The Fear of God

  The Fear of God

The fear of God is an important, yet little studied topic. Let’s start by examining Acts 2:41-47, using the New King James (NKJ):

Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. 42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43 Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. 44 Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, 45 and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. 46 So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, 47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.

You may ask, in light of their joy of being a new creation in Christ, being happily together quite regularly, and being able to see incredible miracles, why do they experience "fear?"  One might argue that they were afraid of miracles, but that doesn't make sense--seeing a miracle of healing would make them rejoice; "this is the right group to be in," I would say. I maintain that this is a fear of the superpower of God instead.  We will study how that connects. Also, we ask, in light of the tremendous power the church had, being close to God, sharing their assets compassionately with one another, and “having favor with all the people”—were these wonderful things caused by their fear of God? It wouldn’t seem possible—such a negative emotion as fear connecting to their joy and upright behavior. Let’s explore this mystery together.

The Greek translated “fear” is phobos—from which we get phobia, defined as “a persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of a specific thing.” But Greek lexicons give phobos a range: Fear, dread, terror, to reverence, respect, or awe. Awe is “the astonished, weighty sense of God’s power and presence.” Vine’s is my favorite (not because of this); for one meaning, the “bad” definition of fear was when Jesus spoke: “dread, terror, always with this significance in the four Gospels.” If Jesus spoke harshly when He used the term, why wouldn’t we?

I have heard "fear" downgraded by so many pastors to "reverence" (which few know what that is, so they can dismiss the whole thing.) The other meaning of phobos in Vine’s is less intimidating but is still weighty (not the weak “awe)”:  “reverential fear of God as a controlling motive of the life; in matters spiritual and moral, not a mere fear of His power and righteous retribution, but a dread of displeasing Him.” It's not like just saying, "God, sorry I did that."  Think hard on the real meaning of "dread."

Examine your hearts: when you're thinking of sinning, do you have a real dread of displeasing Him, and that completely removes the impulse of desire? Is your fear of what He might do, enough to make you stop cold? Is the fear of God a controlling motive in your life? I suspect the only thing keeping us back from many sins is the fear of being discovered by our friends or family and losing our reputations. The serious dread of displeasing God is much worse, but...often it's just not there; we just don’t think about Him.

Many sermons are expounded on God’s love, few on His hate--of sin. Of course, we assume God hates the sin but loves the sinner. If that’s true, why do so many people end up there? Many sermons on “God is love,” few on fearing Him. This paper will attempt to show how many verses there are on how fear of God is good for you, and show you that it is a desirable attribute. Hopefully after reading it you can introspect on His holiness and get to know His “dark side” more. Like medicine, it will seem unpleasant—but it’s good for you.

Let's begin with two verses from Proverbs, 9:10:

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

And Proverbs 10:27:

The fear of the Lord prolongs days: but the years of the wicked shall be shortened

I could end this blog right here; If God says it, I believe it.  Do you, though? You want to be truly smart?  You want to live longer?  Read God's Word with fear. I think of Judah’s king Josiah. His priest, upon digging around the former Temple (looking for money), found a copy of the Torah. II Kings 22:11ff tell the story: 

Now it happened, when the king heard the words of the Book of the Law, that he tore his clothes. ¹² Then the king commanded Hilkiah the priest, saying, ¹³ “Go, inquire of the Lord for me, for the people and for all Judah, concerning the words of this book that has been found; for great is the wrath of the Lord that is aroused against us, because our fathers have not obeyed the words of this book, to do according to all that is written concerning us.”

 Do you feel that His Word is not "wisdom;" it's comfort?  Well, God's purpose is not to make you feel good; it is in pruning, in sanctifying you.  Another statement in Proverbs says we should never owe anybody--you that are under a mountain of debt, do you believe that?  That's just one of the many, many ways to gain wisdom.  Consider the stories (I hate that word--these events all happened exactly as written) of the giants of the faith--they had their weaknesses, too (except Jesus).  How did they handle such weaknesses?  We see, in Scripture, the results of pride, and of humility; of rich people, of poor people.  Scripture tells the whole story, like no other.

Let’s begin with Genesis 20:11, 17 and 18, where Abraham sees the good side of men fearing God: They would be less likely to murder him and take his beautiful wife:

And Abraham said, “Because I thought, surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will kill me on account of my wife...So Abraham prayed to God; and God healed Abimelech, his wife, and his female servants. Then they bore children; ¹⁸ for the Lord had closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech because of Sarah, Abraham’s wife.

He knew that God loves him, that following Him regardless, will all turn out well. Have we developed that trait? Note that his comment on how fear of God would prevent sin is agreed to by God, since He backed him up by healing a family.

In Genesis 31:42a, Jacob has a name for God: The Fear of Isaac. Nowhere does God disapprove of this name. Note how Jacob appreciates this-named God as his God, connecting it with His protection for him. Thus, the three patriarchs of Israel, giants in the faith, are all given to fearing God.  If Laban had that quality, he would not have twisted Jacob inside out:

Unless the God of my father, the God of Abraham and the Fear of Isaac, had been with me, surely now you (Laban) would have sent me away empty-handed.

In Exodus 1:17, the children of Israel are slaves in Egypt. The pharaoh, fearing for their numerical advantage, has instructed the Hebrew midwives to kill the boy babies as soon as they arrive out of the womb. But the midwives refuse to do it—even though disobeying pharaoh endangers their own lives—because of their fear of God (fear of His judgement for murder). Note His blessing on them because their fear of God was greater than their fear of the pharaoh.

But the midwives feared God, and did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the male children alive... because the midwives feared God…He provided households for them.

Maybe we’d have fewer abortions, if the mothers or attending nurses had a real fear of God today. In the 60 million abortions in the U.S. since Roe v Wade, these women (and some attending men) did not have enough fear of God to dread His ultimate punishment for murder. How many have read Galatians 5:21, which says that (unrepentant) murderers “will not inherit the kingdom of God,” and would spend an eternity in hell? (PS:  the end of Roe v. Wade has not dropped the number of abortions.)

In Exodus 14:31, after God’s great plagues, after the exodus, and His killing the pursuing Egyptians, then the children of Israel finally feared God. After that they really believed Moses and God. So, a real belief in God, with obedience following, results from a fear of God.

Thus Israel saw the great work which the LORD had done in Egypt; so the people feared the LORD, and believed the LORD and His servant Moses.

In Exodus 18:21, Moses is to select men as judges, an extremely important function. The first requirement for such men? You guessed it; they need to have a fear of God.

Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds…

In Exodus 20:20b, the Ten Commandments are given. The very first words that Moses says at this momentous occasion include the following:

God has come to test you, and that His fear may be before you, so that you may not sin.”

The Ten Commandments is supposed to show how much our sins have offended Him, and awaken the soul to a proper fear of God as Judge for our sin. The Commandments are His original rules--but it still took a fear of God to see that it was impossible to obey God and live without sin--so we were in Judgment.

