By Stephen Rodgers

Part 1 of 4: John 11:1-16

I’ve come to the conclusion that the Apostle Thomas got a bad rap. “Doubting Thomas” we call him; the expression has even made it into our vernacular as an example of someone who is skeptical beyond the point of reasonableness. After reading the gospels and seeing what they had to say about Thomas though, I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that we got it all wrong.

Almost everything we know about Thomas (other than his name) is found in John’s gospel. Considering that John is self-identified as the “disciple whom Jesus loved,” it is perhaps fitting that I intend to make the argument that Thomas should have been better known as “the disciple who loved Jesus.”

Matthew, Mark, and Luke each mention Thomas, but only as part of listing the disciples. From his placement in the lists and his interaction with the others, people tend to place him in the “middle circle” of disciples with Phillip, Nathanael, and Matthew. We know that he most likely had a twin brother or sister because in John 11:16 he is called “Didymus” (“the twin”), although his sibling is never identified in scripture. However, this is not the most important detail that we learn about Thomas in this verse. In fact, this verse tells us everything we need to know to understand Thomas’ later behavior and decisions.

At this point in Jesus’ ministry He had left Jerusalem to get away from the plots of the Pharisees and the religious leaders. It was at this time that He received word that Lazarus was sick. Now Lazarus (and Mary and Martha) lived in Bethany, which was practically next door to Jerusalem. To go and heal His friend, Jesus would be walking right back into the very center of the plots to take His life. In fact, the disciples knew that to venture that close to Jerusalem again was to court disaster as the Pharisees would know doubt try to kill Him. And quite possibly, if they wanted to make a thorough job of it, they would kill the disciples too.

Now Jesus deliberately delayed until Lazarus actually passed away in order that He might raise him from the dead. And once the disciples understood that Lazarus was dead (previously they were a bit confused on the subject), they knew that there was no talking Him out of it. But they were scared. They knew that the Pharisees would try to stone Him to death.

And this is where Thomas says something incredible.

Let’s take a look at exactly what the Bible says in John 11:1-16. Seriously, go get your Bible and read verses 1-15. But then think for a moment what it means in verse 16 when it says: Then Thomas, who is called the Twin, said to his fellow disciples, “Let us also go, that we may die with Him.”

Now granted, that’s a very pessimistic thing to say. But beneath it there is something more than just a depressed outlook on life; there’s love. There’s a love that is so strong, enduring, and desperate that even his own pessimism can’t keep it down. Thomas believed that if they returned to Bethany, the Pharisees would kill Jesus and them too. But he didn’t believe that was the worst that could happen.

You see, Thomas ultimately wasn’t scared to die. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure he wasn’t looking forward to it. But there was something that he feared more. He didn’t want to be apart from Jesus. If Jesus was going to leave Jerusalem, Thomas was going to leave Jerusalem. If Jesus was going to go back to Bethany, Thomas was going to go back to Bethany. And if Jesus was going to get stoned to death, then Thomas was going to be there to die as well.

You can practically hear him telling the rest of the disciples to get in line. And apparently they listened, because Scripture records that they all did go to Bethany. Jesus went; Thomas followed Jesus, and the rest followed Thomas…

by Stephen Rodgers

Considering Dr. Snider’s recent sermon on the centrality of the doctrine of substitutionary atonement within the Bible, I thought it might be valuable to examine a number of the objections currently being raised against this central tenant of Christianity. As he mentioned, originally the character of God was under attack (with the rise of open theism/free will theology in the early 90’s), then the doctrine of eternity came under fire (pun intended) with the marginalization of Hell within evangelical circles, and finally now the heretical chicken has come home to roost with substitutionary atonement.

Hostile critics of substitutionary atonement (as opposed to “friendly critics” such as John Stott and J.I. Packer who simply and correctly argue for a complete understanding of the doctrine) generally formulate their objections around one of several major categories. I’d like to take a brief look at the three most common objections in order to better understand how to answer their objections.

Many argue against penal substitution by claiming it is contrary to the position of the Early Church. While it is true that the early church emphasized the idea of Christus Victor, (the death of Christ as a means of overcoming sin, death, and the devil), it would be theologically simplistic to the point of error to say that was the only consequence of Christ’s death on the cross. Yes Christus Victor is a part of it, but so is propitiation and expiation of sins, reconciliation of man to God, the revelation of God…the list goes on. And yes, substitutionary atonement is definitely on that list (see Isaiah 53:6, 12; Romans 3:25; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Galatians 3:13; Hebrews 10:1-4; etc.).

