I’ve been reading and journaling on the book of Romans for a little bit now. Maybe I should have done better to choose a different book. In spite of the fact that I’ve read the book many a time and spent … 20 hours in Bible school studying it, when I take the time to read and understand it, I feel that I only get to see a tiny bit more of the treasure that can be found in this epistle. I was reading W. Graham Scroggie’s  ”The Unfolding Drama of Redemption” (that I got for 4$ at Value Village!) as I was walking my way through the book of Romans and last night, commenting on Romans 14, where Paul speaks of the great freedom one can enjoy in Christ and the reality that those who are strong in faith cannot destroy the faith of their fellow brothers and sisters who have different beliefs when it comes to food and special days to observe, Scroggie writes:

There is something greater than liberty, and that is love.

That’s all that needed to be said. I’ve known people who (and I myself do at times) find it difficult to reconcile our freedom in Christ and the fact that we’re called to not be stumbling blocks for our brothers and sisters who don’t have the same thinking. Our freedom is constrained to what other believers think, as if we’d be free to live outside the box but had to live inside it in certain circumstances for the sake of our brothers and sisters’ faith.

Well, Scroggie’s words are quite appropriate here and what’s neat about it is that it reminds us that love indeed is greater than liberty. We would naturally think the other way around, but no, love is indeed greater than liberty and so we’re called to think of loving before thinking of personal freedom.

So I’ve been listening to Brandon Heath lately and more specifically to a song entitled, “Love never fails”. You can hear it here. The song is based on I Corinthians 13, here are the lyrics:

Love is not proud // Love does not boast // Love after all matters the most // Love does not run // Love does not hide // Love does not keep locked inside // Love is the river that flows through //Love never fails you //

Love will sustain // Love will provide // Love will not cease at the end of time // Love will protect // Love always hopes // Love still believes when you don’t // Love is the arms that are holding you // Love never fails you //

When my heart won’t make a sound // When I can’t turn back around // When the sky’s falling down // Nothing is greater than this // Greater than this //

Love is right here // Love is alive // Love is the way // The truth // The life // Love is the river that flows through // Love is the arms that are holding you // Love is the place you will fly to // Love never fails you //

My university’s buildings are all over downtown and I was walking to one that’s quite far away from the others. I was listening to this song and something struck me. I usually think of I Corinthians 13 as the love Christians should have toward one another and unbelievers and probably rightly so. But this morning I realized that this love that we are to have for one another is the love God has for us and more specifically, I was struck by “love never fails you” I know that I Corinthians 13 doesn’t say, “Love never fails you”, but rather, “Love never fails” but still, I just realized that God’s love does not fail and won’t fail me. All of the sudden I had this big smile on my face. What comfort, what peace it is for us to know that God’s love for us won’t fail, won’t ever fail! We are secure for ever in His love, this love that we can’t be seperated from.

“For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.” Romans 14:7-9

“Foolishness!” Isn’t it what most people in our Western society would exclaim after reading that small passage? Most probably. Our society advertises for something that’s standing on the opposite side of what that passage teaches. Society pushes us all to become successful, independent, distinct individuals who don’t need a thing outside of themselves. We are evaluated by what we accomplish, our worth is in our abilities.

The reality though is that we are foolish for believing that we can do it all by ourselves without any outside help. For sure we can all be cool people on earth, but when it comes to meeting God, our abilities amount to nothing. As Philip Yancey writes, “The height of Mount Everest and the troughs of the Pacific Ocean are very impressive to those of us who live on this planet. But from the view of Andromeda, or even Mars, those differences matter not at all. That is how I now see the petty behavioural differences between one Christian group and another. Compared to a holy God, the loftiest Everest of rules amounts to a molehill. You cannot earn God’s acceptance by climbing; you must receive it as a gift.”

Society says to live for ourselves, to be our own master, to belong to nobody. The Word of God says we, as Christians, must live and die to the Lord and that we belong to Him. It’s hard to have this perspective but it seems to me that the more we understand who God is the less we feel the need to feel good about ourselves and to be of any importance or distinction.

Let’s just live to the Lord.

I subscribed for The Gazette for the duration of a month (university sometimes makes you buy newspapers for research), but I still receive them, every morning by my door. I don’t complain but I’ll look into the issue if it persists for another month. All that to say that I sometimes enjoy the “Quote of the day” that’s usually on the cover page. Today’s quote of the day was by H.L. Mencken, “Injustice is relatively easy to bear; it is justice that hurts”.

