What Does the Bible Say? Sexual Immorality

Yes, I am prepared to go there! Even though I am no longer sure where to pee in Target, I feel the need to explore some basic ideas of human sexuality. I agree with those who point out that "sex" is a matter of biology while "gender" is a social construct (defining "masculinity" and "femininity"). But now we've moved from sexual preference, sexual orientation and sexual self-identification to gender identity, gender expression and a gender spectrum. In the midst of all the confusion, I have one simple question: What does the Bible say? On the positive side, I've written about God's plan for human intimacy on another blog. So specifically, I want to explore what the Bible says about sexual immorality.

First of all, I need to define "moral." I see this word in the biggest sense. I mean something bigger than "ethical" or "legal." Something is "moral" if it is being, behaving and functioning according to God's original purpose in creation. Something is "moral" if it reflects "the glory of God." Something is "immoral" if it falls short of the glory of God. Of course, that means that none of us ever functions in a completely moral way. All of us have immoral elements in our being and behaving. It's also true that some expressions of "immorality" are viewed in society as more "normal" and therefore somewhat acceptable - even for Jesus followers. I'm trying to wrap my head around God's view of the whole thing, and therefore must rely on the revelation of God in Scripture to draw some conclusions about the issue of sexual immorality.

First of all, I found 75 passages of Scripture that deal with sexual immorality; 70 in a heterosexual context and 5 in a homosexual context. The root issue was the ancient view that women were owned by men, and could be used sexually without any sense of wrong doing. And that included men using women sexually who were members of their own family. Incest is a frequent example of sexual immorality (cf. Leviticus 18:6), including having sex with one's mother (Leviticus 18:7), step-mother (Leviticus 18:8; 20:11), sister or step-sister (Leviticus 18:9, 11; 20:17, 19), grand-daughter (Leviticus 18:10), aunt (Leviticus 18:12-14, 20), daughter-in-law (Leviticus 18:15, 18; 20:12), sister-in-law (Leviticus 18:16), or any female relative of your wife (Leviticus 18:17). In other words, when a male member of a family views female family members as belonging to him, justifying treating any of them as sexual objects, it is immoral. In fact, I don't think it's too much too say that the tendency of men to treat women as sexual objects is the core issue of sexual immorality.

All instances of sex outside of a committed, covenant marriage relationship are immoral (Leviticus 18:20; Numbers 5:20; 25:1).

The Old Testament also forbids humans from having sexual contact with animals (Exodus 22:19; Leviticus 18:23; 20:15-16; Deuteronomy 27:21). Which raises an interesting point. Why would anyone ever be tempted to have sexual contact with an animal? (or some kind of physical sex toy?) If the object is finding some level of pleasure sexually, it doesn't really matter how you get it? Personal pleasure is the object, not meaningful, fulfilling human interaction. And the fact that these behaviors are also addictive only complicates matters.

It's in this larger context that the Bible addresses the issue of same-sex relations. Here is a complete account of the Bible's statements about homosexuality. “Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable” (Leviticus 18:22). “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable” (Leviticus 20:13). The view is very simple: men having sex with men and women having sex with women is not how God designed it in the beginning. In the New Testament, Paul's sin list in Romans chapter one includes homosexuality. As is true in all of the sin lists, the core issue is idolatry. It's the worship of "other gods," and ultimately of one's self, that leads to sinful and self-centered, self-indulgent behaviors. Paul's list includes greed, envy, strife, deceit, malice, gossipers, slanderers, the insolent, boastful, arrogant, those disobedient to parents, those with no fidelity, love or mercy. In the midst of this list Paul states, "Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men” (Romans 1:26-27). There are two other passages of Scripture that mention the issue of homosexuality. In the midst of Paul's general teaching on sin in First Timothy 1:9-11 he includes "those practicing homosexuality," along with "rebels, the ungodly, liars and perjurers." And finally, Jude 1:7 refers to those who "gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion" in Sodom and Gomorrah.

It seems like there is a general issue of human sin, of our tendency to be self-centered, self-serving, and self-indulgent. If taken far enough, it leads us to exploit and victimize other human beings, treating them as objects. And our fallen human bodies and brains tend to reinforce those behaviors. Everyone struggles with these issues. And the solution is the same for everyone: Agreeing with God that we all have issues, we are all broken and fall short of God's glory, God's best plan for our lives. (This is called "confession.") Having been honest about it, the next step is to turn our hearts toward God, acknowledging that the grace of God alone has the power to forgive, heal and restore. (This is called "repentance.") While we are struggling with our personal broken tendencies and patterns, we must also recognize that everyone makes personal moral choices, and that we are responsible for those choices. It is not necessary to deny our sinful tendencies in order to make godly moral choices.

