are important for handling and cooking poultry.

Ground beef and ground meets other than pork should still be cooked fairly well, up to 160F. Even if you love rare steak, there's really no advantage to getting all red inside your burger.

Beef steaks still have a 'recommended' temp of 145F (due to threat of E.Coli), but steakhouses would go out of business going more than 130-135F when the customer requests it rare-medium rare. Why do people cook it at lower temperatures without problem? Well, the harmful bacteria tend to be on the outside, and the searing of the steak over 300 degrees instantly kills them. Note! This is why if you cook medium rare steaks you should not poke holes in with a fork! You'll push any contaminants to the inside which will not reach sufficient temperature to kill them.

Thought you might like to know :)

Insights from James - Part 2

Our discussion of James 2 in my men's Bible study was quite interesting. There are two main themes in this chapter. The first is about showing (or not showing) favoritism. The key there is not that we can't recognize who is poor, rich, old or young, but that we tend to judge people based on external appearance, and to discriminate against them based on this faulty judgement. The text reminds us that we too will be judged, and that mercy triumphs over justice.

The most challenging part about James 2 is the teaching on the relationship between faith, deeds, and salvation.

- v14 asks if faith unaccompanied by works can save us? (v20 answers it's foolish to think so)
- v19 points out that even demons "believe" - that's not enough
- v21 suggest Abraham was "considered righteous" for his deeds (v22 expands that his faith and deeds were working together)
- v24 "You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone." (NIV)

So, what's the problem?

- Hebrews 11 talks about the supreme role that faith plays in salvation and righteous living, noting that Abraham was a man of faith
- Romans 4 and Galatians 3 seem to be crystal clear that salvation comes through faith alone, and in fact say Abraham was made righteous because of his faith. For example: "We have been saying that Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness." (Rom 4:9, NIV). Also v24: "God will credit righteousness—for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead."
- Eph 2:8-9 is also clear: "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast." (NIV)

Are these two authors teaching a contradictory view of salvation?

The answer is clearly: No. Paul is focusing on the angle of the means and cause of our salvation (repentance that results in faith in what Christ has done to save us from our sins) while James is simply looking at another angle - the natural result or demonstration of a faith that in fact saves is a manifestation of a changed life, of good deeds that spring from understanding and living in God's love. Paul's target was non-Christians (Jews) who were trying to justifying/save themselves by their good deeds and following the law. James is speaking to Jewish Christians (especially those suffering from persecution) who would prefer to rest on their laurels of believe and live life the way they want.

How do we confuse this? We've reduced the word "believe" to mere mental assent. (The demons believe in Christ.) Faith is believe in action. If you tell me that you believe an old wooden chair will hold you, but will not sit in it, then your believe is not faith. Faith is demonstrated by sitting in the chair. The act sitting down isn't what makes it faith, but shows it. The same Greek word 'pisteuō' is sometimes translated as 'believe' and other times 'to have faith'. The original readers didn't see two words - it is the modern mind which cheapens the idea of believe to an intellectual agreement. The other point of confusion is that the greek word 'dikaioō' sometimes means  "declared righteous" (as in Romans 4:2, 5:1, 5:9) but can also mean "demonstrates righteousness" (as here in James 2:21, 2:24, 2:25). The completed work of Christ on the cross, an act of grace received by faith, is what justifies us (makes us righteous), but our deeds and love for one another demonstrate that this righteousness has been made real in our lives. I John 1:6-7 point out that if we walk in darkness, with no fruit or good deeds, our faith is a sham and the truth is not in us, while if we walk in the light, then Christ's blood in fact has paid the price for our sins.

Its no coincidence that Ephesians 2:10 follows v8-9: "For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." We are saved in order that we might do good works - it is not true that we must do good works in order to be saved. This is a critical distinction, but one that should be clear from studying all the passages mentioned above.

KJV 400th Anniversary

On May 2nd, 1611, the King James Version of the Bible was published by the Church of England. Today marks the 400th anniversary of this landmark translation. It's not the first English version, but the most influential in putting the Scriptures into the language of the common man.

The online bible YouVersion is celebrating today with a virtual flash mob - a reading of the entire King James Bible in just 400 seconds, at noon today. Those who register get assigned a random chapter to read. I have to laugh at 'random' - out of the 1189 chapters of the Bible which did I end up getting? James 2 - the very chapter I'm studying this week in my men's Bible study!?! How cool is that :)

James 2, KJV

My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors. For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty. For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment. What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Insights from James - Part 1 Count it all joy

I recently hopped into a new men's Bible study at our church - the Black Coffee Dude's study. It's obscenely early in the morning (6:00am), but the guys and the coffee make it worthwhile. We're going through the book of James, so I thought I would post some insights from our study each week. Today we looked at verses 1:1-18.

