Thinking Out Loud
W. Carl Ketcherside
[Page 129] |
"It has become fashionable to mock at or treat with suspicion, anything that looks like faith in the future. If we are not careful this skepticism will prove fatal, for its direct result is to destroy both the love of living and the momentum of mankind."--Teilhard de Chardin.
Most of my readers know what it is to have a meal of "left-overs." In our own home we have difficulty in preparing just the right amount for two persons. Our work makes it rather necessary that we be a part of the "can-opener culture," but a lot of cans contain more than you can consume at one sitting. The result is that Nell ends up with a saucer full of this and another container full of that, until some day we get all of them out of the refrigerator and have a luncheon made up of "this and that."
The items in such meals have little relationship to one another and would make a nutritionist or home economist wring her hands in dismay and predict an early demise for us both. But I like to "bat in the clean-up position" and I confess that sometimes the variety makes up for the lack of balance. Eating with someone you love always helps the occasion, regardless of the food.
Taking a cue from that kind of kitchen preparation I am going to serve up a potpourri of questions which have accumulated from various forums and seminars. I hope that you will not be too disappointed and that your spiritual digestion will not become upset. I can predict that a lot of readers will not be happy with the answers that I give, because I am never interested in purely traditional replies, the kind that are expected. I am concerned only that I be honest and open and tell what I personally think about things.
You will notice that I have repeated over and over that I am not seeking to bind my views or opinions upon any of you. I simply share my views, but if they cut across your thinking, I do not expect you to concur. It is not necessary that you agree with me for me to love you. And don't forget that I did not always see things as I now do. There is an old Yiddish proverb that says: "If God lived on earth, people would break his windows." It is very difficult for brethren to even tolerate someone whose thoughts differ with their own, but I am grateful to His wonderful grace and mercy that this is no longer a problem of mine.
Boiled down and simmered away, the basis of situation ethics is that there can be no hard-and-fast rule laid down which can cover every contingency which can arise in human relationships. For this reason the ethical approach must be de-
[Page 130] |
In my personal encounter with Dr. Fletcher, he insisted, as he did in his book, that there are but three approaches which can be made to ethics--antinomian, legalistic, or situational. The first denies all law and each man becomes a law unto himself, with anarchy as the natural result. The second insists that the law is supreme by virtue of being law, and must take precedence over persons and their needs. In any conflict between law and human need, the dignity and sanctity of the law must be upheld regardless of the results to the person. Keeping of law thus becomes the ultimate goal of man.
I am quite convinced, although it always "knocks my brethren for a loop" to hear me say it, that God endorsed situational ethics and Jesus practiced it. For example, God gave the law that "if a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die...so shalt thou put away evil from Israel." Yet he spared both David and Bathsheba and they lived together afterwards. It is true that David paid for his guilt, but the penalty of death prescribed by the written code was not enforced.
Another case in point has to do with Aaron and his sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, on the day that Nadab and Abihu were killed because of their transgression. It was necessary that the goat of sin-offering be eaten in the sacred place. Moses made a searching enquiry for it and found it had been burnt. He became very angry and assailed his brother and nephews for their misconduct. But Aaron pointed out to him what had happened to his family in the grief they had sustained, and said, "This is what has befallen me; if I eat a sin offering today, will it be right in the eyes of the Lord?" The record says, "And when Moses heard that, he was content." Human anguish may take precedence over law.
Jesus pointed out that the divine intention was that there be one man and one woman united as one flesh, but circumstances created by the hardness of the hearts of men, forced Moses to alter the original intent and allow men to give their wives a divorce document and separate them from "bed and board."
When Jesus was going through the fields on the sabbath, his disciples plucked heads of grain, and rubbed them between their hands to eliminate the chaff, and then ate the grain. This brought immediate criticism and condemnation from the Pharisees. But Jesus argued that human welfare was the first priority. He gave two examples of men who did that which was unlawful. David ate the presence-bread with his men, and the priests performed tasks on the sabbath within the very precincts of the temple. The conclusion was that "Man was not made for the sabbath, but the sabbath was made for man."