At the same time, it is important to acknowledge that "sin is sin." We may find some forms of sexual immorality more "normal" and therefore "tolerable," while we find others intolerable. That simply reflects our personal preferences and not God's view of sin. We are all broken. We have all fallen short of the glory of God. And we all need God's grace, God's love, God's salvation, equally. So while we are receiving grace from the Lord, we are also committed to being redemptive instruments of God's grace in the lives of others.

What Does the Bible Say? The Unique Sanctity of Human Life

Since I used an old word let me start by saying what I mean by "sanctity." It simply refers to something that is sacred, something that has a divine element to it, that has divine and therefore eternal significance. When something is defined as sacred, it has to be viewed as coming from God and belonging to God. The way we treat something that is sacred demonstrates our view of God and even our personal relationship with God.

Because everything that has been created finds it origin in God, in that sense, all of creation is sacred. At every step in creation, God declared it to be "good" (Genesis 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25). In creation, something God declared to be "good" meant that it was fulfilling it's created purpose, that it was reflecting the glory of God. In that sense, all of life is sacred.

But when God made human beings, God had a very special, unique purpose in mind. “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground” (Genesis 1:26). Somehow human beings were to reflect God's glory - God's "image and likeness" - in unique ways. In fact, human beings were to share in God's authority in creation. "And it was very good" (Genesis 1:31). 

The creation account lays the foundation for our understanding of God's purpose and design for all God had made. But even after those first humans decided to go their own way, independently from their Father-Creator, the Bible continues to describe the unique sanctity of human life. 

When Pharaoh commanded the Jewish midwives to kill male babies born to Jewish women, they refused to obey the command. As a result, God blessed them (Exodus 1:15-20).

In the law, God stated that if two men were fighting and one hit a pregnant woman, resulting in serious injury to the mother or the baby, "you are to take life for life" (Exodus 2122-23).

Job testified that God has fashioned him in his mothers womb (Job 31:15).

David understood that God has designed him with purpose and had uniquely formed him in his mother's womb (Psalm 139:13-16). "Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be" (v. 16). In that sense, David had existed as a special human being in the mind of God before he was conceived. 

When God called Jeremiah to a prophetic ministry, he assured him by declaring, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart" (1:5).

The prophets acknowledged that the greatest act of idolatry possible was the pagan practice of sacrificing infants to their gods. "You sacrifice your children in the ravines and under the overhanging crags" (Isaiah 57:5)."Because you gave them your children's blood...I will bring on you the blood vengeance of my wrath" (Ezekiel 16:36, 38). "On the very day they sacrificed their children...you will...bear the consequences of your sins of idolatry. Then you know that I am the Sovereign Lord" (Ezekiel 23:39, 49). 

When the angel visited Mary he announced that she would conceive a son by the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:31). At what point did the baby become the Son of God? Was the miraculous conception the pre-Jesus? the potential-Jesus? 

Indeed, when the unborn John heard Mary's voice, he leaped in his mother's womb. "As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy" Luke 1:44).

So all human life, every human being, is uniquely sacred. There are no throw-away human beings. There are no accidental human beings. While the circumstances of their birth may reflect the fallenness of humans more than the glory of God, they have unique value and purpose. 

And that means that every human being is to be treated as sacred. Every person is to be treated with equal respect and dignity, so much so that we are required to compensate for the weaknesses of the more vulnerable members of the community. "Do not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block in front of the blind, but fear your God. I am the Lord" (Leviticus 19:14). Why would God require specific treatment of the deaf or the blind unless every person was to be treated with equal worth and dignity. 

The Bible is very clear in stating that the Gospel is to put an end to human prejudice and discrimination. The three ways we most naturally and frequently discriminate against people - racism, classicism, and sexism - are specifically done away with in Christ. "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28). The unique sanctity of human life requires us to see everyone as an equal.

In fact, the unique sanctity of human life is the heart and the foundation of Judeo-Christian morality and ethics. In recent years there has been a new appreciation of the value of pre-born human beings. However, that has not always translated into an appreciation of the equal value of post-born human beings. If our pro-life ethic stops at birth, we are falling far short of an understanding of what the unique sanctity of human life really means, and what the implications are for all of life. A biblical perspective on peace and justice issues must be included in our moral convictions. 

So while many of these issues can be controversial in our society, I am interested in asking only one question: What does the Bible say? And then as Francis Schaeffer once asked, "How should we then live?"

What Does the Bible Say? Love of Strangers

There is a rich tradition of hospitality in Christian faith. True hospitality not only reflects the nature, culture, and core values of our faith, it is also a clear response of faithful, loving obedience to the words of Scripture. "Hospitality" (Greek philoxenia) literally means "love of strangers" or "love of foreigners," and refers to welcoming strangers as beloved guests. It implies a generosity of spirit, a joyful the-best-of-what's-mine-is-yours attitude. Greek culture and other eastern cultures view hospitality as the defining characteristic of their culture.