Context: The author James is a pillar of the early church and is writing to a Jewish Christian audience scattered away from Jerusalem, facing significant persecution. As our study leader and D.A. Carson's father like to say: "A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text."

v2 - Gotta love how the letter starts out: "Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds." (quotes here are NIV)  Seriously?! Ouch! Talk about hard application. He follows with the reason "because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything."

-> Regardless of the reason for the trial, temptation, or suffering, there is the option to respond in joy for the chance to grow closer to God and grow in character (not joyful in the event itself). We'll have to face the trial regardless, and the pain is real, but the type of person who emerges from the trial depends on this choice of attitude.

v6 - why is it bad to pray for wisdom while doubting? Practically speaking, if you lack faith that God is listening, that He cares, or that He is able to see you through and help you grow, the result will almost surely be bitterness and greater confusion. When the circumstances don't change, our natural inclination will be to blame God for not rescuing us. But remember, we're to pray here for wisdom, not an escape from the circumstance of our trial.

-> The context is a group of believers suffering for holding on to their faith. Their suffering would go away if they simply deny their faith. To stay faithful means the persecution and pain will continue. What's needed in this circumstance is the strength to endure, and the wisdom to know how to live and witness. In doing so we follow in the example of Christ and grow in fellowship with Him.

What is the difference between trial and temptation? (v1,12,13,14)  Actually, these words are used almost interchangeably in different translations, and with good reason. The underlying Greek word is the same for both: peirasmos/peirazō, which means the type of trial or temptation in which a man is tested. It's utterly natural for man to consider taking the easy way out, satisfying his own desire rather than God's desire. Circumstances plus this desire lead to the temptation - God does not need to do anything special.

-> The purpose of trial / temptation is not for God to find out how we'll respond (He already knows), but for us to realize what kind of person we are and how strong our faith is. Why is this necessary for us to grow? If we don't know when/how our faith is weak, we will not turn to God for strength. God through the Holy Spirit offers the strength and means to avoid temptation, but the choice is ours whether to seek His help. Pray for wisdom.

Back to verse 2... still, isn't it awful how rosy and unrealistic James is, asking us to reckon it as joy when we face these trials? What does he know about suffering and trials? It was a major "Aha!!" moment for me when I realized...

James is the brother (half-brother) of Jesus. Despite knowing Jesus well, he rejected His ministry and gave Him little respect. Then he had to watch the best brother the world has even known be tortured and killed on the cross. On top of that, he soon came to realize Jesus claims were true, feeling the shame of rejecting his brother and savior. (It's hard to convey just how powerfully and personally this struck me today.) Historians tell us that shortly after writing the epistle James faced the exact persecution he was telling others to count as joy! He was accused by religious leaders, facing being stoned to death unless he recanted his faith. His answer? James "declared himself fully before the whole multitude, and confessed that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, our Savior and Lord."  So this is a man who is acquainted with suffering, with trials, and who was in fact able to live out his own teaching - counting all this joy as a humble servant of Christ.

Ok, James, you've got my attention. Let's see what else the Spirit has to say through the words you wrote to your brothers - and to us. Father, grant us wisdom. Amen!

Pretty Bad Week

It's hard to even imagine that just ten days ago I had a post called "Pretty Good Week" with everything looking rosy. This week is another matter. It's probably the most painful week I've had in the past two decades. Several painful things (and one extremely sad thing) are going on, and I've been crying on and off all day today. Most of the things going on I can't even get into, so let me just ask for your prayers this week. It would mean a lot to me.  Thanks...

I'm thankful that God's love, His blessings, and his sovereignty are constant, even though my circumstances and feelings are not. This week I'm extremely glad to say "He is risen!!"

Radical Revisited

Recently I took at look at David Platt's new books "Radical" and "Radical Together." These are good books that strongly make the point that the kind of obedience required to be a disciple of Jesus is more than most of us like to admit. Jesus' call is for a radical obedience that will follow Him in whatever He asks of us. The major issue I had with Radical was the suggestion that those who were choosing more exotic or dangerous paths (selling their homes and moving to a developing nation to share Christ) were inherently better disciples or glorifying God more than those who felt led to remain in the situation they are in.

Skye Jethani wrote a two-part article, "Redefining Radical" (part-one and part-two) where he makes the case that the call to radical mission is not the solution to consumerist Christianity. He had the same misgivings I had about the book.

“How radical do I have to be?” the suburban mom asked. She had recently read a number of Christian books decrying the self-centered nature of much of the American church. The authors had apparently had enough of the consumer orientation of their congregations. As a remedy, each of the books calls readers to live a counter-cultural life of radical sacrifice and mission. The books, while inspiring, left this woman feeling “exhausted.”

The rally cry to consumerist Christians is to become activists - whether that means sharing the gospel message (for traditional evangelicals) or compassion and justice (for many emerging and/or younger evangelicals). Jethani points out that if we're not careful, we replace one error with another. The story of the prodigal son in Luke 15 shows two paths that ignore the father's love - the younger prodigal son choosing the path of consumerism, but equally wrong is the older son who is far more interested in obedience to his father than loving communion with his father.