There are plenty more in the Old Testament, but to make this paper short enough to be readable, let’s skip ahead to the New Testament; what did Jesus say about fear? Matthew 10:28:

And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

People give the wrong answer when you ask them Who to fear here—we’re to fear God. Only God can destroy both soul and body in hell. People experience “peer pressure;” they shrink back from declaring for Christ, particularly in public. And so it was for the Jews, who did not want to go against the Pharisees, who could be a genuine threat to your reputation if you followed Jesus. But Jesus was unsympathetic for those feelings; He has a stark word (one of many—He talked a lot about hell): basically, "it’s them or me, you can't have both. Fear God, enough to follow Jesus' commands, and you might lose your life, but keep your soul (in heaven); but if you fear Man, thus denying God (You can't have both), and while you save your skin currently, He can Judge you to Hell." Fear can make us more sanctified as we dread to earn His anger if we continue to sin..

Don’t forget, we said in the two definitions of “fear” that the meaning in the Gospels, in Jesus' words, is “dread, terror.” Jesus was blunt. Your terror of what God can do to you should be greater than your terror of what people can do. People can take your lives, but God can take your eternity.

We definitely need an injection of fear for God in this sin-attractive world, to keep us out of hell. You want mercy from God? We all should, because the depth and frequency of our sin means we need lots of mercy. Luke 1:50 tells us how to get mercy:

And His mercy is on those who fear Him From generation to generation.

Luke 5:26 gives the peoples’ reaction when they see Jesus healing: Fear. Why? Of His supernaturalism, of things which they do not know.

And they were all amazed, and they glorified God and were filled with fear, saying, “We have seen strange things today!” In a modern world, we would be more cynical and sophisticated about healings. Which is the better reaction? Note how their fear didn’t stop their glorifying God. Another good result from a supposedly negative emotion (The same thing happens in Luke 7:16).

In Luke 23:40-41, one criminal on a cross next to Jesus rebukes the other. The one who feared God admitted his execution was proper punishment for his deeds, a good thought--but something few criminals do. He also judged Jesus as innocent, something the people and the Pharisees couldn’t do. Fear of God allows you to judge people properly, and to be humble. Also, wonderfully, the one who feared God got saved. The other one was going to hell.

But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.”

Now we go to the book of Acts. God’s stamp of approval was definitely on the man who was the first Gentile to whom they evangelized the Gospel. Cornelius was that man. How did he get to be first in line for such a wonderful event? Because he feared God, among other positive features. A description of him is in Acts 10:2:

…a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms generously to the people, and prayed to God always.

Note that fear of God is listed ahead of his giving to the poor, and ahead of his passion for prayer. I’ve heard lots of sermons on giving and the power of prayer, but none on the power of fearing God.

Once again, for brevity, we have to skip lots of verses, and move on to the Epistles. In Romans 3, Paul is enumerating the horrible sins of those bound for hell…” Their throat is an open tomb,” etc. He then describes sin that gets worse and worse as men get farther away from Him. And how does he end it with, what phrase did he use as the worst, the source of all this defiant sin and rebellion? It’s in Romans 3:18 (just before the gospel is explained):

“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

In Romans 11:20-22:

Because of unbelief they (Jews) were broken off, and you (Gentiles) stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but FEAR. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off.

Paul is justifying why he is bringing the Gospel to the Gentiles—it was because the Jews (the natural branches of Jesus, the Vine) rejected it and got “broken off” the Vine. So God turned to the Gentiles. But the Gentiles might get haughty (“we’re smarter than the Jews”). His solution for that? They needed to fear God, or else He could cut them off too (God hates pride). Further, note that God is called “severe.” Haven’t heard any sermons on God’s severe qualities. Does God sound antagonistic there? Well, deal with it; change your definition of God’s love. He is in charge of the universe, and makes the rules. We should be grateful that He reveals Himself to us so we know what to do to get on His good side, and what gets on His bad side.

In II Corinthians 7:1, Paul summarizes the method to be holy: namely, Fear God; it goes a long way to perfecting holiness.

Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

In Ephesians 5:21-22:

²¹ Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord

Women are going to dislike me for this, but Paul has a solution for women who can’t submit to their husbands because they don’t trust him. Fear of God is the key in submitting to your husband—sorry, that’s what God’s Word says above. I’m reminded of Abraham, who was ready to do something illogical (move his 65-year-old wife 1,000 miles from comfort to live in tents, because, as I assume he said to her  “God told me to.” And it worked out, because God honored his fear of Him--He made sure all was well. Women, take a hint—trusting your husband is really trusting God, because you’re obeying His commandment to submit. He will honor your trust in Him and make it all work out. The verses are then broadened to include all of us acting unselfishly and trusting all the brothers and sisters. One more time--What makes us take a chance and submit to others? Fear of God. I have never heard a sermon on this angle of wives submitting to husbands--it is simply “context.”

 Once again, brevity demands a stop. I’m sure I missed some great verses. All you need to do is go to biblegate.com and “google” the word “fear.” But I think you’ve gotten the message. Fear of God is absolutely necessary to reduce sin and to be more holy, to obey God. A lot more people would be saved if they had this attribute. The only question is, how do we develop this fine characteristic? Here’s a few suggestions: (1) Read more of the Old Testament. Lots of judgment and hellfire for disobedience, from not fearing God. Not pleasant, but you need to see how much God hated sin. Don’t fall for the argument, “God was different then.” If you believe that, you haven’t gotten the right message about Jesus, either, so that leads to suggestion (2) Read the Gospels just to study exactly what Jesus said. Do you notice how much He talked about judgment? Well, there you go. God doesn’t change, after all, in how much He hates sin, between Old and New Testaments. Write down everything that suggests what it really takes to be saved (or read my blog on initial and final salvation for a quickie summary). When you’re reading, be careful to “update” Biblical words like “idols.” Maybe you think that’s just for primitive folk, statues of wood and stone. So it doesn't apply to me, you say. But read a Biblical definition of idolatry, then spend some time asking yourself if you’ve been into idolatry, in its modern applications. In other words, spend some time asking yourself about the sins you’ve done, and the effects on the family, trying to place yourself above God (that’s idolatry too). And then think about God, who loves you more than you can imagine, watching you sin. You (and everyone) could do much more with your life if you dedicate yourself 100% to Him. He would make you so happy. So why don’t you? Examine that—is it simple selfishness? Greed? Fear of being laughed at? Then imagine yourself at the judgment seat—we will all be there—when you give your reasons, your lame reasons. What are your Scriptural gifts? You don’t know? Have they been given to God? Do you know what your fruits are? How about your time with God? A person you’re in love with, you talk to daily—how much time do you spend during the week talking with God? Maybe you conclude that you don’t really love Him? That’s not good; read I John when it separates saved vs unsaved, measured by the love you show.

Last but not least:  Most people will go to hell. Jesus said in Matthew 7:13-14:

narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.
Most people are clueless about their status and believe God is a good guy, so they’ll pass.

It’s never too late to change faulty beliefs.