I remember the time I visited Japan in 1995. I was with a group of students from Portland Bible College, serving in a variety of contexts. One evening we were invited over to the house of a local family as guests. After we were all seated on the floor at places of honor, a series of carefully prepared dishes were brought out and placed before. Our hosts didn't even sit down as they spent the evening serving us. After the meal, one of our Japanese students explained to me that the meal we had just been served would cost over $100 dollars each in a restaurant. This had not been a wealthy family so I asked how they had been able to serve us such an extravagant meal. The answer: In Japanese culture people work hard and put a large portion of their earnings into savings. They don't do so for a rainy day but for an opportunity to show hospitality. This family had spent a significant portion of their savings honoring us that evening. 

That's what the Bible means by "hospitality." 

"Share with the Lord’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality" (Romans 12:13).

"Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers" (Hebrews 13:2).

"Offer hospitality to one another without grumbling" (1 Peter 4:9).

The early Christians were known for the quality of their love, including the quality of their love of strangers, of the "other," of those who were "unknown." That culture was based on a very clear Old Testament tradition. The Hebrew community often found themselves as foreigners in a strange land, at the mercy of their host country. Even in their own land they believed that all they had and the land itself belonged to God, that they were all really temporary pilgrims in a country not their own. For that reason, they were always to show hospitality to any stranger they encountered. 

In fact, Hebrew culture defined three kinds of foreigners: (1) "aliens" or foreigners in general, (2) "aliens in transit," or foreigners who were just passing through, temporarily visiting Israel, and (3) "resident aliens," or foreigners who sought to settle in the land. They were not citizens of Israel and did not have "citizenship rights," but were to be welcomed by the citizens. As a result of having no citizenship rights, they were vulnerable in the land and needed additional care. Because the descendants of Jacob had spent over 400 years residing in Egypt, God commanded them to protect and care for strangers in the same way they would widows and orphans. 

A sampling of Scriptures describing God's instructions concerning the protection and care of strangers might be instructive for 21st-century Jesus followers:

"Do not mistreat or oppress a foreigner, for you were foreigners in Egypt" (Exodus 22:21).

"Do not oppress a foreigner; you yourselves know how it feels to be foreigners, because you were foreigners in Egypt" (Exodus 23:9).

"Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foreigner. I am the Lord your God" (Leviticus 19:10).

"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them" (Leviticus 19:33).

"The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God" (Leviticus 19:34).

"He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the foreigner residing among you, giving them food and clothing" (Deuteronomy 10:18).

"At the end of every three years, bring all the tithes of that year’s produce and store it in your towns, so that the Levites (who have no allotment or inheritance of their own) and the foreigners,) the fatherless and the widows who live in your towns may come and eat and be satisfied, and so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands" (Deuteronomy 14:28-29).

"Do not deprive the foreigner or the fatherless of justice" (Deuteronomy 24:17).

"The Lord watches over the foreigner and sustains the fatherless and the widow" (Psalm 146:9).

"If you really change your ways and your actions and deal with each other justly, if you do not oppress the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow and do not shed innocent blood in this place, and if you do not follow other gods to your own harm, then I will let you live in this place, in the land I gave your ancestors for ever and ever" (Jeremiah 7:5-7).

"The people of the land practice extortion and commit robbery; they oppress the poor and needy and mistreat the foreigner, denying them justice" (Ezekiel 22:29).

"Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the foreigner or the poor" (Zechariah 7:10).

While the quality of our hospitality - of the way we welcome and the quality of our care for them - can be debated along political and economic lines, I really only have one question: What does the Bible say? And how therefore should we live? 

What Does the Bible Say? Creation Care

All of my upbringing and training have made me an enthusiastic, dedicated student and teacher of the Bible. While I accept the need for a critical understanding of issues of Bible background, I am sincerely convinced that True Truth can be found in Scripture. I fully accept the inspiration and authority of all 66 books in the Bible. While I see the need to exegete the culture and consider the contributions of the Great Tradition of the church as well as the knowledge and tools provided by academic expositors and commentators, I'm convinced that God provided a written self-revelation so that it could be understood by anyone with "ears to hear." 

One of the first principles I was taught is that the sum total of what the Bible has to say about a topic is the truth of that topic. I love starting in Genesis and working my way through Scripture, looking for a pattern of truth that tells God's story. When today's Christ-followers tend to debate the various sides of any idea - usually from a political, philosophical, scientific, or cultural perspective - I still believe that the best question to ask is, "What does the Bible say?"

Recently the Roman Bishop expressed an opinion about creation care, and climate change specifically. Immediately there was a wave of reaction representing the two typical sides on this (or really any) issue. In that context I posted a simple question: Is creation care a theological issue? And I didn't really get an answer. And so I pose the question again. Or to put it differently, what does the Bible say about creation care? Does it say anything at all? And if so, because we are committed to the authority of Scripture, what should we do about it? Let's jump in and see.