I was reading … I can’t remember who, nor what what said, but the author was talking about sort of the same idea. We want justice so bad in the world and in our lives, but when we think of it, if this desire is to be fulfilled, that means that I will be straightened up too. Who am I to claim that I am above reproach and have never wronged anybody? Thus it seems that when most of us wish for justice we mean, justice for me when I’m wronged or justice for those people out there who were wronged and we put aside the other half of it, that I must pay for the wrongs I’ve done against people around me. Thus in that way, injustice is easier to bear than justice. If a judge would settle all the injustices we have committed, we’d be either crying or cursing. And that day will surely come. Praise God for God the Son, Jesus Christ who willfully went to His death and was punished in my stead for all the injustices I committed. There is no justice in me apart from the justice that Jesus has purchased for me by His sin offering he offered by His death on the cross.

No distrust made him (Abraham) waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. That is why his faith was “counted to him as righteousness”. But the words “it was counted to him” were not written for his sake alone, but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.

Romans 4:20-25

“It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery. And whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” (Matthew 5:31-32)

These words of Jesus are reported in the gospel of Mark and Luke, but you won’t find the “except on the ground of sexual immorality” part. Now, some people say that Matthew added this sentence to honor Joseph (Jesus step-dad, who wanted to divorce his fiancé Mary when he realized she was pregnant). Do you think this arguement has any value?

I personally have a hard time with it. If you say that Matthew “added” the sentence. Do you mean that Matthew actually added to what Jesus taught? If it is so, then I’m sorry but if you start saying that Matthew added stuff to what Jesus said, you’re saying that scriptures can’t actually be trusted as absolutely true. Saying that Matthew added to the words of Jesus is quite a heavy statement. And if you simply mean that Matthew included those words that Jesus had said on the Sermon on the Mount whereas the other gospels simply don’t mention it, then can we actually think and believe that Jesus said, “except on the ground of sexual immorality” because He wanted to honor Joseph’s idea of divorcing Mary at first ’cause if she was pregnant, it was because she’d been unfaithful? So we think we’re smart enough to know what Jesus thought when he said that sentence and we believe that Jesus would make sure to say it to honor Joseph while he was teaching his disciples?

I don’t think that Jesus ever said anything (especially not in the Sermon on the Mount) to honor specific people. Jesus spoke the truth from God no matter if it pleased the people or not. Jesus didn’t teach in order to honor people and please their ears, He proclaimed the truth.

Ahhhh the things you hear in “Bible studies” sometimes. I might be wrong, but to me, right now it seems that this makes little sense, I wish people would think more before telling everybody what they heard or read.

Hello, I obviously don’t have much to share these days… I actually do, but I am a bit lazy.

Did you guys know that there’s a new Bible institute opening up this very Spring, right in Montréal? I’ve not attended any of their courses yet (since it is only starting in April), but I would assume it is a good place mostly because I know the president. That’s not an argument. Anyways, it’s called Corpus Bible Instritute and I think their courses and schedules can be interesting for people like you and I who go to school full-time or work and live on the island.

Question: Who do you think is El Presidente?

On a different note, I have another question. If you read Matthew 5:13-16, in the context of the whole chapter and whole Bible actually, could you say that amongst several things, when Jesus says ot his disciples that they are the salt of the earth, Jesus means that salt melts things like snow, so he is actually saying that He wants us (his disciples) to melt down the barriers between the different denominations like Catholics and Baptists? Would you ever come up with such an interpretation? Some people do.

You know, I’ve read and heard about the new trend in “Christian” circles, to “discuss” about the Bible and bring in whatever we feel like bringing in, not caring very much about the message God has for us and caring more about what it personally says to us, no matter what it is. I didn’t think I would have to deal with it. I can’t believe the things that are said in some so-called “Bible studies”. People say stuff that’s really not coming from a right interpretation and the best thing we find to say about it is, “Well, thats your truth, that’s the Word of God for you” basically saying that whatever way you interpret the Word doesn’t really matter, ’cause it’s God speaking to you, but not to me, God has another revelation for me, it’s all fine. This attitude upsets me since it does not uphold the true teachings of Christ and doesn’t help people find truth. When I question someone’s interpretation, they usually brace themselves and don’t realltry to consider what I tell them and the passage in its context. I just feel little,  I wish there would be a John MacArthur participating in our Bible studies. Since I’m a girl and younger than the people who come to the Bible study, I don’t feel what I say is taken into consideration (when it challenges their views).

Oh well, I’m praying for wisdom and boldness.

“For as the loincloth clings to the waist of a man, so I made the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah cling to me, declares the Lord, that they might be for me a people, a name, a praise, and a glory…” Jeremiah 13:11

Certain people often mock Christianity by saying that it is a crutch for the weak, for those who need some mental or emotional support. They say that since we are scared and weak, we have constructed someone that we call God in which we find comfort and security. For a long time I thought that these critics of Christianity were totally wrong, but there is a good extent of truth in what they say – to their own disadvantage.