Skye asks "Whatever happened to a theology of calling and vocation?" He points out that Platt seems to really miss the reformed view of calling and vocation, whereby each of us has an occupation that (with the right attitude) is pleasing to God and necessary for society. I think he nails the problem the view expressed in Radical and elsewhere when he says "perhaps even more disturbing than our implicit ranking of vocations is how we have pushed the Holy Spirit out of the picture and instead taken it upon ourselves to tell people what they should be doing for God, or at the very least what they ought to do if they want their lives to really matter." Have we ignored the teaching by Paul in I Corinthians 7:17 - "Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them." Paul stresses that keeping God's commands with a right heart is what counts.

As fully devoted followers of Christ, we should live out a radical obedience, and we should be willing to do anything the Lord asks of us, even to lay down our lives. Yet this does not mean that He is calling us all in the same way, or that the suburban mom is any less devoted to the Lord than someone sharing the good news in a distant land.

Pretty good week

It's only Monday, but it's been a pretty good week so far! On Friday night, I got to enjoy date night with my wife (Thanks Purdue BCM and Parent's night out!) Men's breakfast on Saturday was great, followed by going to see Megamind with the family. After that mom got to relax in the hammock, I got some reading in, and Sunday was pretty awesome too.

Today I found out I won not one but two books from blog give-aways :)
* Weird - the new book by Craig Groeschel (Thank you Michael Hyatt!)
* Launching Missional Communities - by Mike Breen and Alex Absalom
  (Thank you Ron Edmondson!)  I've wanted to read this one since seeing Rob Wegner's review.

Not every week goes like this, but I'll take it when it does!

Review - When Christians Get It Wrong

I recently saw a book with a catchy title and started reading it -- "When Christians Get It Wrong" by Adam Hamilton. He makes some excellent points in the book, and does a great job at describing the need for humility among church leaders (well, all Christians). There are a number of things that some Christians do, say or believe that are increasingly aggravating - both for people outside and inside the church! He does a good job with the discussion of the relationship between Christianity and politics. The book is easy to read, and is clearly written by someone with the loving heart of a pastor. And yet, I found myself growing increasingly uneasy reading this book. Hamilton isn't saying our practice of the Christian message is wrong, but he's saying that on several fairly important issues that our doctrine is wrong, promoting alternatives which do not seem biblical.

Looking on Amazon the reviews were almost universally positive (clearly showing that the issues Hamilton addresses are very important and resonate with many people). Also it's recommended by several pastors and authors I respect a lot. I must differ with them. There are two other books I've read which also do a superb job at pointing out several perceived and real flaws among the church today. These are unChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity... and Why It Matters and They Like Jesus but Not the Church: Insights from Emerging Generations. There is a very significant difference between 'When Christians Get it Wrong' and these other books. The goal of the latter is for Christians to practice a Christian message that is closer to what Jesus himself taught and lived. The flaws they identify are more with the practice (and arrogance) of many Christians. In Hamilton's book, he goes a step further and says that the actual teaching or doctrine of the church is wrong - not just their practices. Specifically he espouses distinctly non-traditional views on the topics of salvation (where he promotes a very inclusivist view, bordering on universalism), beliefs on homosexuality, and about the omniscience and omnipotence of God (in discussing why bad things happen). Whether the lack of orthodoxy in this book's teaching is a good or a bad thing will depend on the perspective of the reader - in particular on their view of the authority of Scripture. But it's important to note the major difference in approach that Hamilton takes compared to the authors like Kinnamon and Lyons or Dan Kimball in addressing the important ways in which Christians don't get it right.

When Christians Get It Wrong raises some critical issues, but it should be read with careful discernment.

Doing a 360

I mentioned recently that I'm taking a class on "Practicing the Focused Life." One of our key assignments was to go through a "360 Evaluation." Basically, a group of 5-8 people comprised of your supervisor, peers, and those you supervise respond anonymously evaluating how your are doing with respect to a set of competencies that are important to your organization and your your own development. In this case we did a self-evaluation on ourselves, answering the same questions as the reviewers. It was also something we self-evaluated a few years go, which allows the students to see progress. The 360 Evaluation can be a bit intimidating, and this was the first time I've done something like this. What if those you work closely with in ministry have a very different (lower!?) opinion of your competencies than you do? Well that would signal a major growth opportunity, but it would also be depressing.

In this case I was pretty relieved to see that my peers and colaborers in ministry had a very similar assessment as my own for a dozen competencies that had been targeted for development through classes and projects. The comparison to the earlier self-evaluation was also encouraging. Change has been so slow it has seemed insignificant, but over the course of two and a half-years I've made significant progress in a number of areas.

Have you ever been part of a 360 evaluation? How did it go?
What growth have you seen in your own character or competences in the past year or two?