God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number;fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” (Genesis 1:28)

When God originally created "the heavens and the earth," his final and supreme act of creation was humanity as male and female. They were to uniquely reflect "the image and likeness" of God in creation, and they were given responsibility for the rest of creation. They were placed "over" the rest of creation, with authority as rulers, authorized to care for creation, almost as co-creators. The assignment to "name" the animals (Gen. 2:19-20) was a clear demonstration of human dominion in creation. 

The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it." (Genesis 2:15).

God's specific assignment as it pertained to the rest of creation is here made clear. Human beings were to "work," or literally serve the Garden, the center of God's creation. They were also to "take care of it," or to keep watch over it, guard it and preserve it. Yes, it's true. Those first human beings, living in Paradise under the rule of the Creator, were to serve the rest of creation in such as a way as to see it flourish and prosper and become all it was capable of becoming. They were to be preservationists, to guard and protect every aspect of God's good creation.

Unfortunately, that was not the end of the story. Human rebellion against God brought sin, destruction, corruption and death into creation - a curse. "Cursed is the ground because of you" (Genesis 3:17.) The fertility of the soil was affected. Hostility and death entered into relationships within creation. After the flood, God even gave humans permission to eat some of the animals (Genesis 9:3). Everything had changed. But that did not alter the Creator's thoughts about creation and the role of human beings within it.

God gave specific instructions for the sustainable farming of the land. 

When you enter the land and plant any kind of fruit tree, regard its fruit as forbidden. For three years you are to consider it forbidden; it must not be eaten. In the fourth year all its fruit will be holy, an offering of praise to the Lord. But in the fifth year you may eat its fruit. In this way your harvest will be increased. I am the Lord your God. (Leviticus 19:23-25)

During times of war the fruit trees were to be protected.

When you lay siege to a city for a long time, fighting against it to capture it, do not destroy its trees by putting an ax to them, because you can eat their fruit. Do not cut them down. Are the trees people, that you should besiege them? (Deuteronomy 20:19). 

Instructions were given concerning preserving the life cycle of birds.

If you come across a bird’s nest beside the road, either in a tree or on the ground, and the mother is sitting on the young or on the eggs, do not take the mother with the young. You may take the young, but be sure to let the mother go, so that it may go well with you and you may have a long life. (Deuteronomy 22:6-7). 

Old Testament poets and prophets foresaw the eventual restoration of creation in terms that included all God had made.

Let the heavens rejoice, let the earth be glad;
let the sea resound, and all that is in it.
Let the fields be jubilant, and everything in them;
let all the trees of the forest sing for joy.
Let all creation rejoice before the Lord (Psalm 96:11-13).

The Lord was known for his personal care of all creation.

The trees of the Lord are well watered,
the cedars of Lebanon that he planted.
There the birds make their nests;
the stork has its home in the junipers.
The high mountains belong to the wild goats;
the crags are a refuge for the hyrax. (Psalm 104:16-18). 

All creation is to praise the Lord - to reveal his glory.

Praise the Lord from the earth,
you great sea creatures and all ocean depths,
lightning and hail, snow and clouds,
stormy winds that do his bidding,
you mountains and all hills,
fruit trees and all cedars,
wild animals and all cattle,
small creatures and flying birds (Psalm 148:7-10).

The wisdom of guarding a fig tree seemed obvious.

The one who guards a fig tree will eat its fruit (Proverbs 27:18).

A mark of God's favor and restoration is new life coming into creation.

You will go out in joy
and be led forth in peace;
the mountains and hills
will burst into song before you,
and all the trees of the field
will clap their hands.
Instead of the thornbush will grow the juniper,
and instead of briers the myrtle) will grow. (Isaiah 55:12-13).

According to the apostle Paul, the glory of God can still be detected in creation. Although imperfect, an important "natural revelation" is available for those who are open to it.

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. (Romans 1:20). 

Paul also taught that, although creation has been frustrated by the corruption that came into the world through human sin, creation is also waiting for God's full plan of redemption for humanity, culminating in the resurrection.

For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. (Romans 8:20-23). 

Further, Paul taught that Christ is both the instrument and the end of God's creation.

The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth. (Colossians 1:15-16). 

Indeed, in the end all things in creation are to find their fulfillment in Christ.

With all wisdom and understanding, he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ. (Ephesians 1:8-10). 

Even now, Jesus is the Ruler of of God's creation.

These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. (Revelation 3:14)

While images of the end of the age in the book of Revelation are symbolic and cryptic, there are some interesting descriptions of judgment relevant to creation.

Do not harm the land or the sea or the trees until we put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God. (Revelation 7:3).