All law is given for the protection and perpetuity of persons, and when the law does not cover the situation (and no law can cover every situation), the welfare of man has priority over the law. All of us are situation ethicists, even those who deny it. We practice such ethics in our homes as we rear our children. We would not scruple to drive sixty miles per hour in a thirty mile per hour zone if transporting a badly injured person to an emergency room of the hospital. We may disagree with Dr. Fletcher over some applications he makes of the principle, and I certainly do disagree with him, but this does not disprove the validity of the principle. I am in favor of it for Christians simply because I believe it is the tenor and teaching of the word of Cod, and in harmony with the nature of God as revealed. Notice I used the term Christians. I believe that situation ethics can only be the guiding principle for God's children and not for the children of the darkness of this passing age. What I mean by this will become more apparent as the questioning continues.
No, I don't consider it dangerous, because I think that is what the Holy Spirit taught. During his earthly sojourn Jesus said that the two greatest commandments were to love God and our fellow-men. That is the difference between Jesus and a lot of preachers. They would have replied that all of the commandments were equal, since they all came from the same authority. A lot of them still argue that, even after Jesus made his statement.
Jesus said that all of the law and prophets were suspended from these two. All of them! This is another way of saying that love is basic and elemental and that all other divine rules and revelations are dependent upon and subservient to it. God decrees law and gives prophecies, but He is love! God is a lawgiver, but it is not His nature to give laws. His essence is love and whatever proceeds from God proceeds from love. And love is first and above all else, even law!
We are no longer under a law code but under grace. This means that citizens of the kingdom of heaven are not confined by law but constrained by love. Law is always external and imposed. Love is internal and impelled. It is also eternal. We love because He first loved us. Our love is a response to love. Law is a police power which keeps men together by defining limits and enforcing them; love is a magnetic power which keeps them together by holding them to a common center. Law was a custodian until faith came. Faith has come and we are no longer under a custodian. We have been set free by the grace of God! Before Jesus came as the living expression of God's love incarnate, God's love was expressed in law, but now God's law, or rule of faith and action, is expressed in love.
This is what I think the Spirit meant when he encouraged Paul to write, "Owe no man anything, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law" (Romans 13:8-10).
A careful analysis of this is very revealing. It indicates that the extent of my obligation, responsibility and debt to all others upon earth is to be stated not in terms of law, but in terms of love. I owe this and must not owe more nor less. If I am forced to borrow money I must do it in the context of love (and love may keep me from borrowing it). When I repay it I must also do that in love. In the preceding statements I am instructed about what is due others, and I must pay taxes and custom assessments, and render reverence and honor, all with that agape which cushions life's hardness with velvet, and oils the grinding wheels of commerce and business, as well as civic intercourse, with a lubricant which offsets heat and corrosion.
All of the commandments are summed up in love. The apostle names some of the familiar ones, but knowing the human tendency of the legalistic mind to search for exceptions, he adds, "and if there be any other commandment." Paul says that they are all "comprehended" in the saying about loving your neighbor. The original word for "comprehended" literally means "to gather under one head." It was used in Ephesians 1:10 where we are told that it is God's purpose, plan and pleasure to gather all things in heaven and on earth in Christ.
But it was also used by the Greeks to indicate a summary of a speech, where all of the thoughts enunciated are collected and classified under one brief statement. The philosophers summed up their thoughts in such fashion. So Paul sums up the whole relationship we sustain to God with love. It should be remembered that we get the word "sum" from the same word from which we de-
[Page 131] |
The reason why love is the ultimate is because it works no ill to another. There is no law ever given that, in some instances, does not have built-in inequities. This is the nature of law because of the varying circumstances of men in the world. It is not the weakness of law but the weakness of man that makes law imperfect. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., said, "The standards of the law are standards of general application. The law takes no account of the infinite varieties of temperament, intellect, and education, which make the internal characters of a given act so different in different men."