As you can see, lots of Scripture reading and introspection are needed. Please, take time for this. Most people’s mind goes ten different ways when trying to be quiet and meditate on Scripture. Or they sink into this, “I’m just a worm and can’t do anything.” (Maybe appealing for sympathy to get out of being judged always worked when you were a kid; it doesn’t work with God). Developing a fear of God would be frowned at by most ministers today, but who cares what they think? Their “moral leadership” is why we’re in a mess in the U.S. Better to read Scripture like the above to get the real truth about qualities God loves to see. Like fearing Him.

 

Modern Evangelism Is Missing a Vital Link

 

Modern Evangelism Is Missing a Vital Link

A well-known evangelist, Ray Comfort, estimates that 80-90%, conservatively, of decisions for Christ in modern evangelism will thereafter lose their witness and he or she will not even attend church consistently.  He cites a detailed study of the 294,000 who “got saved” in a one-year crusade effort by a major denomination, Harvest, in 1991. They had 11,500 churches keeping close records.  (PS: Evangelism sweeps don't usually do this).  Only 14,000 of the 294,000 still attended church, only a couple years later. That’s a 95% loss rate!

He also studied the works of famous evangelists of the past—such as Wesley, Whitefield, Moody, Spurgeon, and Finney. Along with New Testament evangelists, Paul, Peter, Steven, and Timothy.  Their writings and sermon notes suggested a much higher number of people hanging onto their conversion in those bdays.  Why has this loss rate gone stratospheric, he wondered?  One of the things he noticed was that in those days, the preaching by these great men would frequently begin with how people have broken God’s Laws.  Then, after that was covered thoroughly in the sermon, the Good News was taught. This principle of sermon order (bad news, then good news) has faded away, particularly starting in the early 1900s.  Nowadays, preachers--and seminary professors-- consider that the “You Have Broken the Law" sermon-starter is just too negative, and have shied away from it.  Modern evangelistic theory (taught in Christian colleges) assumes that most people feel they are not worthy to be with God, so we have to emphasize God’s grace and love right from the start, to make them feel wanted, then explaining what Christ did on our behalf. The Prodigal Son (Luke 15) was the classic example of a good sermon, as they teach how the father accepted his son, though he wasted the inheritance, and still smelled of pigs.

Mr. Comfort came to his conclusion:  the old ways were better, because they had a lower loss rate.  

What's more important, Scriptures seem to provide proof of his idea.  Psalm 19:7 says, in part:

The Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul

Well, converting the soul is what we want in evangelism, right?  The Bible lays it out plainly.  You present the Law where people can clearly see their own violations. Then you bring up God as holy, and having expectations that we clearly cannot meet. THEN you bring up Christ, and what he did.

Mr. Comfort gives us a parable.  Suppose you’re walking around, and someone pops up and says, “I’ve got good news for you!  Someone paid a $2500 fine on your behalf!”  Your reaction might be “What are you talking about?  That doesn’t make sense; I can’t think of what I did wrong for the fine, nor has anybody told me this.”  You are confused, not exactly in a grateful mood, right?  Such a person would be offended, actually--they might even thank you, but still confused.  BUT what if the following event also happened:  This person was clocked doing 55 mph in an area set aside for a blind children’s school nearby.  There were 10 clear warning signs stating that the speed limit was 15 mph.  What he did was extremely dangerous, negligent, and reckless, whether he knew about it or not, and a $2500 fine was appropriate and it was the law.  So this person was caught, and in court his ignorance of the law was brushed aside (that would never bring back the life of a child killed--besides, he had clear warning signs; he just never slowed down to read them).  He was told all the details of his illegality, and then told to pay the fine, and with agony he wondered whether he would have the money, how stupid he was to do that, how much his family would sacrifice their lifestyle—or even how he would tell them—when suddenly someone he didn’t even know stepped forward and paid it for him.  Now his reaction would be a definition of gratitude, right?  He might even want to make friends with this stranger, to see what motivated him to give so much so graciously.

As you can clearly see by the two parables, the second example--explaining the bad news, the Law he broke.  And then, with proper acceptance of that news, giving him the Good News of One who has paid his debt, generates a much more positive response.  Well, that’s the principle they formerly used in preaching.  On the other hand, the first approach is what we have a great deal more of now.  Most people, hearing this more-recent approach, are offended—they don’t think they are bad sinners. (Which means they haven’t been taught about God, how He is perfect, and hates sin. Their thinking might be “I’m better than these criminals I see on TV, so God won’t treat me bad—He’s love, right?”). If I talk the current theme of "grace-only" with a prospect, I pretty much can’t get away from insinuating that they need a do-over to gain assurance about their relationship with God, when they have usually deceived themselves into thinking they don’t think they need one—and they resent our suggestion—and our indirectness. Or, they consider the idea that they need salvation foolish.  As Scripture says in I Corinthians 1:18:

…the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing

Anyone “saved” by this method is more by emotionalism, since there is confusion about why they need to be saved, and what the Good News really saves us from. But in the cold light of the days following, this emotionalism cools off to its final result--rejection (because of the  “sneak attack on my character” more often than not.)  Which is where the 80-90% falling away comes in.

Thus I need, in my speaking evangelistally, to take the time to speak insightfully of the Ten Commandments and even how Jesus took the concept of sin a step further.

To carry the Ten Commandments further, read the Sermon on the Mount; sin is a violation in thought as well as deed.  Thinking about a woman lustfully, is as evil as having sex with her; or hating someone makes you guilty, wanting to wish them dead. And then, if time, you should also cover Jesus’ commandments in the Gospels—for instance, if you are unforgiving to others, God will be unforgiving to you in Judgment day (Matthew 18:21-35), all to show the prospect that we have truly offended a just God—then our prospect hopefully becomes, as James says in 2:9:

Convicted of the law, as a transgressor.

Then the Good News of Christ’s paying our debt will not be offensive or foolish…it will be the power of God to rescue us from a deserved hell unto salvation.

Let’s look at each function of presenting God’s Law. We’ll start with Romans 3:19:

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 

Thus, one function of it is (1) to stop the mouth from excusing or rationalizing.  (A man might say, she enjoyed sex as much as I did, and nobody was hurt. Therefore it's not sin.  Wrong.  It disobeys God's law, therefore it IS sin).  We don’t need to hear much of the prospect’s wisdom, justifying himself and saying, “there are plenty of people who use everybody worse than me.” (He’s either deceived or just putting you off, really). We are the ones bearing the wonderful gift of good news, and need an opportunity to speak.

Secondly, Romans 3:20 says this:

...by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

The prospect needs to learn about sin, since self-defense and self-deception are rampant today.  We cannot assume that his sin is in the forefront (or even in the back) of his memory. 

 I John 3:4 says:  sin is the transgression of the law.  It would seem obvious that a person needs to know the law intimately in order to know if he has transgressed it, or has sinned.  Romans 7:7 declares this more forcefully:  I would not have known sin except through the law. If you decide that the best course of action is to be ignorant of the law, that won't help.  You still transgressed it, and will pay the price if unsaved.