We give thanks) to you, Lord God Almighty,
the One who is and who was,
because you have taken your great power
and have begun to reign.
The nations were angry,
and your wrath has come.
The time has come for judging the dead,
and for rewarding your servants the prophets
and your people who revere your name,
both great and small—
and for destroying those who destroy the earth. (Revelation 11:17-18).

There seems to be a specific kind of judgment awaiting those who have contributed to the destruction of the earth. 

At the end of it all we see the curse reversed, Paradise restored, creation healed.

Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life,bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be any curse. (Revelation 22:1-3).

I should say a word about the descriptions of judgment that picture creation returning to a state of chaos - of being "without form and void." (Cf. Jeremiah 4:23) This return to primeval chaos is a common symbol of judgment. Peter even refers to the elements of creation melting in the heat of God's judgment (2 Peter 3:12). However, God's judgment is not the last word. The healing and restoration of all things is the last word. The specific language of "a new heaven and a new earth" refers to a renewed heaven and a renewed earth - God's creation with sin and the effects of sin removed. Taking descriptions of judgment as an excuse for the misuse and a bad stewardship of creation is based on a false reading of Scripture.

And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making everything new!” (Revelation 21:3-5). 

The Light of the World

The controversy concerning the relationship between the followers of Jesus, the citizens of his Kingdom, and the world is as old as the New Testament. What does it mean to be both "in the world" but not "of the world"? And is that really possible for anyone other than an extraordinary saint? The way this issue is resolved has formed the basis for various Christian sub-cultures, from the Amish community to American Evangelicalism.

In 1951, H. Richard Niebuhr delivered a series of lectures at Yale that remains very influential to this day. He proposed that there are five types of interaction between Christian faith and the world: (1) Christ against culture, a sectarian, law-based reaction that calls for separation from the world; (2) Christ above culture, acknowledging that everything good in culture is a gift from God and is to be embraced; (3) Christ transforming culture, with the view that the power of the Gospel is able to transform the surrounding culture; (4) Christ and culture in paradox, calling for Christians to live in tension with the world under the sovereignty of God; and (5) Christ of culture, calling for harmony between Christians and the world. 

The American Evangelical church's engagement in the "culture wars" always raises this issue. While culture wars require us to be highly selective in the sins we're upset about (usually homosexuality and abortion) while ignoring others, the larger question, the theological backstory, is this pesky issue of the nature of the relationship and interaction between citizens of Christ's eternal Kingdom and human society organized independently of God - the "world." It is reflection on this issue that causes me to return to the simple statements of Jesus: "You are the salt of the earth," and "You are the light of the world."

"You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven" Matthew 5:14-16).

It seems too good to be true - too much to expect from us imperfect but committed followers of Jesus. The light of the world?! Really?! And what does that really mean? The simple statement of Jesus seems to focus on the fact that his disciples are to have a visible function in the world. We are not to be a hidden hill. We are not to be a lamp hidden under a bowl. The world is to see the light shining in and through our lives. 

But is that humanly possible? No! There is nothing in our human nature that could remotely function as light. It is essential that we see the divine nature of this light. After all, it was Jesus who said, "I am the light of the world" (John 8:12). In his prologue to the gospel John wrote, "In him was life, and that life was the light of mankind" (John 1:4). Jesus told his disciples, "While I am in the world, I am the light of the world" (John 9:5). 

The idea of a light on a lampstand brings to mind the golden lampstand in the temple. That lamp could not provide light until it had its wick trimmed regularly and was given a steady supply of oil. It was the prophet Zechariah who was given a vision of the lampstand with two olive trees providing a stream of oil. And the meaning of the vision? "Not by might, not by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord Almighty" (4:6). 

So the ability of a disciple to shine a light depends entirely on a covenant relationship with Jesus and the presence and activity of the Holy Spirit. The light is divine. So when Jesus says we are the light of the world, what's implied is that we are instruments of the light. We provide a lamp from which the light can shine. It is the light of Christ that is shining in and through our hearts (see 2 Corinthians 4:6). Before our attachment to Jesus we were "darkness," but now we are "light in the Lord" (Ephesians 5:8). Therefore, "Live as children of light." The light of Christ shining through our lives means that a certain quality of life will be visible, will be clearly seen by the world. That's why Paul follows up his statement in Ephesians 5:9 with specific examples of what living as children of light would look like.

The point of being a light source is that we are to "shine" in a very clear and visible way in the world, in a way that can be clearly seen in the world. So what does it mean to "let your light shine before others"? What is it that Jesus expects the world to see when they see the light shining through our lives? Does letting our light shine involve making correct doctrinal statements? Believing the right things and knowing how to say them in the right way? Does shining the light of Jesus mean taking the right position on current political issues? Cultural issues? Supporting the right political party or candidates? Is it going to the right church? Memorizing the best Scripture verses? Having the best theological education? Is shining the light summarized by knowing the correct sins and the right sinners to condemn? 