There is no mercy in law, which must require and demand strict adherence or provide a penalty. Law is inexorable and unmerciful. This is true whether the law originates with God or man. "He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses." The "law of Christ" which is a "law of liberty" is love. The commandment of Christ is that we love one another as he has loved us. And this provides for mercy.
"Speak to others and do to others as becomes those who are amenable to the law of freedom. Under this rule of action one who does not extend mercy will not receive mercy, and remember that mercy takes precedent in God's attitude toward judgment" (James 2:12, 13). Under the previous regime, which was one based on a legalistic code, one who kept the whole law and yet stumbled in one point was guilty of all. He had violated the code and, regardless of circumstances, death was the penalty. "Thine eye shall not pity him" was the injunction.
It is amazing how many people misunderstand the implication of James, who is contrasting the royal or kingly law of love with the codified system of the Mosaic economy, and thus overlook the fact that under a law of liberty we are free to minister mercy and must do so if we are to receive mercy. Mercy is never required when man keeps law to a perfect degree. It is only shown when men are failures as judged by the law. On this basis we all need it.
William Barclay points out that the Christian is self-governed and self-directed by the love which dwells in his heart. He writes, "He follows the right way, the way of love to God and love to men, not because any external law compels him to do so, and not because any threat of punishment frightens him into doing so, but because the love of Christ which is in his heart makes him desire to do so." I concur with that, although I find it one of the most difficult routes one can take in the flesh. I do not believe that one can ever do it merely upon his own strength or under his own power.
Of course not! I am not saying we should repeal any laws in the world. I am simply saying that in the body of Christ, love is the only law in the absolute. The love of which I speak is agape, and it is a gift of God, poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit. Those who are out of Christ must be subject to laws,
[Page 133] |
Paul asserts that it should be a matter of common knowledge that "the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for homosexuals, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be anything else that is contrary to sound teaching." My brethren who claim they are under law have placed themselves in the company of a motley group, but maybe they know more about themselves than I do.
It is here that Joseph Fletcher is in error with regard to "situation ethics." This is probably caused by his humanistic philosophy. Love can never become the dynamic for those out of Christ, because they walk in the flesh and not in the Spirit. And those who live after the flesh will die. They are the unrighteous, those who have chosen not to accept Christ as their hope, but are motivated by all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life. Love is not the universal rule of action for the unregenerate world but for the kingdom of God's dear Son. It is effective only in a theocracy and can never be in a democracy.
Those who are dead and whose life is hid with Christ in God, who are no longer children of disobedience but have put off the old man with his deeds, are the ones who are told above everything else to put on love, which is the very seal of perfection. They have donned the new man and are renewed in knowledge after the image of God who created them. They are no longer under the dominion of sin and for that reason are not under the reign of law. They have begun in the Spirit and are free from fleshly domination, because those who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Nothing is clearer than the fact that those who walk in the Spirit have been delivered from the whole domain of law. Indeed, the apostle says, after he has listed the entire catalogue of the fruits of the Spirit, "In this area there is no law." He bolsters his declaration that "If you are led by the Spirit you are not under law" (Gal. 5:18). Again, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace" (Romans 6:14). Sin rules over those who are under law, and they are under law precisely because sin rules over them. Sin takes occasion by the legal commandment to deceive and slay them.
First, you must remember that when I talk about being delivered from law, I mean that we are not under a written code. We are not amenable to a statute-book as were God's people before the coming of the Messiah. I do not mean that we are not subject to Christ for he is the very Lord of life. I do not mean that we are at liberty to sin for such liberty would be license. We are free in Christ, not free from Christ.
But the new covenant of God is not what men call "The New Testament." The new testament, or covenant, of God was not written with pen and ink at all. The epistle of Christ, ministered by the apostles was written on the hearts of believers with the Spirit. "You are plainly affirmed to be the letter of Christ by our service, and this letter was not written with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone, but on the tablets of human hearts" (2 Cor. 3:3).