Thirdly, in Galatians 3:24, the Law is not only to build our knowledge of sin, but, very importantly…the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ. What this means, is, the knowledge of the Law doesn’t really make us reconciled with God…it shows us that we are helpless.  It doesn’t justify us, it just leaves us guilty at the judgment seat. But with the Law, when we see our sin, as God sees it, we see how we have offended God, and if hell is even brought up (which it almost never is nowadays), we can see that we are, deservedly, destined for it.  Then we seek Him for some method of deliverance from such an end. How can I seek reconciliation with a righteous God? Christ is that key, as a good evangelist will point the way.

Modern evangelism abandoned the "old" principle of discussing the Law and how Christ saves us from wrath.  So a new method was sought, considering that  it needed a reason to attract us to Christ. So they invented the term “life enhancement.”  Following Christ will benefit us.  We will have peace, love, joy, fulfillment, and lasting happiness. At this point, Mr. Comfort provides another useful allegory:

Two men are sitting in a plane.  The first is given a parachute, (the only one receiving the offer), and told that it will “improve his flight.”  He is skeptical and even thinking the flight attendant is wacko, as he knows that airlines only talk about "good times are ahead," but he puts it on—just as a trial.  But it weighs his shoulders, and gives him difficulty in sitting upright.  But he perseveres.  After a while, though, he notices that other passengers are laughing at him due to his unusual clothing accessory.  Feeling humiliated, he can’t stand it anymore, and he throws the parachute to the floor.  Disillusionment and bitterness fill his heart, because as far as he was concerned, he was told an outright lie.

To continue the allegory; A second man was given a parachute, BUT he was told a different reason, in alarming detail:  at any moment, without warning, a faulty flight could mean he would be jumping 25,000 feet off the plane. He takes it to heart: He doesn’t notice the discomfort of the parachute, because his mind is consumed with the thought of what would happen to him if he had to jump without it.  He develops a deep-rooted peace in his heart knowing that he shall escape a sure death no matter what happens.  He can deal with other passengers’ mockery—he knows that they need to do what he did.  He might even engage them in intense conversation about their need for this safety device.

You can see what we’re saying.  Under modern evangelism, the man-centered “improvement” approach we started with is a guaranteed failure.  People will take on Christ as an experiment to see whether their life does improve.  But they eventually get what the Scripture promises to the saved--temptation, tribulation, and persecution.  They are humiliated by others, disillusioned about not seeing a rosy path develop for them. They take off the Lord Jesus, and are rightly embittered. They are now inoculated against evangelism in the future, so their latter end is worse than the first. Modern evangelism has promised them what God has not promised.  The opposite of their expectation occurs.  After all, God has every right to test us to see if we can really endure.  Modern evangelism does not ask a crucial question:  Are we able to drink of the cup that Jesus drank of?
We should take the second parachute approach, boldly telling every man, as Hebrews 9:27 says:

it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment

He must understand the horrific consequences of the judgment--hell. He must be educated on what breaking the Law means. He must be told to escape the wrath which is to come, when God judges the earth in righteousness. The issue is not one of happiness, but of righteousness.  Then he will flee to Christ, and experience true peace and joy—the fruits of salvation.  But don’t speak of peace and joy as a “draw card” for salvation, or sinners will respond with impure motives, lacking repentance.  The man correctly taught will have much more motivation to endure the slings and arrows of the unsaved.  When bad times come, he doesn’t throw off Christ—because his reason for taking on Christ is not for rosy paths, but to save him from future wrath.  He has been re-taught to ignore man’s reasoning.  If anything, trials will drive the true believer closer to the Savior—life will be that much better in heaven, and he will be looking more for heaven when life on earth gets miserable.

Mr. Comfort then told of an evangelistic crusade he preached in Australia.  He preached of the Law, Hell, and wrath.  He told of disappointment: few people came forward, and how the atmosphere felt tense. He felt the usual disappointment in people’s deafness.  Well, he thought of Noah, “a just man, perfect in his generations...who walked with God” (Gen. 6:9), who despite being “a preacher of righteousness” (II Peter 2:5), never was able to save a single soul outside his family.  The Spirit lifted Mr. Comfort up, told him to simply carry on. Mr. Comfort confessed that this lack of results, over time in a cynical world, wears him down, and had pulled him, at one time period, unwittingly to preaching a man-centered Gospel—to get happier results. For that time he got lots of results—that was nice.  The original numbers of people “saved” are higher that way, and there is less tension.  People are happy to have Jesus take a turn at getting them out of the mess they’ve made of their lives. But--they are not clean from the wrath to come because we don’t tell them of the wrath to come.  That was a glaring omission in his message. In the end, people should be asking what David, what the Prodigal Son, and Joseph asked:  How could they sin against God? After all, He is also a God of wrath, and we can’t just ignore that—it’s one of His personality traits.  Real repentance is understanding that the great offense here is against God, not just “horizontal” repentance against your fellow man. Mr. Comfort calls this “horizontal only” approach “superficial and experimental.”  The prospect should be seeking something called “godly sorrow” to obtain true repentance, an important element in salvation.  As II Corinthians 7:10 says: …godly sorrow produces repentance.  In evangelism nowadays, we are missing discussing sin against God. We have preached the cure without telling them of the disease.

AB Earle, who had 150,000 converts to his ministry in the mid-1800s, made the following quote:
I have found by long experience that the severest threatenings of the Law of God have a prominent place in leading men to Christ.  They must see themselves lost before they will cry for mercy; they will not escape danger until they see it.

Mr. Comfort has noticed that there are many people who have been “saved” several times, yet their lives don’t show change. They’re still fornicating, still blaspheming, and so on. What they’re likely doing is:  Using the grace of God for an occasion of the flesh. They sin, they might ask God to forgive them, they move on same as before. They don’t esteem the sacrifice and don’t understand how great the sin.  It means nothing to them to trample the blood of Christ underfoot. The problem is: They’ve never been convinced of the disease—so that they might appropriate the cure.

When you study the Word, you find that Biblical evangelism is always interpreted as restrictive to people that are proud, but grace to the humble.  Never do you see Jesus giving the gospel to proud, arrogant, self-righteous people.  With the Law, He breaks the heart and with the Gospel, He heals the broken heart. The proud and highly esteemed are an abomination to God (Luke 16:15).  Note who gets the good tidings in Isaiah 61:1. The poor, the brokenhearted and the captives are those who are there spiritually:

“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me, Because the Lord has anointed Me To preach good tidings to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives, And the opening of the prison to those who are bound

Only the sick want to appropriate a cure. In Luke 10:25-37, after being plainly asked "what shall I do to inherit eternal life?", Jesus gave the lawyer Law.  Why?  Because the man was proud.  Note v. 29 for that in part of the story below:

And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” ²⁶ He said to him, “What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?” ²⁷ So he answered and said, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’” ²⁸ And He said to him, “You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.” ²⁹ But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”  ³⁰ Then Jesus answered and said: “A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves…(the rest of the story is of the Good Samaritan, who helps a person in trouble when no one else would).

