Some Christians might not think this is funny, but I do…
Some Christians will not find this funny. But I did.
Good fruits are not the good works we perform
In Matthew 7:16, Jesus says that to recognize false prophets, “you will know them by their fruits.” In Matthew 7:20 He says something similar: “By their fruits you will know them.” Many teachers and Bible scholars say that Jesus is referring to a person’s good works as the indication of whether or not they are a false prophet, or more generically, whether or not they are even a Christian.
Good Fruit Does Not Equal Good Works
Two things can be said against the idea that good fruit refers to good works in Matthew 7:16-20.
First, in the immediately following passage (Matthew 7:21-23), Jesus talks about a group of people who have all the good works, but they do not know Jesus. They are so “good” in the good works department, they prophesy in His name, cast out demons, and perform many miracles.” Surely, if good are “fruit” then these people qualify. But they do not qualify. Jesus says they practice lawlessness.
So what does Jesus mean when He talks about knowing someone by their fruit? A few chapters later He tells us. In Matthew 12, Jesus once again brings up the topic of good fruit from good trees, and this time, He specifically states that the good fruit is the good words that proceeds out of person’s mouth, while bad fruit is the bad words that come out of their mouths. So by Jesus’ own words, the “fruit” He has in mind is not the good works that a person does or doesn’t perform, but rather, the words that come out of their mouths. Jesus emphasizes this again a little white later in Matthew 15:18 when He says that those things which come out of the mouth proceed from the heart (cf. Luke 6:45). This fits right in line with what James, the brother of Jesus, writes in James 3 about the tongue.
Christian “rules” for Proper Speaking
So what does it mean to have good fruit come out of our mouths? Strangely, we Christians have seemed to reduce this teaching of Jesus down to a few guidelines:
- Christians cannot use curse words or vulgar language.
- Christians should try to include verses or references to God and Jesus in their discussions whenever possible.
- Christians should always stick up for the truth, no matter the cost—even if what we say sounds hurtful and hateful. These three rules come from questionable understandings of Ephesians 4:29, Psalm 118, and Ephesians 4:15.
In many Christian circles, as long as we “Stand for truth no matter what!”, season our speech with Bible quotes, and don’t say “the S-word” or worse yet, “the F-word”, we are good to go.
Yet we turn around and gossip at church about the pastor’s wife. We get online and say the meanest things imaginable to people we do not know on Twitter and Facebook. We curse entire groups of people to hell because we don’t like their religion (e.g., Muslims), their lifestyle (e.g., Gays), or their politics (e.g., Liberals). We speak harshly to our wife, rudely to our children, and arrogantly to our “unsaved” neighbor. With our words, we undercut our boss at work, denounce our President as the anti-Christ, and tell police officers that they are racist pigs.
I sometimes think Christianity would be far better off if we just all shut our mouths.
How to truly have “Good Fruit”
In an age when insults are so normal we think “roasts” are cool, and cyber-bullying occurs so often we barely take notice when suicides are the result, followers of Jesus need to be a rock of love in the swiftly-moving current of curses, providing voices of hope, healing, restoration, and acceptance that have almost never been found in the church.
Good fruit proceeds out of a mouth which overflows from a heart filled with love for others.
So the next time you tap out that perfect insult on Twitter, or come up with the witty rebuttal by email, or simply want to lash out in unchecked anger at the false teacher (in your opinion) on Facebook, take a deep breath, move your finger away from the “Send” button, and remember those famous words from Thumper in the movie Bambi: “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say nothin’ at all.”
This post is part of the April 2015 Synchroblog. Here is a list of the other contributors. Go check them out!
- Mark Votava – The Fruit of Non Violent Communication
- Carol Kuniholm – Fruit That Will Last
- Clara Ogwuazor Mbamalu – The Importance of Success By Bearing Fruit
- Glenn Hager – Juicy Fruit
- Done With Religion – Can We Produce The Fruit of the Spirit?