There is no reason to wonder what letting our light shine before others means? Jesus made it very clear. You are to shine your light before others so "that they see your good deeds." Frankly, that definition is hard to swallow for those of us who are committed to a gospel of grace. In fact, the whole idea of "good deeds" can be seen to work against grace. Nevertheless, it's hard to misunderstand the statement of Jesus. The world is to see the practical and observable difference having the light in us, walking and living in the light, makes in the life of a disciple. 

On the other hand, shining the light of "good deeds" must be done in a way that cannot be misunderstood. It's possible to shine a light in such a way that people in the world conclude that we are somehow just "good people," that we are caring, benevolent, conscientious. When in reality, we're no better in and of ourselves than anyone else. The light that people see in our lives is the light of Christ shining as a result of the presence and activity of the Holy Spirit. It is imperative that when people see light in our lives, they will "glorify your Father in heaven." It must be obvious that the light people see in our lives is supernatural, that is shines because of the presence of Jesus in our hearts and lives. 

So when the Barna Group did a study of the moral behaviors of young American adults, they found that "born-again believers are not much different from non-born-again adults." In every category of behavior, there was only a slight difference between Christians and non-Christians. In other words, the light is not shining. The light has nearly gone out. So while we are condemning the moral behavior of people in the world, as if it is up to the world to shine the light of Christ, what has happened to our light? And isn't that an area of great concern to us? Yes, the moral compass of our nation has swung off center. But I propose that the moral compass of the American church is just as off-kilter. So rather than condemning sinners (who are only capable of sinning), it might be more helpful if we would give ourselves to true, heart-felt repentance. Maybe focusing on a season of wick-trimming and oil-replenishing would have an overall redemptive effect on our culture. The goal is very simple: When the world sees the light of Christ shining from our lives, they will glorify God. Who knows - some might even be attracted to light. Some might consider stepping into the light and finding a new life as children of the light. If so, we will have fulfilled our call to be the light of the world. 

We Need a Revival of Salt!

The church, as the covenant community of God's Kingdom on earth, has a very unique and special mission. It has a powerful role to play in the world. The church has the responsibility (and the opportunity) to express the nature of God's Kingdom and extend the influence of God's Kingdom. Jesus described that Kingdom function with an interesting metaphor. "You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot" (Matthew 5:13).

Most disciples are familiar with this statement without taking time to reflect on it. As you may know, salt had a duel function is ancient (and some modern) cultures: it served as a preservative and as a flavor enhancer. 

Much of our food has chemical elements in them that, along with the presence of bacteria, causes them to become harmful fairly quickly. Ancient peoples discovered that when they rubbed salt onto meat it kept it from going bad. Scientists now know that salt creates an environment that removes the surroundings needed for bacteria to live and reproduce. Meats are still preserved with salt today. The salt does not change the nature of the meat. It still has a tendency to rot if left alone. Salt just blocks the effects of bacteria. 

Salt also serves as a flavor enhancer. A few grains of salt not only adds a salty flavor, it also seems to make some fruit sweeter and mask unpleasant bitter tastes. As a matter of fact, salt contributes to better health if taken in moderation. Salt plays an important role in moving water around in the human body. Human beings need a proper balance of water to survive. So salt provides flavor in a life-giving way. Once again, salt does not change the nature of the food; it just enhances its flavor and its potential benefits.

So it's amazing to read that Jesus described us as "the salt of the earth." It would seem that the earth has a natural tendency to become rotten. It's not flavorful or healthful on it's own. It needs an element added to it, rubbed into it. An element that is external to it but one that has the ability to bring very positive results.

There's no question that human societies and cultures tend to "go to seed" over time. There is nothing inherently healthy in human institutions organized independently of God. If they are to survive, if they are to offer any positive benefits over time, they need to be regularly salted.

Time and time again we have seen examples of a society beginning to lose it moral center and spin into a pattern of self-destruction. The only thing that prevented its final demise was a supernatural visitation from heaven upon the church. And when the church was sufficiently revived, it had the effect of salt on the surrounding culture.

There is an excellent example in American history that church historian refer to as "the Great Revival" or "the Second Great Awakening." A variety of historians and church leaders have noted the spiritual condition of the new United States of America after the revolution. Here's what one leader wrote: "The effects of the Great Awakening of 1735 had worn off. The seeds of infidelity, imported from revolutionary France and watered by such men as Thomas Paine, were yielding their poisonous fruit. Eastern colleges were rife with the skepticism of the age. Lawlessness ruled on the western frontier. People were floundering in the bog of confusion created by the French and Indian War and the Revolution. There were few churches, few praying people. The established churches, most of whom had sided with England in the struggle for independence, had lost their influence." The decade of the 1790s became known as "the Egyptian Darkness," a result in part of "the French Infidelity." 