Jesus knew this Jewish lawyer didn’t like Samaritans.  Then the Master Debater came to the climaxing point:

³⁶ So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?” ³⁷ And he said, “He who showed mercy on him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”

The lawyer had no response—he could see his own lack of love, compared to this generous Samaritan.  He could see that he was a Commandment-breaker.  The Law has done its job again—stopped his mouth, maybe convinced him of sin.

Note that a similar event happens when the rich young ruler visits Jesus.  We read of it in Luke 18:18-23, where again, Jesus shies away from an easy response:

Now a certain ruler asked Him, saying, “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” ¹⁹ So Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God.²⁰ You know the commandments: ‘Do not commit adultery,’ ‘Do not murder,’ ‘Do not steal,’ ‘Do not bear false witness,’ ‘Honor your father and your mother.’ ” ²¹ And he said, “All these things I have kept from my youth.” ²² So when Jesus heard these things, He said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”²³ But when he heard this, he became very sorrowful, for he was very rich.

Again, Jesus did not begin with the Gospel to this person. (Today’s preacher, as soon as he asks, “what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” would engage him in a salvation prayer).  But Jesus sees a proud person underneath (Note v. 21), who was not ready for the Gospel.  So in verse 20 the young ruler gets the Law—the “horizontal” part-- and is still convinced that he has never sinned (an advantage that only Jesus can claim, really).  Then Jesus slyly points out his lack of the first commandment (Thou shall have no other gods before me) by showing him that his real god is his money.  Once again, no argument. His mouth was stopped.

In contrast, we see Nicodemus, in John 3.  While a leader of the Jews, he was humble of heart, acknowledging the deity of Jesus (verse 2).  He receives the Gospel, and perhaps the greatest verse in His Word, John 3:16.

Consider also Nathanael, in John 1:47-51.  In him was no deceit.  That trait is a tool of the proud, but he does not have that negative quality.  Plus, he acknowledged the deity of Christ (v.49).  Jesus gives him the honor of prophesying about Himself and His future coming.  Part of His glorious good news. This kinder approach goes for the Jews who gathered on the day of Pentecost, in Acts 2.  These were devout men, v. 5 (“devout” denotes humility).  What did Peter preach to them?  Not the Law, but the Gospel.  (But he doesn’t hesitate to lay blame on them for His crucifixion, v. 36).

Think of two verses to the great hymn, “At Calvary:” Years I spent in vanity and pride, Caring not my Lord was crucified, Knowing not it was for me He died  On Calvary.
By God’s Word at last my sin I learned; then I trembled at the law I’d spurned Till my guilty soul imploring turned  To Calvary. May God bless you as you search for His ways of presenting His precious Words to the lost in your environment.  In the light of our first few paragraphs, remember the saying: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.” There is a lot of insanity in evangelism these days. Acknowledgement:  Ray Comfort, “Hell’s Best Kept Secret,"   audio and book from Livingwaters.com.

 

Manhood and Womanhood

 

Manhood and Womanhood

I’d like to summarize most of a great sermon by Dr. Voddie Baucham on “Manhood and Womanhood.”  Christian family is a frequent sermon topic for him, and I have done another blog on this subject from another sermon.  But the Scriptural proof and the approach this sermon takes on this vital topic are well worth reading; he is uncovering false doctrine that most families follow. If you truly believe in following God’s heart on this subject and doing His commands, this sermon and blog will give it to you straight.  The Church has erred on this subject badly, and it has cost us. Few pastors will preach on this. One who did, Dr. John MacArthur, had some people walk out. He also had 1.2 million viewers within 48 hours. That should give you an idea how “third rail” explosive this subject is—and how far the Bible is from our culture nowadays.

He reads Ephesians 5:22, but he starts and stops with the first phrase:

Wives, submit to your own husbands

Right there, he says, Scripture and true Christians are already at war with Western culture.  Feminism is at war with the Gospel—and with traditional marriage. In the modern neo-Marxist culture, everything involving relations is seen through the lens of power—they see everything from an “oppressor-oppressed” paradigm. They see marriage that obeys Scripture, as the “oppression of women.”

Through this same partial Scripture, we are also at war with same-sex marriage.  It says marriage is made up of husband and wife; a wife has a husband, not another wife.  Yet, this simple fact amounts to fighting words today. Also, the verse strongly suggests that there is something unique about manhood, and something unique about womanhood.  God made them male and female in His image, in the very first chapter of Genesis. His instruction to them is God’s earliest establishment of relationship, so it must be important. As Genesis 1:26 says:

So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

That’s yet another battleground, as certain people attempt to mess with male and female by transgendering them.   But God does not make mistakes when He creates them male or female.  Playing God like this is corruption.

As you read on in Ephesians 5, it brings up another battleground between Scripture and culture:

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. ²³ For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. ²⁴ Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything… ²⁶ that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, ²⁷ that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. 

It is an offense to most folks when you bring up any idea that people should be made holy. Sinfulness? A need for salvation, or rescue from hell? A need for sanctification?  They are offended that you suggest that they need them.  It’s a third rail in regular conversation. They see the evening news, and the lowlifes.  “We’re better than that.” They are clueless about what Jesus was trying to say in Luke 18:9-14, blessing the repentant tax collector, not the self-righteous Pharisee.

To continue in Ephesians 5:

²⁸ So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself.. ³¹ “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother (wow, there are those binary terms again) and the two shall become one flesh.” ³² This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Another reason why this manhood/womanhood matters:  It refers to Christ and the Church, to the redemption that we find in God’s Gospel.  So we cannot abandon this ground.

Now he studies details.  Looking at the beginning of verse 22, “Wives, submit,” the Bible teaches us that there is order within the context of marriage.  Headship and submission. This is patriarchy.  That concept puts us at war with the culture that hates the patriarchy.  A definition here: Oxford defines it as a system of society or government in which the father or eldest male is head of the family and descent is traced through the male line. But neo-Marxism, and even evangelical feminists, find subterfuge in this:  it is evil, they say.  Men having this power are oppressors. Patriarchy also unfortunately puts us at war with ourselves.  The Church is divided.  Many in the Church hate to seem different, or disliked by the culture. So when they see the culture is moving opposite of literal Scripture, they become fearful, and back off Scripture, or twist Scripture, saying, “No, that conclusion is a misreading of Scripture. We are willing to change orthodoxy and be adaptable when it is needed. Only fundamentalists try to stick with the old ways; only they agree with patriarchy.”

Yet, they do twist Scripture.  One twist is based on Genesis 3:14ff, where God curses all the parties to the Fall.  He curses both Adam and Eve, and through them the entire race of humans.  Here is God’s curse on women, through Eve:

To the woman He said: “I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children; Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you.

“Woke Christians” say that women allowing the male to rule, his headship, is a product of the Fall, so she was ashamed and gave up any leadership to him. They insist, when we find ourselves in Christ, women no longer need headship. They say Christ reverses the curse of Genesis 3:16.