In view of this Paul writes, "We are granted ability by God, who has also made us capable of ministering the new
[Page 134] |
"Now we are freed from the bondage of the law, since the law which once bound us has died, and this freedom makes us able to serve under a spiritual bond and not under the old domination of a written code" (Romans 7:6). Regardless of what Paul may have meant by the expression "under law to Christ," he certainly did not refer to a written code or compilation of statutes set down with pen and ink.
The new covenant scriptures do not constitute such a compilation of laws, statutes and judgments. They represent the thoughts of God exposed and not the will of God imposed. In order to observe them we must have "the mind of Christ" and this means allowing the word of Christ to dwell in us richly in all things.
The new covenant in Christ and the relationship to the covenant is a personal matter. Jesus is our covenant. The promise of God in the prophetic message was, "I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant to the people, for a light to the Gentiles" (Isa. 42:6). Again, "Thus saith the Lord, In an acceptable time I have heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant to the people" (Isa. 49:8).
To be under the law to Christ is to be in Christ and under his lordship. This means an abdication of the human will to the will of God. It requires a hauling down of the flag of self and the surrender of the fortress of the heart to a new captain. He occupies the throne room of the inner man. He becomes the master to whom one stands or falls. God's law is in the mind. It is written on the heart. It is not the engraving of the finger of God on tablets of stone, or the inditing of precepts with pen and ink, but the writing of the name of Christ on the walls of the heart, so that "whatever you do in word or deed is done in his name." Praise God for that name which is above every name. Thank God it is written in the chambers of my poor and unworthy heart.
This makes it possible to say, "I delight in the law of God after the inward man." And again, "With the mind I myself serve the law of God." This is distinctly called "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (Romans 8:2). That means just what it says. Our law is the Spirit of life! Those who are hooked on the written code concept of law, assume that even such mention of the word "law" refers to the letters constituting the new covenant scriptures. But these are not a law. They are a compilation of love letters written to congregations and individuals who were in the covenant. These brethren were not in the covenant because they had these letters but they received the letters because they were in the covenant. Everyone of the letters was written with pen and ink on parchment or papyrus, but the man who wrote most of them, said in one of them that the new covenant was not written with ink, but with the Spirit on the tablets of human hearts.
Let me say again that the law of the Spirit of life is "the Spirit of life." It is contrasted with the law of sin and death. The Spirit of life is now the governing principle, the rule of action, for the covenant people. In Romans 8:3, the law which was "weak through the flesh" is not superseded by another law, but by God sending his own Son in the flesh. Many of our brethren think Jesus nailed one law to the cross and handed another one down. But Jesus did not offer us another law. He offered up himself. He did not condemn sin by statute but by sacrifice of himself. When the custodian brought us to faith it did not turn us over to another custodian but to Jesus.
The result is that the righteousness at which the law aimed and which it could not achieve because of weakness is now attained by having the Spirit.
[Page 135] |
The law of God, that is, the principle of divine control over human personality, is not a written code, for such a code is always weak because of the flesh. The covenant is Christ. The inscription is in the heart. The law is the life of Christ, eternal life, and the empowering agent is the Holy Spirit. Anyone who seeks to bind man to an attempt to be righteous by conformity to a written code, regardless of origin, dooms man to eternal condemnation, for "by the works of law shall no flesh be justified."
I think I should make a few preliminary observations because of the insistence of most of my brethren that we are under a written code and will be saved by law-keeping. This feeling is probably engendered because we are immature and spiritually adolescent. All adolescents crave for law and imposed restraint even while rebelling against it and struggling for freedom. Psychologically this stems from fear, a fear that the experiences of life thus far do not equip us to handle life on our own. A lot of God's children get to the spiritual teenager state and halt their growth, which means that they must always suffer from the tensions and strife peculiar to this stage of development. They want to remain under "tutors and governors" and we have a lot of applicants for the job.