Evidently the corrupt state of society was particularly pronounced on the college campus. When Timothy Dwight became President of Yale College in 1795 he remarked that at best, 10% of the student body professed faith in Christ. One of the students at Yale, Lyman Beecher, commented: “The college church was almost extinct. Most of the students were skeptical, and rowdies were plenty. Wine and liquors were kept in many rooms; intemperance, profanity, gambling and licentiousness were common. That was the day of the infidelity of the Tom Paine school. Boys that dressed flax in the barn read Tom Paine and believed him … [M]ost of the class before me were infidels and called each other Voltaire, Rousseau, D’Alembert, etc.”

What do do? What could the church do in the midst of this corruption and potential destruction? Some of the clergy had an idea. "The ministers were agreed on one thing--a revival was desperately needed. 'What shall we do about it?' they asked themselves. The only answer: pray. They issued a `circular letter' calling on church people to pray for revival. They were specific. Let there be `public prayer and praise, accompanied with such instruction from God's Word, as might be judged proper, on every first Tuesday, of the four quarters of the year, beginning with the first Tuesday of January, 1795, at two o'clock in the afternoon . . . and so continuing form quarter to quarter, and from year to year, until, the good providence of God prospering our endeavors, we shall obtain the blessing for which we pray.' Apparently hearts were hungry, for there was an enthusiastic response. All over the country little praying bands sprang up. In the West `Covenants' were entered into by Christian people to spend a whole day each month in prayer plus a half-hour every Saturday night and every Sunday morning. Seminary students met to study the history of revivals. Church members formed `Aaron and Hur Societies' to `hold up the hands' of their ministers through intercession. Groups of young men went to their knees to pray for other young men. Parents prayed for their children's conversion. The stage was set. What happened as a result of this concerted prayer effort has gone down as the most far-reaching revival in American history."

In 1802 the revival in the church spread to Yale. President Dwight testified: “Such triumphs of grace, none whose privilege it was to witness them, had ever before seen. So sudden and so great was the change in individuals, and in the general aspect of the college, that those who had been waiting for it were filled with wonder as well as joy. And those who knew not what it meant were awe-struck and amazed. Wherever students were found in their rooms, in the chapel, in the hall, in the college-yard, in their walks about the city, the reigning impression was, “Surely God is in this place.' The salvation of the soul was the great subject of thought, of conversation, of absorbing interest; the convictions of many were pungent and overwhelming; the “peace in believing” which succeeded, was not less strongly marked.” A student later reported: “The whole college was shaken. It seemed for a time as if the whole mass of the students would press into the kingdom. It was the Lord’s doing, and marvelous in all eyes. Oh, what a blessed change! It was a glorious reformation.”

And the Great Revival salted America. In fact, historians credit the formation of a variety of "societies," including the abolition society, on the Revival. 

In 2015 we are once again aggrieved at the downward spiral of morality and the overall quality of life in our nation. What to do? What is the very best way for the church to serve as salt, as a preservative and flavor enhancer, in our nation? I would suggest that Jesus would not place the blame on the rotting meat but on the fact that "the salt has lost its saltiness." What we need is a revival of salt. If the American church would position itself for another great revival, perhaps its saltiness would return, with a preserving and flavoring effect on the nation. And let there be no doubt: As Charles Finney (a leader in the Second Great Awakening) famously wrote, "A revival may be expected when Christians have a spirit of prayer for a revival."

"If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land" (2 Chronicles 7:14).

Has the Mission Changed (and nobody told me about it)?

It's not uncommon to begin asking the "big questions" at some point in our lives: Why am I here? What is my purpose? What is my mission? How will I know whether or not I'm fulfilling my purpose? Those who don't have a personal belief in God have to dig deep to find answers. "My purpose is to help preserve the species. My purpose is to fulfill our social contract," etc. On the other hand, those who see God as the creator and Lord of everything have a very different sense of purpose. It's possible to not only get answers to the big questions for our personal lives but also for humanity, for the world, for history, for the created order. 

Fortunately, if we are committed to following Jesus, the answer to the question, "What is my (our) mission?" has been answered for us. I still find it amazing that Jesus would entrust his mission to his followers. "As the Father has sent me, I am sending you" (John 20:21). In other words, Jesus said, "I am sending you on the same mission the Father sent me on." In the same way the Father sent Jesus, he is sending us. We know what our mission is: It is to announce the Good News (Mark 16:15). It is to recruit other followers of Jesus from every people group on earth, to show them how to follow Jesus by "teaching them to obey" every thing Jesus has commanded us (Matthew 28:18-20). Every generation in every time and place has the same mission - until Jesus brings this age to an end.