- Pastor FedEx – How Do We Bear Fruit?
- K.W. Leslie – New Fruit!
- Leah Sophia – Stewardship Trilogy
- Paul Metler – Bearing Fruit
One of the best commentaries on Exodus I have read
If you are tired of reading commentaries on Exodus that seem to do nothing but talk about the Documentary Hypothesis (aka the JEDP theory), and if you have sometimes found yourself yelling at the pages “I don’t care if was the J, E, D, or P source, just tell me what the text means!!!”, then the new commentary on Exodus by Duane Garrett is for you.
I knew this commentary would be good when he wrote this about the JEDP theory:
Much of this discussion is of doubtful value, either in terms of gaining better tools for interpreting the text or in terms of finding criteria for dividing it into its supposed sources. It maintains only a shell of intellectual coherence (p. 17; cf. p 18).
This is a scholarly and gracious way of saying “The JEDP debate is BS.”
And the commentary only got better from there.
I loved his insistence on an early date for the composition of Exodus. He doesn’t side with the “scholarly consensus” that Exodus was written during the post-exilic era.
Following in the same vein, Garrett actually believes that Moses wrote Exodus! While I often benefit from commentaries that were written by source-critical scholars, I find it so refreshing to read a commentary written by a world-class scholar who actually believes Moses wrote Exodus during the time period in which the events took place.
Speaking of which, Garret actually believes the events of Exodus took place. Again, in today’s scholarly circles, this is a very rare position to take! But I love it.
Best of all, Garrett writes his commentary much as he says the book of Exodus was written: “the vocabulary consists primarily of common words” (p. 21). Garrett writes to be understood; not be prove how smart he is. Again, it is so refreshing to read commentaries of this sort.
As I read through the introductory material, I found his discussion of Pharaoh Akhenaten’s conversion to monotheism to be absolutely riveting, as well as his thorough and detailed summary of the date of the exodus and the location of the Red Sea crossing. But then, I’m a bit of a Bible geek.
As for the commentary on the book of Exodus itself, it was top-notch. Most of the questions I had about Exodus were given adequate space for discussion. He talked about how the ten Plagues may have been designed to prove the powelessness of the Egyptian pantheon (though he ended up saying that this was not the point, p. 301).
He also wrote a good discussion of “Theodicy in Exodus” which is an attempt to explain how God could get Himself involved in the questionable behavior of killing children in the 10th plague (p. 214; I was not fully satisfied with his explanation on this). And of course, in light of a recent study of mine, I was glad to see that he wrote several pages about the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart (p. 370).
One great element to this commentary is that each section concludes with some helpful “Key Theological Points.” This allows the commentary to not just be an explanation of the text, but also to show the student of Exodus how the text guides and informs our theology.
If you are preaching through Exodus or studying it on your own, this commentary on Exodus by Duane Garrett is definitely one you show consult.
A New Podcast by Brandon Chase! I am loving it!
I have a 25 minute commute to work. Sometimes I listen to Conservative Talk Radio, but when I am looking for something with a little less doom and gloom, I listen to Podcasts.
Two Podcasts I almost never miss an episode of are the (1) The God Journey by Wayne Jacobsen, and (2) Beyond the Box by Raborn Johnson and Steve Sensenig.
A blogging friend of mine, Brandon Chase, recently started his own podcast. I listened to the first two episodes last week. All I can is WOW. If you like listening to Podcasts about theological topics like the things we discuss here on this blog, I highly recommend Brandon’s “Real Life Radio” podcast. Keep it up, Brandon!
Click any of the links above to subscribe to their Podcasts through iTunes.
Brandon’s first two episodes were a discussion with Jamal Jivanjee. They discussed many of the things I have been writing about on this blog during the past couple years (prior to the current Calvinism series). They say some quite controversial things about Scripture, God, and the church. What a challenging discussion! In fact, I think that Jamal got himself in a bit of trouble by some of the things they discussed… listen to the two Podcasts and then go read his blog to find out why… You should also read Brandon’s blog.