Many more argue that the whole idea of penal substitution is inherently unjust. The most famous quote in this category likens the death of Christ to “cosmic child abuse.” What this metaphor utterly fails takes into account is the fact that child abuse is only possible in an inequitable relationship; in other words, what makes the crime of child abuse so heinous is that it occurs between an individual who has relatively ultimate power, and an individual who is relatively impotent. But before we start characterizing Christ as a victim, we should go read His words in John 10:17-18: “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.” That doesn’t sound like a powerless victim to me!

Some argue that the doctrine of substitutionary atonement is based on Natural Theology. This argument can be addressed in a similar fashion to the first argument based on the position of the early church. First though, a quick definition of Natural Theology: essentially this is a label to categorize the establishment of an understanding of God based on worldly examples and experience rather than an understanding of God based on the revelation of Scripture. And while it could be argued that a strictly limited view of penal substitution was originally drawn from a worldly concept of judicial retribution, such was not the Reformers intention. They fought against such theological reductionism, and so should we. In fact, we will face this all the more precisely because we live in a sound byte culture that judges the validity of an argument simply by how good of a headline it makes! While it may be convenient for us to summarize, abridge and simplify, such actions and attitudes only display our utter disregard for God’s word. Don’t do it!

However, possibly the most commonly encountered and widespread threat to the doctrine of penal substitution is not the threat of theological revision and/or reductionism, but rather that of doctrinal marginalization. It is a rare church these days that declines to water down their theology in order to be more socially acceptable, less offensive, and more culturally relevant. One of the largest churches in America makes it their practice to avoid sermons dealing principially with the topics of “sin, blood, death, hell, or the cross.” And by logical extension, if these topics are not open for discussion, then substitutionary atonement is off the table as well.

Unfortunately, by extension, so is Jesus. And that my friends, to turn the list of objections back on itself, is “unacceptable, utterly offensive, and absolutely irrelevant.”

by Jennifer Shin

There is much controversy going on in the state of California, as there was a state appellate court ruling on February 28, mandating that parents who aren’t credentialed cannot educate their children at home. Legislators stated that parents do not have the constitutional right to teach their own children and that under the law, these children should be sent to public schools where they will receive instruction from credentialed and “qualified” teachers.

According to Justice H. Walter, who was one of three members of the district court to sign the opinion, “Parents who fail to [comply with school enrollment laws] may be subject to a criminal complaint against them, found guilty of an infraction, and subject to imposition of fines or an order to complete a parent education and counseling program.”

There are an estimated 166,000 students in California who are currently being homeschooled. If the decision isn’t appealed, then many parents will be considered offenders of the law and their children considered truants.

Teachers, especially those firmly rooted in the teachers’ union, stated that only credentialed teachers are qualified to teach. Others said that homeschooling is elitist and anti-democratic. Two professors emeriti at Cal Poly Pomona said in a Los Angeles Times article, “It’s evident that the vast majority who teach their offspring in front of the television do so because they don’t want their children to be subjected to such dangerous doctrines as evolution, abortion, global warming, equal rights and other ideas abhorrent to the evangelical mantra.”

This statement shows the blatant hostility toward parents who homeschool their children, especially those within the Christian realm. The two professors at Cal Poly Pomona and others who are supporting the decision mock these parents, stating that they “fear the contaminating influence of what is commonly known as a liberal education.” To them, it is a matter of being open-minded in a liberal society. For us as Christians, it is more than a matter of law or conforming to how the world thinks. In fact, in Romans 12:2, Paul states, “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” It is not a matter of children being taught by “qualified” teachers but a matter of keeping their minds from being infiltrated with the world’s doctrines and being exposed to teachings that support evolution, homosexuality, same-sex marriage and sex education that contradicts God’s design.

Many Christian parents homeschool their children because what is taught at the public school contradicts what is taught in the home in alignment to God’s Word. A Christian parent in Sacramento stated in the Los Angeles Times, “I want to have control over what goes in my son’s head, not what’s put in there by people who might be on the far left who have their own ideas about indoctrinating kids.”

