Further Issuances

Well? This past week I uh.... reformatted my computer. That's interesting isn't it? I transferred all my files to my parent's computer, erased mine, installed Windows XP Pro (which I got from the college) and then put everything back on. The problem is getting all of my updates to all the programs (I had old copies of all my installers) because of the poor connection. Ah well, I'll fix it all up eventually.

As briefly as I can, I'll try to write down some of the thoughts I've had over the past week and especially yesterday during church and what came after. Sort of like a journal entry I suppose, if I had a journal :)

The pastor spoke in Sunday School about the second commandment, not to have any idols. He also said he was convicted that since we do not know what the Lord Jesus Christ looked like, that he felt it was improper to have images of him (I agree as it says in the RPCNA Testimony, 21:3), he also stated that the pictures we make of Jesus Christ tend to be what we envision as a perfect human being, whereas Isaiah 53:2 (he quoted) says that he had no "stately form or majesty, that we should look upon him." I would be cautious with this interpretation of that verse though, I don't think it means that Christ wasn't comely or ugly in human appearance, but that he didn't come in the glory anticipated, with trumpets blaring and a great army, he was lowly of birth and of appearance, meaning that he didn't look like a king. Whether he was humanly beautiful in appearance I don't care to speculate upon, what we do know is that no one spoke like him before, and that is what is important. But I do agree with the pastor that often we make God what we want him to be, rather than what he really is as revealed in his words and we tend to focus on what is most important to us whereas his wrath and justice upon the wicked are equally as glorifying to him as his mercy and love upon his people. Which is precisely what I have made mention of in several discussions with people in regards to hymns that men have written. They almost exlusively focus on the aspect of Christ or God that they feel is most important, and that is always his love toward me. And while how wonderful this is, yes, it still doesn't teach and instruct the younger, convict the sinner, and keep in view all attributes of God as he has revealed himself.

Just a thought that came up as well: as I was sitting there listening to the sermon (which was on Colossians 3, the first 12 verses or so) something clicked for some reason which had never clicked before. When, in James 1:27 he says:
"Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world."
The mention of looking after orphans and widows has this main point: true religion acts! It lives itself out in daily life, not just on the Lord's Day or on any other special day, but everywhere at every time. Matthew Henry says:
"True religion teaches us to do every thing as in the presence of God. An unspotted life must go with unfeigned love and charity. Our true religion is equal to the measure in which these things have place in our hearts and conduct. And let us remember, that nothing avails in Christ Jesus, but faith that worketh by love, purifies the heart, subdues carnal lusts, and obeys God's commands."
Though this may not seem like much, it was like a shaft of light to my dark mind. Yes, I knew this, but it was made real to me and was along the lines of what J. Nathan had been speaking of with Ross upon, that works are not necessary to salvation, no, but a truly saved person LIVES! He lives out his religion in daily life! Of course Ross would just say that James was written to "the twelve tribes" and not to believers, how can you debate with a person that merely excludes whatever is contrary to what he believes?

Another thought that came up which I've thought of before (and I guess all of this is nothing really new but it's good to go over again at least for me) is that when I was younger I remember asking what a "gentile" was and being told that I was a gentile, according to the Bible, there were "Jews" and "Gentiles" and that those who were physical children of Abraham were Jews, and the rest were Gentiles. While this is true to a certain extent, a long time ago I read Romans 2:28-29
"For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God."
What? You mean that I am a Jew too! Especially over the past few years this has meant a lot to me. As one of God's people today, I belong to that true Israel! This really opens up Romans 9:6-8 and especially notice verse 8.
'6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,
7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but "Through Isaac shall your offspring be named."
8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.'

This has become even more amazing the more I think about it and has meant a lot as I have read through the the Old Testament again this year. David isn't just a hero of the Hebrews, he is MY hero, my spiritual predecessor. This is my history, my heritage. It's not just the history of the Jewish nation (and ho-hum we have the NEW Testament now) it's for me. "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work." 2 Tim 3:16-17.
No, of course I don't believe that we are still under the rituals and sacrifices that were instituted by God under Moses, that has been fulfilled in Christ, but now I get to see HOW it was fulfilled, those spiritual giants that Hebrews eleven speaks of. In distinction to this, I see so many people living under the aura of dispensationalism. The more vehement forms (like with Ross) saying that many parts of the New Testament don't apply to us (we're not Jews after all) and of course the Old doesn't! I recall an elderly lady around here, when we were going to look at property, who said "Oh Cheyenne," speaking to the young real-estate agent who was with us, "That's the OLD Testament, we don't need that anymore." What a precious piece of heritiage and instruction they are losing, and they are losing the entire meaning and sense of what Christ accomplished for us. It's boring to those who look at it this way, but it's been very exciting for me this past time through. I fear that even many people who would not claim dispensationalism openly, do still operate under that sort of influence. It's the living Word of God that we are speaking of, not just some dry, dusty manuscripts.

I was going to do a short study on the Sabbath day as well (which is partially what spawned some of the above statements) but shall save that for some other time perhaps. This update doesn't seem very long but I've got a few letters I wanted to write today and time's a-wastin'! Thanks to all the people (again) who have left me comments, I appreciate them!