Dr. Baucham’s response to “the curse is reversed” position that twists Scripture so as to deliver women from the clutches of patriarchy, is, first, take another look at Genesis 3:16 (see above):  The first part of the curse is pain in childbearing, then it gets to patriarchy. So, wouldn’t it make sense that both those curses are now reversed? But are they? Thinking of maternity wards everywhere, he asks, “Why do I feel like it still hurts, ladies?” With the cries of pain still ringing in our ears, it seems clear that the curse has not been reversed for the ladies, even after the first coming of Christ supposedly removed it.

Secondly, Adam had headship BEFORE the Fall--not as a result of the Fall, as they insist.  Plenty of Scriptural proof in Genesis 1 and 2: (a) the man was made before the woman; (b) the woman was made for the man; (c) the woman was brought to the man; (d) the woman was named by the man.

Another twisting was actually done by the Council on Biblical Equality (CBE), supposedly a Christian theologian get-together. They begin their summary by saying, “Scripture is our authoritative guide for faith or practice.” Yay. But then they say, “Patriarchy is male dominance.”  (Note the bias in the aggressive word “dominance.” Baucham disagrees, saying patriarchy is male leadership, headship—as Oxford dictionary says—dominance can be avoided if they observe context—more on that later.) The CBE continues, “patriarchy is not a Biblical ideal, but the result of sin.” (They are speaking of Eve’s sin.)  But that gave him power, they continue, which he almost always abuses. That results in, to quote the CBE, “men taking from females what God has given them.” The CBE assumes that Christian men cannot restrain their abuse, and will essentially always take from females.  Hard to believe that Christian theologians, as this CBE statement shows, can conclude the Holy Spirit is incapable of sanctifying Christian men—they have a total lack of appreciation of God’s power of sanctification.

And, oh yes, their feeling that this was Eve’s sin is disputed by Romans 5:12:

Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—

If you thought of the question, “Why was all the blame laid on him?  She sinned first.”  The answer is, as anyone in a hierarchy knows, those in headship bear the responsibility for anything that happens under their watch.  Thus, the sin is blamed on Adam; he was the head of the family, and the sin occurred under his watch—so it was his responsibility.  Baucham, having put holes in these twists of Scripture, now asks us, “Please don’t shy away from the word patriarchy; embrace it…if for no other reason, it just messes with their head so much.”

Another twist-of-Scripture argument evangelical feminists use is: they argue that the word “submit” is not in v.22. Presumably, they argue, v.22 was borrowed from v. 21.  So tying them together, they think, it goes like this:

²¹ submitting to one another in the fear of God. ²² Wives, to your own husbands, as to the Lord.

So, based on that v.21, their argument is, what you have is mutual submission in v.22, not headship of one. (The revised verse doesn’t say that.) He submits to her, and, at other times, she submits to him.  Baucham’s response?  The verb “submitting” in v. 21 is a military term.  But in the military, submission works in only one direction—so we’re still talking wives submitting to husbands only.

Rev. Baucham summarizes that the reason for Scripture-twisting is, the culture hates male headship because they hate God’s headship overall. They are also in rebellion against Christ, who is also God.  So their desire is to blaspheme God—and, since the Family is structured to copy His image of Christ and the Church, they want to blaspheme that too. Scripture points out that Christ is head over us, His bride, the Church.  We submit to Him, knowing He loves us enough to even die for us.  God designed that the family copies that same image.  The husband is head over the wife, and the wife is willing to submit, knowing that the husband is to love her and will, if necessary, give his life to protect her.

In reality, Ephesians 5 could not be clearer—we just do not want to accept God’s plan, because we would rather believe lies. (Exactly what Eve did in her sin.)

Now Dr. Baucham stresses that submission does not depreciate the wife’s value.  This is about order, which a family must have.  Trying to have both husband and wife giving orders is trouble:  anything with two heads is a monster. It leads to fights between them, and confusion among the kids.  Dr. Baucham uses a military illustration to explain value vs order:  Say a unit has a sergeant who has been on several tours of the area where the regiment will be working in.  And it has an officer, a lieutenant, wet behind the ears.  Who is more valuable?  The sergeant, since he has experience; let’s hope the lieutenant seeks his advice in critical times.  But according to order, who is the head?  The lieutenant.  The sergeant leaves the final decision to him, and when the order comes down, even if it’s wrong, he salutes and executes.  If he doesn’t obey, everything breaks down. The enemy has won already.  Like the sergeant, women are not less valuable than men. Dr. Baucham has traveled much, and insists that cultures impacted to obedience by the Gospel are the places with the freest, safest, most protected and cherished women on earth.

But what is the usual story of women who truly free themselves (i.e., divorce) from their husbands and raise the kids without his headship?  Here’s the sobering fact:

…median family income of married-couple families with children was about $101,560 in 2021, whereas single-mothers with children had just $32,586 (U.S. Census Bureau 2021).

Then Dr. Baucham deals with another touchy subject.  Look at Ephesians 5:22 again:

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.

She is to submit, not because he is smarter, or even deserves it (think of our sergeant again); or even that the louse almost always acts in his best interest (another Scripture for her on that; another blog).  She is to trust God to work on straightening, or punishing, him out.  God will honor her submission by giving her the break she needs; that’s what God does for obedience.  Nor can she use the statement that sounds spiritual, “The Lord told me I am to do this, and not what you want.”  The Lord will never tell her that; He cannot direct her to violate His Scriptural commands.

We are seeing in our culture the results of ignoring God, who wants the women to be protected as the weaker vessel (I Peter 3:7). Such as, the foolishness of a trans athlete who goes from middle of the pack as a man, then declares himself a woman, and “earns” a women’s national championship.  He actually stole the crown away from a woman.  Or a trans-MMA fighter who got into the ring with a woman and fractured her skull.  Or, a big one:  Women who actually go into combat as soldiers. Or, here’s one that we are likely unaware of:  consider that men have a distinctly shorter life, on average, than women, and suffer much more of mortal ailments that have been related to anxiety.  Quite possibly from the pressures at work? Trying to uphold the family as breadwinner?  So, what happens when women are persuaded to shoulder a workload (More money to spend!)  They also experience the same ailments, the same shorter lives. My theory is likely proven by how the mortality gap between the two genders is shrinking, a known fact, as more women went to work.  Plus, since women actually still have maternal instincts, when they make the mistake of going to work while some kids are smaller, or as adolescents, and need good parental guidance—but she cannot reliably do it.  And the moms feel guilty.

You ought to read Ephesians 5:25-29 when you hear people say that our patriarchy, doing what God prescribes, is “detrimental to women,” as they accuse God’s system. Many respond by fear, or by burying or twisting the Scripture. Many of us hang our heads and have no response, and are ashamed; we should not do this; it is God’s command, so have confidence that it will work out best. Never be ashamed of following God. Ask yourself:  Do these verses below look like husbands abuse women? As you can read, God wants him to love her.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her… ²⁸ So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. ²⁹ For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. ³⁰ For we are members of His body…

If we trust our loving God, His commands and structures will not steer us wrong.  Simply be obedient to His Word. We men do not suddenly convert into an abuser. With that kind of accusation, they are actually saying that Jesus is an abuser of His bride, the Church—would He do that to the Church that He loves and gave His life for?  This blasphemes Christ’s love for His bride. That’s why we can’t give them this ground. This is sinister and comes from the mind of Satan.