That is why, when God plainly states that we are not under law but under grace, a lot of brethren actually busy themselves trying to turn grace into law. We regard grace as merely another lawgiver, imposing a new written code under threat of damnation for every misunderstanding. We are frightened by freedom because freedom creates awesome responsibilities in which we must make judgmental choices and be responsible for their outcome and results. It is much easier to be responsible to the law than to be responsible under grace.
Let me now make a clear distinction between the law of Moses and the life of Christ, that is, between Deuteronomy and the Sermon on the Mount. Both contain commandments, but under the law men lived only because they kept the commandments, while in Christ we keep the commandments only because we have life, eternal life. In the Mosaic economy, men earned the right to live by strict obedience to the law; in Christ we receive the right to serve by the gift of life. We have not been called unto law, but unto liberty, and the two are antithetical to each other. Our ruling principle, our governing guide, is a "law of liberty," that is, a principle of freedom. Our law is liberty! "For brethren you have been called unto liberty, but do not take advantage of liberty to gratify your flesh, rather by love serve one another" (Gal. 5:13).
The commandments of our Lord are guidelines for life. Because we love him we remain within the guidelines which he marked out for us by his life on earth. "If you love me, you will keep my commandments." This is the natural, spontaneous reaction of love, for love always seeks to please its object. It does not require a list of "dos" and "don'ts" drawn up in legal form. Through the indwelling Spirit God works in us to do his will. We are not on our own to do or to die, to sink or swim! It is important to know how we should work in God, but it is no less important to know that God works in us.
This is the nature of the eternal covenant, ratified by the blood of Jesus, and validated by his resurrection from the dead. Under the terms of this agreement
[Page 136] |
We follow the Shepherd because we hear his voice, not because he cracks the whip. A shepherd does not lay down the law. He throws down the feed! But what the Shepherd calls feed some of my brethren call law, and because they think of it thus, some of it is hard to swallow and they choke on it. The shepherd did not come to kill or destroy. That is the work of the thief who invades the fold. Jesus said, "I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." Law brings dread, despair and doom; life brings light, love and longsuffering.
It is important, I think, that we note the interchangeable use of the singular and plural as regards the word "commandment" when employed with reference to Christ. Failure to do so can create a sad misunderstanding. A good illustration is found in John 15. Jesus distinguishes between the Father's commandment in which he walked, and his commandment given to the disciples. "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love" (verse 10). Then he says at once, "This is my commandment, that ye love one another, as I have loved you" (verse 12). Again, "These things I command you, that ye love one another" (verse 17).
If this seems strange, it is no more peculiar than Paul's insistence that the commandments he quotes, plus any other commandment, are briefly stated in one sentence, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." This is identical with the point made by Jesus. Love is our principle of action, the guideline for life.
Another illustration is found in 1 John 3. The apostle urges us not to love in mere verbal expression or oral declaration, but in performance and reality. He asserts that it is only by demonstration of our love in deeds that we know we are for real and our hearts are free of hypocrisy and doubt. He reasons that if our own heart condemns us because of our emptiness. God is greater than our hearts. He is a greater judge than our own conscience, and he knows everything there is to know about us. On the other hand, if our heart is not conscious of a lack of living love this makes us confident in the presence of God who is love. The loving heart does not shrink from the God of love.
The apostle then says that whatever we ask from such a confident and assured heart we will receive, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight. In this context his commandments are that we love in deed and in truth, that is, in demonstration and in reality. The very next verse is explanatory. "And this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment."
But the next verse says. "And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us by the Spirit which he hath given us." Put it all together and it informs us that "we keep his commandments...and this is his commandment...as he gave us commandment...and he that keepeth his commandments." It is neither confusing nor contradictory.