Ephesians 6:4 calls parents to “bring [children] up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” Legislators and teachers are stating that parents are not qualified to teach their own children. But God declares that parents are the primary instructors in their children’s lives. We must keep in mind to be discerning in what we teach children, whether they are our own or not. Even what we teach is to be set apart from the world. Though we are called to submit to our earthly authorities, our ultimate authority is God and our perfect and complete source of instruction that is profitable for all things is His Word.

by Stephanie Shin

A stroll down America’s timeline quickly shows that our country’s history is rife with war—you’d be hardpressed to find a generation that hasn’t lived in an era unaffected by one. Rarely are the cultures that result from these wartime periods as the crow flies; they flow from the wellspring of political, economic and social change. It’s arguable to what extent public support can determine the success of a war, but it’s unquestionable that the home front can govern the morale and purpose of a wartime era A short 5 year stint in the early 1940s in the U.S. is a prime example of this. World War II was a significant time in American history: iconic figures such as Rosie the Riveter, and similarly noteable establishments like the Salvation Army and the YMCA and YWCA were created in the WWII era.

What was most striking about this period was the solidarity in which the American people banded together. There was little to no revolution against decisions to curb production of certain items that we today have come to rely on as necessities: cars, houses, new appliances. Rationing of food items and other basic necessities were met with hardly a blink of an eye. Labor unions took a hiatus on their strike over wages, coming to a temporary arbitration with the government in light of the war. The women who stayed at home rallied around their men across the seas by planting Victory Gardens and joining the American workforce. Roosevelt stated that the efforts of civilians at home to support the war through personal sacrifice was as critical to winning the war as the efforts of the soldiers themselves. The support of the average Joe combined with the discipline and bravery of the military uniform made WWII a hopeful time rather than a dark one.

On March 25th, 2008, news headlines underscored the 4,000th fatality since the March 2003 invasion of Iraq. The stark contrast between the WWII era and the Iraqi War that we’re presently a part of is unmistakably clear. It’s a sad testament to the apathy to how this war is seen that many are unaware that there’s a war still going on. Unlike the unity of cause during World War II, the Bush administration is facing deep malcontent and antiwar movements from a large portion of the American people. The majority are content to remain blissfully unaware and to only occasionally churn out rhetoric to disparage or support. Meanwhile, the weight of this war on American morale and the world’s perception of the United States is devastating. The war is still being fought bravely by the soldiers we send overseas, but the home front remains disconcertingly inert.

Oftentimes, I find that I fight the spiritual battles of this life as if they were part of a war that I was forced to be a part of. Rather than a patriot for the cause of glory that God saved me for, I fight like a conscripted soldier who is unsure of the means and purpose. But it’s clear in the Word that this life is one not only meant to be lived with joy (“O come, let us sing for joy to the LORD, Let us shout joyfully to the rock of our salvation” Ps 95:1), but with an unflinching purpose and resolve to be a light in the darkness. 2 Timothy 2:2-4 says: “Endure hardship with us like a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs—he wants to please his commanding officer.” John Macarthur in his commentary writes, “Just as a soldier called to duty is completely severed from the normal affairs of civilian life, so also must the good soldier of Jesus Christ refuse to allow the things of the world to distract him.” Our purpose is clear: “Yet for this reason I found mercy, so that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might demonstrate His perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life. Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever” (1 Timothy 1:16-17). As sinners saved by a merciful God, we are not to be like hired mercenaries whose loyalties stop at the point of personal sacrifice and are fickle at best; we are slaves who have been freed by a merciful King who equips us with the whole armor of God to fight for Him. We are to pray at all times in the Spirit, be on alert with all perseverance and petition for all the saints.

What does it mean to fight the war on the home front as a Christian? It means to recognize the day-to-day choices that we make that will either give God the glory or not. This varies from person to person as God chooses to convict people in different ways. As shown by the war mobilization of civilians during WWII, a foundation of support at home helped to create a unity of purpose. “The main purpose was to remind people that there was a war on and to provide activities that would engage the civil spirit of millions of people not otherwise involved in the war effort.” That purpose is given to us in the Word! We can often get caught up in the stories of men who have fought the visible spiritual fight and have died for the cause; I read the stories in Foxe’s book of martyrs, the journalled testimonies of David Brainerd and Jim Elliot and became caught up in flames of zeal and conviction to go abroad and do the same. But the reality is that this isn’t the type of spiritual warfare that most of us will have to face. Rather than looking abroad to where the ammunition can be seen and heard, we confront an enemy who is much more internal, infiltrating, and increasingly unnoticed.

To submit to Christ the seemingly mundane things in our lives and to discipline and train our minds and bodies to determine to know nothing but Jesus Christ and Him crucified is the daily battle that we are entrenched in. Will we rejoice when circumstances seem to exact otherwise, to desire humility when our sin clamors for acclamation,to love when it hurts, to sacrifice when our flesh desires more, to consider all the things of the world as loss for the surpassing value of knowing Him as bondslaves of Christ?