Lately I've been reflecting on the challenges faced by the first generation of the church. With a clear understanding of and commitment to the mission, with a holy passion burning in their hearts, they set out to proclaim and disciple. But the societies to which they were called were as opposite to the message as possible. There was little respect for human life. It was not uncommon for unwanted babies to be simply thrown into the town dump. A sense of the sanctity of marriage and family, of human sexuality, was long gone. Some Greek intellectuals taught that homosexual relationships were morally superior to heterosexual relationships (since women were viewed as sub-human). At best, men viewed women as property and divorced them for any and all reasons. Marital unfaithfulness was completely unknown. In Roman society, being bi-sexual was the norm. Paul had to address the problem of men attending social banquets (orgies) on Saturday evening before gathering to worship on Sunday (the background of 1 Corinthians 6 & 7). 

Knowing the environment in which the church had to carry on the Jesus mission, I've looked for invectives against Greek or Roman culture. It only seems sensible to believe that part of the church's mission would have been to expose and condemn the sinfulness of the societies they were in. Instead I find statements like these:

"Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established" (Romans 13:1).

"I urge then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made . . . for kings and all those in authority" (1 Timothy 2:1-2).

"Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him" (1 Peter 2:13-14). 

Even when the emperor declared the new faith to be illegal and began to systematically oppress and slaughter the followers of Jesus, those early disciples never lost sight of the mission they had been entrusted with. 

Don't get me wrong! Part of their mission to "make disciples" included living out the alternative to the way of life typical of their day. In fact, the very fact that they were called "followers of the Way" indicated their commitment to being counter-cultural. They had very high standards within their local communities. Paul's instructions in 1 Corinthians 5 are an excellent example. The Corinthian congregation thought it was acceptable to allow someone having an incestuous relationship with his step-mother to remain in full fellowship with them. Paul begged to differ! While that kind of thing was common in Roman society, it was not acceptable in the church. In that context Paul drew clear lines: "I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral, greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler" (v. 11). The "way" of the surrounding culture was not to be the "Way" of the followers of Jesus. 

However, there was no suggestion that those standards be imposed on those outside of the faith community. " . . . not meaning the people of this world . . . . In that case you would have to leave this world" (v. 10). The way of life of committed disciples was not to be used as a way of rejecting those who were not followers of Jesus. In fact, drawing those lines would result in the church not only leaving the world but leaving the mission as well. You can't recruit new disciples if you reject those who are potential disciples.

Recently I had an experience that caused me to question whether or not the mission had been redefined. I had students tell me they were so depressed they couldn't concentrate on their assignments. Church leaders declared that the wrath of God was coming on us. Passionate debates broke out about whether or not a disciple should eat with certain kinds of sinners. And the cause of all this consternation? The Supreme Court of the United States had ruled that it was no longer legal to discriminate in any way against homosexuals. To be clear, I consider homosexual behavior to be wide of the mark, to fall short of the glory of God, to be sinful. However, the SCOTUS does not constitute the leaders of the church. They were not attempting to exegete Scripture. They were not commenting on biblical moral standards. They were fulfilling a legal function in American society (whether or not we like their decision).

In fact, it made me wonder whether or not the American church tends to confuse the United States with the Body of Christ. Recognizing the traditional Christian elements in our American culture does not mean that our nation is the Kingdom of God. Other believers in history have made the mistake of confusing their community or state with God's Kingdom community, and it has never ended well. The United States of America is a human nation, a modern state. I can't tell you how blessed I am to have been born in America. But confusing my beloved country with the Kingdom of God is a theological error.

In fact, Scripture is very clear in showing nations rising and falling. It reminds  me of the dream Daniel interpreted for Nebuchadnezzar (chapter 2). In the symbol of a large statue (vv. 31ff) Daniel described a series of empires rising and falling - the Babylonian, then the Persian, the Greek, and finally the Roman. Over a period of many hundreds of years these great societies rose to a pinnacle only to follow a predictable pattern of decline and eventual fall. However, the good news was that in the days of the Roman Emperors, "the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed" (v. 44). At the end of history there will only be one kingdom left - the Kingdom of God.

While I am a citizen of the United States, committed to serving as a faithful, engaged citizen, my prior citizenship, my permanent citizenship, is in God's Kingdom. My first loyalty is to my King. My personal mission has been entrusted to me by my King. And no decision of the Executive, Legislative, or Judicial branch of the American government can alter my sense of identity or purpose. Responding by expressing my disappointment and anger toward certain ones in our nation runs the risk of compromising my ability to recruit new disciples among them. Insisting on my right to reject them simply disengages me from the very reason why I'm sucking air on this planet. 

We are here to "serve the purpose of God in our generation." We shouldn't be all that shocked when sinners demonstrate their commitment to sinning. Our mission is not to condemn them or reject them. Instead, we are called to continue to announce the Good News to them. God loves them so much he sent his Son to die for them. We all need a Savior! Fortunately, we have one - in Jesus!