The commandments of God simply create and sustain a relationship, a unified relationship of faith and love. We believe "into the name of His Son" and love one another. This is it. Everything else is an expression of love and faith, proceeding from the heart, the inward spiritual nature. All of the commandments are summed up in the commandment. The commandment embraces and
[Page 137] |
That depends upon the people and upon that to which you have "converted" them. If they have been taught to trust in their membership in an institution and in their own righteousness for salvation, you should build a high wall around them and patrol it regularly. You should also gather them together weekly and rehearse all the words of the law in their ears. It will help if you will also develop an intricate spy system since the "somewhats" in the congregation cannot be everywhere at once and will need to know whom they must threaten with expulsion from the camp.
Never forget that all external law requires both an interpreter and an enforcement squad. If tnese two functions <:an be combined in one agency, so that those who determine what must be believed to remain in the party corral can also throw or drive out the non-conformists, it will simplify matters. Such a system will lessen the danger of people thinking and this is always the real threat to the status quo in any company. It is always safest in a closed-end corporation to teach the people how to swallow everything but not to speak about anything.
However, I am not a part of such a religious order. I suppose I was at one time, but that was before the Deliverer entered in and set me free. I was "high" on rules and regulations, but I was a lot better at laying them down for others than I was in living up to them myself. I do not recall ever laying down a law God had not given. Anything we thought was the will of God. That was before I learned that no one is transformed by the mere fact of having membership in an organization, regardless of its origin. Calling such an organization a church does not change things. It only compounds the crime and may make for more widespread hypocrisy.
If the church, as you conceive of it, is a round-up of individuals still retaining their criminal tendencies, and who must be confined to keep them from temptation, I suspect it would be dangerous to tell them they are not under law. As I view the community of saints it would not only be incongruous to tell them they are under law, but it would be an insult. Moreover, it would imply that law is superior to grace as an instrument of righteousness. I do not believe that. It would be a tacit admission that even after faith came we are still under a custodian, a child-conductor, and are no better off than slaves, even though we are the promised heirs of all things.
I think of the believers who are under the Lordship of Jesus as righteous, while law is aimed at the lawless and unrighteous. I do not think of myself as clothed in my own righteousness, but in His. I have nothing of my own in which to glory or even trust. "Nothing in my hand I bring; simply to the cross I cling!" When I sing that I mean it. The things in which I once trusted, including legal rectitude, I count as so much garbage, for the sake of gaining Christ and finding myself incorporate in him, with no righteousness of my own, no legal rectitude, but the righteousness which comes from faith in Christ, given by God in response to faith? Does that sound like Paul? It is!
When I responded to the righteousness which is in Christ by my faith, God responded to my faith in Christ with that righteousness. The righteousness I now have did not come from keeping laws or obeying statutes. It is a gift from my Father, an heirloom of heaven. I am not righteous because I keep the commandments, but I keep the commandments because I am righteous! In the case of law, the law comes first and righteousness follows through obedience; in the case of grace, the righteousness for those
[Page 138] |
It doesn't bother me when brethren who dwell in fear attack what I am saying, because they really do not know what I am talking about. It is difficult for one who is in prison and under the watchful eye of an armed guard to write a meaningful critique of the life of one who is free. I know, because I was a prisoner in the custody of law, shut up to that faith which was revealed to me through personal meditation long after it was revealed to the world of mankind through divine revelation given to the holy apostles and prophets.
I am not boastful about this, for I did not escape at all. I was rescued. And I have no animosity or hostility toward those who are still behind the walls which they equate with maximum security. I am not inclined to lob missiles or Molotov cocktails over the barriers even when they fire at me and take journalistic potshots while patrolling the precincts to see that no "heretic" passes a freedom paper to the inmates through the barbed-wire. It would be childish for one who escaped from a cage to stand outside and make faces and stick out his tongue at those who are still inside. I do not have time for such "monkey business." I am too busy celebrating my freedom, and I am also too wise to start another party built around myself or my concepts. We've got enough walled-in sects on this earth now. If you are waiting for another faction to frame up, forget it and face up to reality!