God Himself says in Jeremiah that He made His people Israel and Judah to cling to Him so that this whole “clinging” brings Him fame and glory. To me this small verse really synthesizes what God’s plan has always been and is still today for His creation: We are in need of Him. We go to Him and cling to Him to be whole. He is glorified.

It is true that we are weak. It is true that we are in need of a crutch and even more than a crutch. We are all sinners and in desperate need for divine redemption. We all need to acknowledge our state, repent and believe that God in Jesus willingly bore the punishment that our sins deserved by dying on a cross and rising from the dead. We need to be a people that clings to their Maker and Redeemer, everyday of out lives. Trusting in His blood and walking in obedience to His Word.

Yes we are weak. It would be one of the greatest mistakes to think we aren’t and that we need no divine help. If we think that way, then we’re lost, forever in hell.

I’m reading though Genesis and I find it refreshing to see that I notice all sorts of little details that I never noticed before. Here’s one:

Genesis 4 reccords the story of Cain killing Abel. How God deals with Cain by saying, “And now you are cursed fom the gound, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from you hand. When you work the gound, it shall no longer yield to you its strength. You shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth.” (Genesis 4:11-12). We see that Cain, in spite of his guilt, complains to God about his punishment: it’s too heavy for him to bear it and anybody who finds him will kill him (that’s what Cain pretty much says). When I think of it, just there, God gave Cain a ’smooth’ punishement when I remember that a some time later, God commands through Moses that murderers be punished by death (Exodus 21:15). but anyways, what I find amazing is God’s response to Cain’s complaint, “Not so! If anyone kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” (Genesis 4:15). So, God is gracious to Cain first of all by letting him live (hard living since the ground it doubly cursed for him – Genesis 3:17 + 4:12) and secondly by being gracious to him by granting him safety from being killed.

Quite often I think … and tell friends, “God is crazy” (in a positive way, like, “God’s unbelievable!”). And that’s another instance when God does soemthing unbelievable. Cain did not deserve anything good from God; he had killed his brother. But God grants Cain his desires and calm down his fears. God is gracious even to sinners who complain about God’s punishment on them! It’s so clear that we do not earn God’s blessings, it is Him who decides to grant blessings and salvation to whoever He chooses.

Some of you heard about this picture… well, here it is!

“When iniquities prevail against me, you atone for our transgressions.” Psalm 65:3

“Yet he, being compassionate, atoned for their iniquities.” Psalm 78:38

“Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of your name; deliver us, and atone for our sin” Psalm 79:9

“You forgave the iniquity of your people; you covered all their sin.” Psalm 85:2

I’ve been reading the Psalms. I suppose that when I think of God’s salvation that is not by works of man, but by the gift of God to man, I am prone to turn to the Gospels or the Epistles for verses that speak of God’s grace to us, I rarely turn to the Psalms – maybe you do. It is interesting that as I read the Psalms, I keep noticing glimpses of God’s work for us, as the few verses I quoted above tell: It is God who atones for our sins. I guess that I think that the N.T. is clearer when it comes to explaining God’s slavation, but the thing is that God always dealt with us in the same way, right from the begining: We can do nothing to atone for our sins, only God can cleanse us and that is through the blood of Jesus Christ, God incarnated.

“The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.” Acts 5:30-32

“When iniquities prevail against me, you atone for our transgressions.” Ps. 65:3

I guess that I was always told as I grew up and later on when I read the Bible, that the provider of my salvation was not myself or any other human being, but God. But I can’t remember being taught or having read (although I did but I never caught on) that God was the one who gave repentance. I’ve always thought of repentance as something I performed, without an outside help. But it seems that Peter says that yes God forgives sins because of Jesus, but He grants repentance. The opposite of repentance is probably hardening one’s heart. We can read that God hardens people’s hearts, like Pharaoh’s. Thus, God hardens hearts and softens them, allowing them to repent.

I just find this quite interesting. It is not that I believe that we don’t need to seek repentance or repent simply because we haven’t felt God’s flow of granting us repentance (I don’t know how to say what I mean…). It would be wrong to believe that each time Jesus called us to repent he didn’t actually mean it. We should seek repentance and repent from our sins. But it seems that God, ultimately, is the one who grants repentance.

This is to my Anglophone friends learning French struggling with the issue of “savoir” vs “connaître”, it’s taken from Bill Bryson’s book, “The Mother Tongue”:

“On the other hand, other languages have facilities we lack. Both French and German can distinguish between knowledge that results from recognition (respectively “connaître” and “kennen”) and knowledge that results from understanding (“savoir” and “wissen).”

I think he’s right, but I don’t know if it works all the time.