At the end of his run, the apostle Paul was able to say, “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing” (2 Timothy 4:7-8). Will we able to say the same? We fight the fight for the promises He mercifully gives in His word.

by David Ahn

Over the past 3 months, the sports world witnessed two of its marquee stars signed to record-breaking, long-term contracts. In baseball, the Yankees signed Alex Rodriguez to a 10 year, $275 million dollar contract in December. Just a couple months later, the hockey world watched the Washington Capitals sign Alexander Ovechkin to a 13 year, $124 million dollar contract extension. While it might be easy to get caught up with the mind-blowing salaries, allow me to draw your attention to the lengths of the contracts as well. 10 and 13 year contracts! To gain some perspective, Lighthouse Bible Church has not even been around for 10 years. 13 years ago, I was in the middle of my fifth grade; 13 years from now, I will be in my upper thirties, hopefully practicing as a full-fledged doctor and supporting a family (Lord-willing). It is amazing to think that these sports franchises consider it a worthy financial investment to commit to one player at such a high price, and for such a long amount of time.

Obviously, these lengthy contracts aren’t given to every athlete that walks into the clubhouse. They are reserved for the most consistent players who have shown a dedication to the sport that will not fade after the check clears. If these athletes were doing it solely for the money or for the celebrity or for a comfortable life, they wouldn’t spend hours on end in the off-season training, or in the film rooms studying their game, or on the field/ice honing their skills. Why can certain athletes be trusted to put their all into every game and every practice, even after the security provided by a long-term contract? It’s because, for some of them, the money is not their primary motivation. Instead, their desire is to be able play their sport at the highest level, in hopes of achieving as many accolades and trophies as possible. They are being paid to do what they enjoy, what they truly love. It’s because of their love of the game. Now, you might be asking, why is this article in the LBC newsletter and not on ESPN? It is because, for those of us that are genuine Christians, WE have been given a contract of infinite value that is guaranteed for the length of eternity, by God’s grace and through Jesus’ death on a cross. After the point that we have dedicated our lives to Christ and genuinely believed the truth of the gospel, we now have Christ’s righteousness standing in the place of our sinfulness. The question is, how do we respond to this?

Unlike A-Rod or Ovechkin, we might find ourselves dragging our feet, hesitant to put forth any effort or sacrifice that might be required to grow in the process of sanctification. Some of us might struggle with the most basic of disciplines, looking to expend the minimal amount of energy to just limp into heaven, content with the security of our salvation. Maybe some of us ran hard initially, but over time have grown complacent with just maintaining our spiritual knowledge and level of commitment.

But this is not the biblical picture of a Christian. Rather, we are called to “work out [our] own salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil 2:12), to “lay aside every weight and sin,” and to “run with endurance the race that is set before us” (Hebrews 12:1). How and why are we to do these things? The writer of Hebrews continues in verse 2: “looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame.”

For those of us that might find ourselves struggling to run hard, we must remember what we are running for! We must fix our eyes on Christ. We must remember the cross and the immeasurable grace that we, deserving of absolutely nothing, have received. Left to our own will, we would be continuing further and further on the path to destruction, but God loved us so much to sacrifice His own Son to pay the penalty for our sin. This sacrifice on our behalf should cause us to love Christ and treasure Him all the more. Comparing sports and the Christian walk is not something new. In 1 Corinthians 9:24-25, Paul writes, “Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable.”

Sports stars might strive for the perishable wreath of the Pennant or the Stanley Cup; we strive for the imperishable “prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.” (Phil 3:14) They aspire to be in the record books and the Hall of Fame; we aspire to be in the Book of Life and the Halls of Heaven. They do it for the love of the game; we do it for the love of Christ. We can not and must not allow ourselves to lose sight of this.

by Tim Sohn

“If God dropped us whenever we sinned and he felt neglected we would be hopeless.”

The reality of sin is that our world is filled with brokenness. We lack the ability to faithfully keep covenants, and in this age we do more covenant breaking than we do covenant keeping. Marriage is the strongest bond that we can commit to in this life. We enter into a holy covenant before God to faithfully care for and cherish our spouse for the rest of our natural lives. Yet, this commitment is often treated flippantly like a romantic first date. When the romance wears out, we get out of the marriage and go on to other things. Over the past decades we’ve seen an increase in divorce rates regardless of what faith a person confesses. The topic of divorce has once again made its way to the national stage because of last month’s Christianity Today article titled, “When to Separate What God has Joined: A Closer Reading on the Bible on Divorce.”