I just do not believe that any person on this earth will ever attain unto righteousness by law. He will always fall short of his potential and wash out on his dream. He will never come into fulness of being by walking that kind of a tight-rope while doing his balancing act. There is no strength or power in law to perfect a human personality. On the contrary, the very strength of sin is the law itself. "The sting of death is sin, and sin gains its power from the law; but, God be praised, he gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 15:56, 57). Victory over sin, victory over death, and victory over law. "This is the victory which overcomes the world, even our faith." That is where the victory is and that is where I intend to stay! Praise the Lord!
Then where do we get our strength if not from our obedience unto law? And how do we attain unto fulness if not through perfect law-keeping? The answer is plain. We get our strength and power from the indwelling Spirit. We get our fulness from experiencing the four-dimensional love which the Spirit pours out or sheds abroad in our hearts. Have you not read?
"He may grant you strength and power through his Spirit in your inner being, that through faith Christ may dwell in your hearts in love. With deep roots and firm foundations, may you be strong to grasp, with all God's people, what is the breadth and length and height and depth of the love of Christ and to know it though it is beyond knowledge. So may you attain to fulness of being, the fulness of God himself" (Ephesians 3:18,19).
Did you notice that little word "so"? It provides the "how-to" key. So may you attain to fulness of being! How? By grasping and experiencing the love of Christ. Look up to its height, look down at its depth, look out at its breadth, look into its length, and realize that as high as that love is, as deep as it reaches, as broad as it extends, as long as it lasts, it is yours. You can know it, that is share in it, although it passes the kind of knowledge that you get through study, deduction or meditation. It is mind-exploding, volcanic, terrific, and it is yours. Through it you can attain unto the very fulness of God himself! Do you believe that? I do, and I am thrilled with the dynamic of love which can overcome everything and outlast anything.
[Page 139] |
I certainly think so. It is simply a matter of spiritual maturity and while we have a long way to go, we are on the road and obviously a lot farther along it than we once were. I think the future holds great promise. Our greatest enemy and drawback is fear and this is enhanced because of the fright tactics employed by sincere men who are intensely partisan and reactionary. They are like the circumcision party in the primitive ekklesia.
What I have been saying is branded as "liberal" and this scares off good men and women who would like to demonstrate love for all of God's children, but who shrink from doing so because they know they will be attacked from the safety of the pulpit which is off-limits even to those who contribute the cash to pay the salary of the one who assails them from the "sacred desk."
However, dogmatism and the authoritarian spirit will gradually lose their power to manipulate thinking people and as they search the scriptures for themselves they will see that much of what has passed for God's will has been human tradition and is a rope of sand which cannot bind them. The day is coming when men will no longer regard preachers and elders as being the infallible interpreters of the word of God and our little papal kingdoms will disintegrate.
There will be a period of reaction against the will of God as expressed in his wonderful love for the world. Grace will be attacked under cover and will be equated with law. Lectureships will be held in which it will be made to appear that brethren who stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made them free are heretical. Preachers who are jealous of their standing with the party will be loud in their boasting and violent in their attacks. It will be made to appear that the most important things in the world are the issues over which our fathers fought and divided. But the love dynamic is so great and so powerful that it will eventually triumph.
Already scores, and even hundreds, of young brethren are coming to see that the dogmatism of yesterday has no place in the world of the present. They are under attack as leaving the faith when really what they are doing is finding it. Pressures will be brought to bear against those who verbalize their relationship with Christ as transcendent over everything else, including the partisan stance, but many of them will not succumb to pressure tactics. They will seek secular employment for support before they will give up their liberty.
Men always fight harder for their traditions than for revealed truth although they often equate the two as identical in their own thinking. But we are in a day of intellectual breakthrough and many of the rationalizations of the partisan status quo are being challenged. This is good and will make of us a more honest and straightforward people although the pioneers who lead the reformation will be hated and maligned as all pioneers are. But cheer up, for the privilege of being strangers, pilgrims and pioneers is worth the cost!