If you subscribe to any of these podcasts, let me know what you think!
As a bonus, I often enjoy listening to The Free Believers Network Podcast as well. The discussion from 7/27/2014 called “Heaven is for NOW” was fantastic.
Understanding the Potter and the Clay in Romans 9
Western theology has committed a terrible disservice to this imagery of a potter and clay by making it seem as if God is a deterministic puppet master up in heaven pulling the strings of people and nations down here on earth.
This is exactly the opposite of what Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Paul meant by using this terminology.
The Potter and the Clay in Jeremiah 18
In Jeremiah 18, for example, while God is equated with the potter, God calls upon Israel to turn from her wicked ways and obey His voice so that they, as the pot which God is fashioning, will not be marred (cf. Jer 18:8-11).
God calls upon Israel to come into conformity to the work of His hands. If they do not, they will become marred, and He will have to reform the clay again into another vessel (Jer 18:4). He does not destroy or discard the clay; He simply forms it into another pot which will be used for a different purpose.
A similar understanding is seen in Isaiah 54 and Romans 9.
The Potter and the Clay is not teaching Determinism
There is no deterministic message in the image of the potter and the clay in Isaiah 54, Jeremiah 18, or Romans 9. If we accept the deterministic perspective of these texts, just imagine for a moment what sort of God is being portrayed. H. H. Rowley sums it up best:
Neither Jeremiah nor Paul had in mind an aimless dilettante, working in a casual and haphazard way, turning out vessels according to the chance whim of the moment … To suppose that a crazy potter, who made vessels with no other thought than that he would afterwards knock them to pieces, is the type and figure of God, is supremely dishonoring to God. The vessel of dishonor which the potter makes is still something that he wants, and that has a definite use … The instruments of wrath … were what the New Testament calls ‘vessels of dishonor,’ serving God indeed, but with no exalted service. They were not puppets in His hand, compelled to do His will without moral responsibility for their deed, but chosen because He saw that the very iniquity of their heart would lead them to the course that He could use (Rowley, Doctrine of Election, p. 40-41)
Neither Isaiah, nor Jeremiah, nor Paul had in mind a potter who purposefully created pots just so that He could smash them. No potter would do that, then or now. Instead, God is the wise potter who works with the clay to form useful tools. The vessels of “dishonor” are not vessels which are destroyed, but vessels which will be used in “ignoble” ways. They still serve important purposes and help with vital tasks, but they are not vessels of honor.
Typically, vessels of dishonor do end up being destroyed (which is not necessarily hell!), but this is not because the potter made them for such a purpose, but because unclean vessels, when they have served their purpose, are usually not useful for anything else.
And what makes one vessel clean or unclean? As H. H. Rowley pointed out above, God allows humans to determine what kind of vessel they will be, and then He uses those who have made themselves vessels of dishonor.
A careful reading of Romans 9:22 reveals this very point. W. E. Vine, in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, says that the word “destruction” is used “metaphorically of men persistent in evil (Rom 9:22), where ‘fitted’ is in the middle voice, indicating that the vessels of wrath fitted themselves for destruction” (Vine’s Expository Dictionary, 2:165)
None of this Relates to Person’s Eternal Destiny
Again, none of this has anything to do with whether or not a person goes to heaven or hell after death. The way a vessel is used refers primarily to how God uses individuals, kings, and nations in this life. Marston and Forster add this:
The basic lump that forms a nation will either be built up or broken down by the Lord, depending on their own moral response. If a nation does repent and God builds them up, then it is for him alone to decide how the finished vessel will fit into his plan … God alone determines the special features / privileges / responsibilities of a particular nation (Forster & Marston, God’s Strategy, 74).
To read more on Romans 9, get my book The Re-Justification of God.
If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- …
- 40
- Next Page »