The traditional teaching on divorce from Scripture is that one may find grounds for divorce for marital infidelity. Yet, even then, divorce should not be the first option to be pursued. In his Christianity Today article, David Instone-Brewer argues for an alternative teaching on divorce that is grounded in Exodus 21. Instone-Brewer argues that in Jewish times, divorce was allowed on the grounds of neglect. This is more formalized later in Jewish and Christian marriages as “love, honor, and keep.” Thus, the divorce was allowed for both sexual unfaithfulness and for various forms of neglect. Neglect is a broad term that can easily be expanded to include many things.

In response to this article John Piper wrote, “To put it bluntly, the implication of this article is that every marriage I am aware of could already have legitimately ended in divorce…. Now Instone-Brewer may not want to say it, but he does say it: We have a ground for divorce if we are not “honored” by our spouse. I don’t know any spouses who are so well honored by the other that they could not make a case that they are insufficiently honored.” The main implication of Instone-Brewer’s interpretation is that any of us could make a case for divorce. This is the last thing we need in an age where one’s word is practically meaningless, and covenant breaking is treated like a bad habit.

The divorce controversy has been picked up by Time magazine to show that there is controversy within the Christian community. “Still, the controversy suggests that even the country’s most rule-bound Christians will search for a fresh understanding of scripture when it seems unjust to them. The implications? Flexibility on divorce may mean that evangelicals could also rethink their position on such things as gay marriages as a generation of Christians far more accepting of homosexuality begins to move into power.”

Reading these articles I tried to imagine what our view of marriage and divorce says about our perception of God. If God dropped us whenever we sinned and he felt neglected we would be hopeless. Marriage is designed to be a radical display of Christ’s love for His church. A witness to the world that God is a covenant keeper, and will never ‘divorce’ or abandon His people. Piper writes, “The world we live in needs to see a church that is so satisfied in Christ that its marriages are not abandoned for something as amorphous as ‘emotional neglect.’”

by Stephanie Shin

The speed and volume of knowledge in the age of the Internet is staggering. Cyberspace has penetrated virtually every domain of human living: sports, communication, finance, shopping, news media, entertainment, religion, and now more than ever, personal journaling, called weblogs or blogs, for short. You know these blogs well in its many forms: Xanga, WordPress, Blogspot, and social networking blogs such as Facebook and Myspace. The web has created a “blogosphere,” a little space on the internet that a person can call their own.

As I personally saw the internet become more heavily integrated into my own life, the questions I heard that related to this topic became more acute: if someone were to track my internet activity, would they be able to identify me as a Christian? Do the blogs I write and the blogs I read reveal a consistency of who I say I am in Christ? Do they reflect the reality of my walk with God? How do I surf the web to the glory of God? These questions have a two-pronged direction towards blogging and web surfing.

On his own website (albertmohler.com), Albert Mohler quotes Rupert Murdoch of the behemoth media conglomerate NewsCorp, “They don’t want to rely on a godlike figure from above to tell them what’s important. They certainly don’t want news presented as gospel. Instead, they want their news on demand, when it works for them. They want control over their media, instead of being controlled by it.” Ironic that Murdoch would use a religious metaphor, but he depicts well the liberty that the web offers, and this not only limited in the news that we read, that most people take for granted. Mohler addresses the new missiological challenge—how is the gospel to penetrate this new virtual reality?

In reference to personal blogs, we can look at the life of Paul, who allowed the gospel to direct all of his life. In 2 Corinthians 10:11, he writes: “Let such a person consider this, that what we are in word by letters when are absent, such persons we are also in deed when present.” In the context, the false apostles accused Paul of writing powerful, influential letters while in reality he seemed to lack the qualities of a truly great leader.

Paul’s response to the apostles was simple: he defended his ministry for the sake of the Corinthians, but his only interest was what his Lord thought of him. He sought to exalt Christ more than himself. Paul’s life was one characterized by the gospel and a desire to submit to the will of Christ—his words aligned with his actions; had he wanted to, he could have more than defended himself against these false teachers. Similarly, in the lives of our personal blogs, can we be sure that the content matches our real-life identity in Christ? Have our words become greater than we really are?