Many of you are like Mr. Spock, taking actions based primarily on logic (but in the short run), and lean away from Scripture when it seems illogical comparing to what the culture does. Did you know that you are judging God?  Well, when it comes to Scripture, you have to avoid doing that. I was that type, and with my pubescent mind, there was good logic in frequently lying to my parents. Our minds, compared with God’s mind, are nothing and perverted by sin. His mind is often not understandable:  it is immense, cosmic, and eternal. If we believe Him, we can just relax and do His will when decisions involve moral choices. And His commands for male and female are that sort. I’m not saying husbands will be perfect (based on my experience).  I’m not saying that if the husband is not moral we should divorce him. Think of Abraham, when after so many years he had a child under a freewoman (Sarah), finally seeing God’s promise come true. Then God asked him to offer that son as a blood sacrifice. What?! There are a million logical reasons why he “should have” ignored that illogical voice that told him to do that. It seemed crazy.  And think of Job, who clearly lived for following God and living a righteous life.  But he lost his kids and all his earthly fortune, and his health. Why not curse this illogical God? In all this, there is sometimes no explanation—but we cannot mistrust God out of our lives—that would mean hell for us, to be blunt but truthful.  God may do this to test us, to let us find out if we will follow Him no matter what.  Or God may do it to prove that His children are not guaranteed a life of roses when we become born again.  If He had that pleasant idea, some people would do a con job to become Christians, just to grab those benefits. But they never wanted a relationship with God. Then you have churches full of unsaved people, so His bride’s reputation becomes filthy, not spotless and sanctified.

Well, given that school systems, laws, and certain government employees are going crazy, not logical at all, we need some harsh words to wake up and not fearful of becoming different.  May God bless you receive these words, and to spread Truth around when you see it in Scripture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

God's 5 Covenants Part 2

 

Last week we covered God’s covenants with Noah and with Abraham.

The third covenant God made was with Moses, the Mosaic Covenant. This was given upon their exodus from Egyptian slavery, 430 years after Abraham.  This was about the occupation of the land. It was a covenant of (possible) security.  It was for their nation alone. He gave laws to live by, no less than 613 laws (10 of those were our familiar “big ones”) in Exodus and Leviticus--all the way from what kind of foods were acceptable, and sanitation facilities to keep out disease, what is sin and what are the retributions from man to man, on family life, and on deaths. If they follow these laws, God would make the land fertile, and they would be happy. The downside is, the opposite was also true.  With disobedience came the curses, which God named as a part of His covenant:  pestilence, drought, no rain, killed and oppressed by conquerors, even finally exiled from His land. All named in Deuteronomy. It took then a thousand years of fighting to get the land, but only 500 years to lose it all. This was a reminder that “God keeps His promises”—both negative and positive.  Few Jews will admit that that curse was brought on by themselves. But God is serious; He means what He says. One day He will divide the nations, like sheep from goats.

The Mosaic was a temporary covenant; it was only intended to operate until the Messiah came.  (Which He did. Though most of the Jews don’t know it, Jesus was their Messiah.) Those laws make us really aware of what sin is. Speaking of replacing the Mosaic with the New Covenant, we don’t abolish all the old law. For instance, many economists would tell you that operating our economies on the “Jubilee” scale, given by God, might still work on evening out the business cycle.  Or, the criminal justice system could learn something by applying the Mosaic system that emphasized restitution, instead of mostly punishment.

The fourth covenant was with David, and was about succession. The covenant had two parts:  God promised successors who would permanently sit on David’s throne—IF they obeyed Him.  Secondly, from David would come, not just a king of the Jews, but the King of kings, Jesus, who would sit on that throne forever.  In Matthew and Luke, the genealogies of Jesus, from both mother and stepfather, were given and it was proven that Jesus on both sides came from David That was unconditional.  Jesus will come in a Second Advent to do that.

David had great faith in God’s promise; on his deathbed, he thanked God, even though he could not see any of it come true.  Again, he showed faith. Dr. Pawson then gave a side note:  we were not made for a democracy; that concept was nowhere in Scripture.  Man is at his best in a kingdom, under a benign king—and what of a king that would lay down His life, who would have a special concern for the poor, someone who is not going to become power-hungry, or dazzled by wealth or fame—someone whose model is “service”—well, we found such a person—Jesus the Messiah.  There were several times when people wanted to make Him king during His first advent, but they were fickle, and He knew it; He rejected all that.  His purpose then was to show what love was, and to die for the ungodly.  His purpose on His second advent will be different.  It is to be a Judge and our King and Sovereign.  We will meet our Maker then. He will judge from David’s throne in the Millennium, for both Jews and Gentiles that are saved because they believe in Him.

Now we come to the final, fifth covenant.  It is called the New, or Messianic covenant.  It is detailed in three places in the Old Testament. God was kind enough to provide all five covenants in the Old Testament—and all five can be found in the New. This New Covenant was foretold by three prophets:   Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel. From Jeremiah 31:31-34:

 “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah…I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. ³⁴ No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they all shall know Me…  For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

First, as other Scriptures show, the New Covenant includes Gentiles in the “house of Israel.” Secondly, how to live would not be written on stone tablets, but on men’s minds and hearts.  This means they would have an inclination to avoid sin.  They wouldn’t have to be told for each thing how to live, but they would know the rule of love, and have a desire, not to seek for their own pleasure, but to live Christlike. Today, some churches in England, when each of the Ten Commandments are read, the congregation responds by saying, “Lord, incline our hearts to keep this law.”  The beauty of the New Covenant is, the inclination is already there. We will want to obey God; we will want to do good.

It shows us that there will be intimacy--all of us will know better what the Lord is feeling or thinking. There would be no need for teachers or classes on what God is like.

The third characteristic of the New Covenant in Jeremiah is innocence. As opposed to guilt—which comes between you and someone you love. Are you hiding a secret from your love in this life?  Not a good idea.  But innocence happens when you have confessed and have been forgiven; it is a wonderful feeling. Again, we will desire to have nothing between us and our “husband,” God.

Jesus improved the Mosaic commandments by making us guilty for thinking about some things, not just acting upon them. If our mind hates someone, and if we think about lusting after someone of the opposite sex, for instance—we are guilty as well as killing or having sex. Also, sin is not just “avoiding what we shouldn’t do;” it’s also not doing what needs to be done. Jesus had some radical ideas in His commands: When mercy is called for, we must practice to act and be merciful—or else we miss heaven.  If we need to forgive someone, we must do it regularly—or we miss heaven.

It’s important to stress this overall fact:  This Covenant is made active, in part, in each of us, by the sanctification of our souls, after we have truly seen Jesus for all He did, and have repented the wickedness of our nature, have confessed, been born again—and been baptized.

In the second set of Old Testament verses, from Isaiah, there is a seeming contradiction of character.  Isaiah 9:6ff, we learn that Jesus will be one who governs.  And He will be a:

Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace

And what will be His kingdom like? Endless, peaceful, with Judgment and Justice--forever.