Recently, Pastor Patrick memtioned a post on Rick Holland’s blog during a sermon discussion. It served as a pretty harsh but helpful rebuke. Holland writes: “Most blogs are masquerades. They make people look like something they’re not. Bloggers pose as theologians, philosophers, statesmen for causes, even spokesmen for Christianity when they are little more than guys with some computer savvy and a strong opinion.”

Over a hundred years ago, William Blake prayed: “Take my intellect and use every power as Thou shalt choose.” When I stumbled across this quote, I altered it to: “Take my Internet and use every power as Thou shalt choose.” Cheesy, but it gets the point across! Web surfing is the 21st century’s invisible leisure activity. An innocent “checking-the-email” session can find unchecked hours fly by on Youtube. The websites available for our entertainment and reading pleasure are countless, and the time spent on it potentially endless.

But web surfing doesn’t always have to be wasteful; on the contrary, some time spent on the web can be profitable for the purpose of edification, encouragement and learning. Learned men of faith have kept up with the times and now post blogs of their own. Sermons are now offered on podcasts, and believers can interact on the net. Again, it’s not the internet that is, in and of itself, a bad thing; it’s the way we utilize it that can either bring God glory or not. Jonathan Edwards’s fifth resolution was this: “Resolved, never to lose one moment of time; but improve it the most profitable way I possibly can.” In the same vein, Ephesians 5:15-16 writes “Therefore, be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil.”

Rick Holland’s post on blogging ended liked this: “Because on the road to Damascus, in Acts 9, Saul was converted. The Apostle Paul met the living Savior and everything changed. His life was intercepted. His perspective was reversed. His eyes were opened. His passion was redirected. His worldview changed. His soul was converted. His mission was clear. Paul’s approaching Damascus is a rallying point. It symbolizes for me a place where the gospel of Jesus Christ changes everything” (emphasis added).

Our whole lives are to be marked by the gospel, even in cyberspace where the internet can serve as an extension of what we are learning and what we believe to shine the light to those who don’t know Christ.

by David Ahn

Over past several months, the news has brought a seemingly endless stream of embarrassing headlines and shameful accusations against otherwise respectable figures in society. Whether it’s a conservative US Senator being arrested for lewd acts in a public restroom, or an NBA referee being accused of having officiated games in a way to benefit his own gambling interests, it seems as if no occupation is any longer above reproach. Unfortunately, even a prominent Christian pastor in the past year has been exposed for leading a scandalous double-life. If you’re anything like me, the following string of questions immediately comes to mind: How could this happen? How could they harbor such heinous sins over the span of years, while actively carrying out their admirable every-day lives?

It’s easy to assume that these people are just inherently evil, or that they struggle with unique and extreme desires of the flesh, but we should not be so quick to distance ourselves from them. Their situations did not come about overnight. What most likely took place is that those areas of sin began as seemingly minor temptations, but were cultivated and expanded over many years of indulging while hiding their sin from the public eye. The Bible clearly states that we are all sinners, so we must take heed and really consider the danger of entertaining secret sin in our own lives, no matter how insignificant they might appear at the time.

To begin, we must examine what secret sin really is and the danger that it poses. Is there even such a thing as sin that is truly secret? The answer is a resounding no, at least according to our theology. We worship an omnipotent, omnipresent God who sees and knows everything. Interestingly enough, we know this fact in our heads but yet it doesn’t seem to take root in our hearts, which explains why temptation seems most appealing when our brothers and sisters are not around, or why our private thought lives are often the hardest to control. Sadly enough, this essentially reveals a fear of man over a fear of God, and the Bible firmly denounces such thinking: “Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matthew 10:28, NASB). Secret sin is not inherently any worse than any other sin. God does not rely on human witnesses to sway His judgments. However, secret sin can be more dangerous because of the soil in which it takes root: the absence of a fear of God.

In his book, Battling Unbelief: Defeating Sin With Superior Pleasure, John Piper elaborates upon the disparity between the fear of God and the fear of man through a thoughtful discussion of shame. He introduces and defines two types of shame: misplaced shame and well-placed shame. The difference between the two is whose glory is at stake: do you feel shame when you look bad in front of others or fail to meet their expectations, or do you feel shame your actions have dishonored God? The only time that we are justified in feeling shame is when we have done or thought something that takes away from His glory.

King David had the right idea of shame. When he was confronted regarding his sins of sending Bathsheba’s husband out to die in battle so that he would be able to take her as his own wife, King David immediately responded by saying, “I have sinned against the Lord” (2 Samuel 12:13) and also wrote Psalm 51: “Against You, You only, have I sinned \ And done what is evil in your sight” (Psalm 51:4, NASB). He was not remorseful because he was being punished with his son being stricken with disease, he was not ashamed because his secret sin had been discovered and might tarnish his legacy, but he was contrite because he realized that he had dishonored God.

A proper understanding of the difference between appropriate and misplaced shame is crucial for fighting secret sin because it addresses the underlying heart issue. Without this, the problem of our fear of man can remain uncorrected even after our sins have been exposed. In this case, we might just go about trying to repair our image by going through the motions of apologizing or even by correcting our behavior, but this is only an incomplete and temporary fix. In fact, it can even exacerbate the problem by causing us to build back up our pride and decrease our dependence on the grace of God, further feeding our fear of man. On the other hand, if we have a correct view of what well-placed shame looks like, we will humble ourselves and remember that our sole purpose is to bring glory to God in everything that we do, then all sin (public or private) becomes equally shameful because it dishonors Him, and we would respond by immediately confessing to God and taking comfort in the work of the Cross, and the joy of salvation would quickly overcome the feelings of doubt and guilt.

This is obviously not an easy shift of perspective that will take place over a day or two, but we can make an effort to persistently check our motivations and intentions for why we do what we do and why we feel shame when we do. Try out the following practical suggestions: The next time your cheeks flush red and your blood temperature rises, try to identify why you are feeling shame. When a brother or sister calls you out and rebukes you, identify why you are feeling shame. When the temptation to sin comes knocking, try to identify what shame it is that you fear the most. Is it misplaced or well-placed shame? Is it a fear of God or a fear of man?

by Tim Sohn

I love to do things myself. I enjoy building my own computer, cooking my own food, eating my own food, and hopefully someday fixing my own car. Why give others the enjoyment of the activity, when I can do it cheaper and faster while having fun? Although a “do-it-yourself” mentality is great for saving costs and having fun, this type of mentality can be disastrous and detrimental when we apply it to our Christian lives. In the church today, do-it-yourself Christianity has become the common way we approach our new lives in Christ. When we talk about the Gospel, we tend to view the good news as only the means by which we enter into the kingdom of God. We think that once we are saved by the Gospel it becomes a memory that we look back to, and the way we live out our Christian life is by doing it ourselves through hard work and obedience. But hard work and obedience that is not grounded in the Gospel will not sanctify you – it will strangle you.

A frequent phrase among Christians is “I need to be a better/more devout Christian”. This phrase comes up in many forms, but all of them are related to “trying hard”. An even more subtle way that this type of thinking enters our minds is “I need to try to be more like Jesus.” While we absolutely want to be like Jesus, when we try to do it ourselves our efforts spiral us downwardas our hard work strangles us. In essence, we are crushed by the weight of Jesus’ perfect example because we see Him solely as one we should imitate, divorced from the fact that He is first our Savior. The key to becoming more like Jesus through the sanctification process is not do-it-yourself Christianity; it’s to “use” the Gospel in every area of our lives and allow it to go deeper into our hearts. Gospelcentered sanctification will not strangle you – it will free you.

Tim Keller writes, “The gospel is not the first “step” in a “stairway” of truths, rather, it is more like the “hub” in a “wheel” of truth. The gospel is not just the A-B-C’s of Christianity, but it is the A to Z of Christianity. We are not justified by the gospel and then sanctified by obedience, but the gospel is the way we grow (Gal. 3:1-3) and are renewed (Col 1:6). It is the solution to each problem, the key to each closed door, the power through every barrier (Rom 1:16-17).” Our problems often stem from a lack of understanding of the Gospel. The solution to the problems we face isn’t to try harder – it’s to reorient ourselves to the truth of the Gospel.

Several weeks ago I found out that a co-worker had advanced farther than me in his professional pursuits. He was experiencing success, while I had recently been experiencing some failures. Inside I felt jealous and dismayed, but outside I showed signs of excitement for my co-workers success. I told myself, “I’ve done better in the past, so I have no need to be jealous”, “You shouldn’t be jealous. Just stop it.” “People like you, it’s okay.” While this may have addressed the sin problem at hand (jealousy) in a do-it-yourself manner, it ignored the deeper problem. My deeper problem was that I had two idols: my self-image and my own success. These were the things I saw as being my real savior instead of Jesus. As long as I had a longer list of successes I would be “better”. If others liked me, I would be accepted. My problem was bigger than simply having a jealous heart – I did not have a proper orientation of the Gospel. The Gospel-oriented response would have been to repent of my idols that were at the root of my problem, and use the Gospel on them. Instead of my past success or my self-image before others being what I turned to, I should have seen that I am unbelievablyloved and accepted by Jesus. In essence, I needed to use the Gospel to take over the space that the idols had in my heart. If I had simply followed my thinking to try and sanctify myself, I would have been deceived into reinforcing the idols, which would later manifest themselves through other types of sin. However, by not trying to do it myself and by using the Gospel to crush my idols, it provided a freeing path for grace to stream in. This is not a process that will happen once or twice; it must occur daily with every problem that we face.