Of the increase of His government and peace There will be no end,
Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, To order it and establish it with judgment and justice From that time forward, even forever.

But in Isaiah 53, He is also prophesied to be the opposite, a suffering servant:

He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed.
⁶ All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all

As we see above, the details of Isaiah 53 are an accurate prophecy of Jesus’ first advent—written nearly a thousand years before Jesus fulfilled it and died for our sin. The 9:6 verse, on the other hand, will be fulfilled on His second advent.

The early Jews never thought that there would be two advents, and they could not put the two Isaiah statements together (they have even suggested two Messiahs coming), and never suspected Jesus to fulfill any of the Messiah’s requirements. They ignored the Servant and wished for a King out of a great desire for a ruler to deliver them from Roman oppression. Jesus spoke of us belonging to a kingdom, but for now, a kingdom of the mind, and conquering our enemy, sin.

Their desire to kill Him was more likely due to the fact that He snubbed the religious leaders of the day.  He also made blunt, outrageous statements pointing out their sin. They were so full of hate of Jesus that they lied to the Romans that He wanted to grab a kingship (Remember, the Romans alone had the authority to kill Him).

A side note: Pawson believes that baptism is a part of salvation (I have a blog on that). He doesn’t have time to debate this special baptism position theologically, but he does touch on one thing:  it was big enough that the idea was an introduction to 3 of the 4 Gospel accounts with the words of John the Baptist.  Here is Matthew 1:8 for example:

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

He will also soften our stubborn hearts.  He will also give His Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was hidden until near the end of Christ’s ministry.  But Ezekiel prophesied on it, even though he was writing hundreds of years before, in 36:26-27:

²⁶ I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. ²⁷ I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them

Rev. Pawson insists that we will never truly enjoy the New Covenant until we receive the Holy Spirit. He also believes in a separate filling of the Holy Spirit. He has excellent proofs.  But his sermons have always blessed my spirit.  So read what he says next. His testimony is powerful. Being so baptized means, he says, “filled to overflowing”. How would you know when that occurs?  The mouth is the “overflow” chamber.  Jesus did say that whatever you are full of, will come out of your mouth. Dr. Pawson told of two personal incidents. The first was a conversation he had with a missionary in a park, who was bewildered and sad, and said that he hadn’t really accomplished anything measurable in 10 years of evangelism and work. The missionary confessed that he didn’t think he was ever filled with the Holy Spirit--though he was clearly saved.  He asked for Rev. Pawson’s prayer, and as soon as he gave an inauspicious one, the man’s head shot upright and he shouted “Hallelujah!” in the loudest possible voice. Got everyone’s attention.  Fortunately, they were in a public park. Rev. Pawson asked him if he had ever done that before, and the missionary said, “Never! I am a reserved Englishman.” But then he said, “Is that it?”  Pawson said, “I just heard you overflow. That’s it.”  Rev. Pawson says, within 24 hours the missionary had administered healing on two very sick people—which he had never done before.

Then he related an even better second story, this time involving him. When he was a senior pastor, a man at his church (named James) was the self-appointed leader of the opposition—repeatedly saying “we’ve tried that, it didn’t work” or “we’ve never done that before, and we’re not going to try it now.” This man flattened every idea of progress that Rev. Pawson brought up.  Pawson regretted him greatly, since the church wasn’t together or moving ahead.  But Pawson always got 6 weeks respite every year, when he could actually pursue some ideas—because Philip (another senior pastor) had a weak chest and was laid up in the hospital every springtime (all his life) with hay fever miseries.  He was gasping for air at the worst of it.

Well, upon Pawson’s annual trek to see him, driving there he heard the words “James 5” ringing in his skull. Perhaps you might have guessed what the words refer to: in James 5, where if you are sick, you should call for the elders, who administer oil, and you would be healed. Pawson thought, “I don’t want to do that for Philip.”  He rationalized that he needed a break, and it would be good for the church. Then he made a startling confession: “You know what, Lord, I have never administered oil.”  Clearly. he was a more worldly man then, since no one in his congregation even thought of him for any expectations of healing. Like many congregations, belief in the supernatural or miracles was most uncomfortable. Asking to administer oil showed belief in the supernatural, that God would act now like He did in the Book of Acts.  Few people had enough faith for that. Well, what was the first thing our hospital patient said when Pawson came through the door? “What do you think about James 5?” Pawson responded, “why do you ask?”  The patient said “I want you to do it to me.” His lungs were full again, the doctors said he should stay there for another 3 weeks, but he was thinking about a business appointment he didn’t want to miss, only 3 days away. So he said, “Will you come and do that?” Pawson sought a way out, so he said “I’ll pray about it.” He did pray on the way home, but not heroically--He said, “Lord, please tell me why I shouldn’t do this?” But the heavens were brass, he said.

Two days later Philip’s wife finally called, and asked, “Philip wants to know if you’re coming to anoint him.” He said, “All right, I’ll come tonight.”  He bought a large container of olive oil and went. Philip was, as usual, gasping for breath, so he opened his Bible to James 5, and read it robotically. The first thing it said was, “Confess your sins one to another.”  So Pawson said, “Philip, I’ve never lied to you.”  (Rev. Pawson’s audience was really enjoying this.) Philip responded, “That’s mutual.”  So “we dealt with that part,” he said to his laughing audience. So when they got to the “anoint” part, he got his bottle of oil, took the top off, and poured it all over his head!

Guess what finally happened?  Absolutely nothing. He still lay there gasping.  So Pawson was muttering how Philip would act worse than ever as he slunk out the door.  In a final grasping for straws, he said “I’ll run you to the airport for your business trip tomorrow.” But he didn’t believe it. Nor did he sleep all night, and didn’t think of Philip come morning. But he got a phone call.  “Hello, Philip here; can you pick me up?”  Pawson, shocked, finally said “Are you all right, James? What happened?” He said in the middle of the night, it was as if two hands squeezed his chest.  He coughed up a bucketful of liquid from his lungs, and, lo and behold, he could breathe freely. Upon Pawson asking, he assured him the doctors gave him a pass.  “In fact,” he said, “I’ve even been to have my haircut.” The barber said, “I’m afraid I’ll have to wash your hair first. I’ve never seen such a greasy head in all my life.”

Three more miracles arose from that event.  First, he never had that problem again.  Second, Philip got filled with the Spirit; and third, he became Pawson’s best friend.

“But I’ve missed out the most important part: Just before I did that, I went to my church, knelt down, and tried to pray for Philip. Have you ever tried to pray for a sick man when you want him to stay sick? And then, to my astonishment,” he said, “I found myself praying with all my heart and soul—but not in English!” He looked at his watch, and figured it went on for an hour.  He’d never done that intensive prayer that long, before. “That’s when I understood Acts chapter two, and understood the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Now I find myself doing things I’ve never done before in my life. I could administer God’s healing, give people wisdom and knowledge, even prophesy.” That’s the New Covenant. To go on being filled. The Spirit is softening our heart, conveying God’s forgiveness.  Thank God for His Spirit! Thank God for His covenants!