Do-it-yourself Christianity sounds great, but is the beginning of a long, hard road to nowhere. The only way to avoid it is to identify areas in our lives where we need to use the Gospel. Ask God to reveal them to you, and to lead you to repentance. Look at the ways you address your sin, and think if it’s about hard work and obedience without the Gospel. Always remember that you are deeply flawed, but because of Jesus you are incredibly loved.

by Tim Sohn

Every Monday night at 9pm I end up with a dilemma. Do I record Heroes on NBC, or 24 on Fox? Tuesday nights are American Idol. Wednesday nights feature the results of the votes for the previous days American Idol. Thursday is NBC’s Must See TV where all of America enjoys seeing awkwardness to the extreme in The Office. I never seem to know what’s on Friday nights because ever since ABC’s old school TGIF lineup went down the drain (and I started going to church) I stopped paying attention. In a world that is incredibly saturated by the media, it’s easy to simply come home plop on the couch and absorb everything the tube has to offer. As Christians we are called to “be transformed by the renewing of your mind (Rom 12:2)”, which means that the way we view the media, entertainment, and our culture needs to be from a biblically-based worldview. A worldview is a set of beliefs so basic, that everything else is seen through that grid. In a nutshell, this means seeing the world as corrupt, trying to alleviate its prob lems through moralistic means, and in need of the Gospel of Grace. As Christians, we need to express discernment as we look at the culture around us and understand what ideas fall in line with biblical teaching, and what does not. In fact, a TV show that expresses a world that is messed up, sinful, and in desperate need of restoration is more biblical than some moralistic “be a good person” messages that we hear from some Christian mediums. The media often shares a message, attempts to ask and provide answers to questions that affect the human soul. In essence, a story is being told. Often these stories reflect a world that longs for Jesus. Our aim in expressing discernment is so that we can understand the culture around us, and use the stories that are told through movies, TV shows, and music to share the most magnificent story of a King coming to save and redeem His people.

Many of the themes we see in our culture that attract us are related to redemption, finding identity, or discovering significance. When we see characters fail, but triumph in the end, we are elated that redemption has occurred. We often find superheroes discovering their abilities through some stage of adolescence, and struggling to find their identity with everyone else in the world. Only when they begin to discover others like them, such as in the X-men saga, do they feel a sense of belonging and community. In the recent hit show, Heroes, each of the individual heroes is trying to find their significance in the greater story of saving the world. The questions they ask are “how do I fit in?” and “what should I use my powers for?” I believe that we are attracted to these types of stories, because all of us in some way identify with them and want to experience them indirectly. The questions that many characters ask in superhero stories are the same ones that we ask. Who am I? Why am I here? In superhero stories we always see someone who is trying to “save the world” and restore order. Superheroes fight crime, combat injustice, and protect the weak. In many ways, these stories reflect a culture longing for things to be made right, and for sin in people’s hearts to be eradicated. What our culture reflects in these stories is a longing for a world that is peaceful and happy; a world that is joyful and where life is enjoyable.

The truth that our world longs for and needs is Jesus. Jesus is the only one in whom we find the real story of redemption. A story about God Himself, condescending to earth to restore the brokenness in our world. Because of Jesus’ death on the cross we can be first and foremost reconciled to God, and also reconciled to each other to the world around us. In Jesus we can find our true identity as His child, and a community of people who He calls His own. Only through Jesus can we find true significance and labor for something greater than ourselves, the expansion of God’s kingdom throughout the world. Every story that our culture tells through the media always finds a solution that isn’t quite big enough. Our minds are fascinated, our hearts are captivated, but the world that is displayed isn’t real. Yet, we want it to be. There is always a way to take a story, understand the themes and questions that are being asked, and show how the real answer to the story about humans is found in Jesus. In Jesus we find the God that we really crave, and the God that we really need. He is the only one that can make the world right, and deal with the problems that we see in us.