"Your self-worth is determined by you, you don't have to depend on someone telling you who you are."
Or so says Beyonce.
In fact, just go on Google images and search "self worth" or "self worth quotes" and take a look at the myriad of "inspirational" images about self-worth. Here's a few that stood out to me, or that seemed to sum up the general feeling I was getting from them:
- "Respect yourself enough to walk away from anything that no longer serves you, grows you, or makes you happy. If you aren't being treated with love and respect, check your price tag. Maybe you've marked yourself down. It's YOU who tells people what your worth is. Get off the clearance rack and get behind the glass where they keep the valuables."
- "Self respect, self worth and self love, all start with self. Stop looking outside of yourself for your value."
- "Self-worth is so vital to your happiness that if you don't feel good about YOU, it's hard to feel good about anything else."
- "When your self-worth goes up, your net-worth goes up with it."
- "You are so much stronger than you think."
- "Not one drop of my self-worth depends on your acceptance of me."
- "I forgive myself for having believed for so long, that I was never good enough to have, get and be what I wanted."
The first and last quotes there I found particularly striking, beyond the others (though I think it's definitely still there in the others) they showed a particular self-centredness that came with looking to yourself for your worth, but that's something I'll come back to later. What stands out to you from these quotes? Do you feel more valuable for having read them? According to the third quote, your happiness is intrinsically linked to you feeling good about yourself, so do you feel happier for having read them? Perhaps you do, perhaps you don't.
When I read these quotes, and the others that I came across, I noticed four recurring things: a desire, an assumption, a problem and a consequence.
Here's the desire. It seemed that there was a distinct longing behind all of these for validation, for love and for happiness. Take that google search I talked about earlier, notice how many quotes are about ignoring what other people think of you, walking away from people who don't think highly of you, and just telling yourself and enforcing to yourself that you are valuable and worthy, important and special. There is a strong yearning to know that you mean something, that you're in some way significant and that you have rights. There's also a massive emphasis on receiving love. But this isn't selfless, other-centred love. Instead this is love of self, and acceptance of other people's love only provided they honour and treat you as someone highly special. There's this idea that you can't guarantee that other people will love you to the standard that you feel you should be loved, so you love yourself to that standard. And, present in both the desire for validation and the desire for love, is a desire to be happy. The desire for happiness also expresses itself in a desire for control, notice the last quote especially, believing that you have the right to get and take whatever you want, however you want.
There's a whole truck load of assumptions that come with these though, but I'm going to try and narrow it down to two. First, there is the assumption that you are in fact valuable and worthy, that you deserve the admiration, respect and love of everyone who meets you and that you are a basically and fundamentally nice and lovable person. The second assumption is that if outside sources aren't affirming and praising these things then looking to yourself and living for yourself will provide all of the proof and confirmation of these things in order for you to have the validation, love and happiness that you're looking for.
Unfortunately, it seems, this is as far as most people's thinking progresses. I say unfortunately, as there are fundamental problems with both of these assumptions. I'll explain why I think that in a moment, but before I do I want to give some evidence that what I'm saying is at least somewhere near the truth and is therefore worth considering. I know a whole host of people who both love themselves and live for themselves, but not one of them is content, not one of them is not striving for more, not one of them is consistently happy. Do you know anyone who has met the desires I mentioned through the means of loving themselves and affirming themselves? They may look like they have on the surface, people are really good at giving that impression, but I bet you if you looked just an inch under the surface you'd see a very different story.
The problem is that self-love doesn't work.
Why? Let's start with the first assumption. Where do we get this idea that we are all so deserving? Where do we get the idea that we belong "behind the glass where they keep the valuables"? Where does the concept that we should be freely given time, affection and stuff come from? If we were so worthy of these things, why do we need to ignore all of the outside voices telling us otherwise? And if these things are so evidently true, why do we need inspirational posters and quotes to help us ignore that nagging inside voice that says, "You're not more important than everyone else, in fact you get a lot of things wrong", that actually we kings and queens? Look at the quotes I gave, do you notice the recurring idea that we actually have a low view of ourselves and that we need to convince ourselves that we're better than we think? The fact is, all of us are constantly and incessantly messing up. We're proud and selfish people, we're so often either too lazy or work obsessed, we get angry too quickly or we show no emotion where we should show concern, we're never as caring or as consistent or as heroic as we know we'd like to be. The reason we have to constantly convince ourselves that we're special, is because in our core we think we're broken. We are not fundamentally nice and lovable, but rather we are fundamentally self-seeking and ravenous, snapping up affection and biting anyone who shows anything else. This means that by looking to ourselves we will never find the validation that we are so desperately looking for.
As for the second assumption, there is no way that this could ever work, even if at first you were somehow actually a fundamentally nice and lovable person. Why? Because who has ever spent time with someone who thinks the world of them self and is only interested in looking out for themself and loving themself and gone away feeling happier for it? Self-loving is being selfish, and the more you express it the more you drive away friendships and relationships. As for the love that you give yourself? Loving yourself isn't really love, because love is inherently selfish. You'll be left with an inner vacuum that you can't fill with yourself, and that vacuum prevents any hope of real and lasting happiness.
Look, I know I'm sounding really quite grim here. If you've read this far then well done to you, I'm impressed. Please, don't give up now, keep reading a little longer. I needed to make it clear that loving yourself just cannot fulfil the desires that we all so desperately need to have fulfilled. But that doesn't make those desires unfulfillable, it just means that we've been looking in the wrong place for it. I think it's already clear from the very fact that we turn from looking to others for validation, love and happiness that we already know that we can't satisfy our desires from the outside (if you don't believe me, I wrote a vaguely related post about beauty and achievement which runs along a similar line http://youthministrytrainee.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/unhelpful-messages-about-beauty-and.html). You will not find in beauty, money, fame, success, human relationships, animal relationships, pride, sex, achievements, adrenaline rushes, friends, housing, careers, meditation, religion (by which I mean a belief system that requires you to earn your way to salvation), holidays, art, relaxation, sight-seeing, experience, cars, muscle-size, children, food, technology, discovery, exploration, pregnancy, height, charity, volunteering, space-flights, destruction, power, control, affirmation, games, praise or even bungee jumping any lasting, consistent and sufficient fulfilment of the desires you have for validation, love and happiness, and that is the consequence I talked about earlier. If you still don't believe me, go ahead, try them all. Have as much sex as you can with as many people, earn as much money as you can, go on as many holidays as you are able, escape to the wild and nature as often as you see fit, do whatever you like, you'll find it to be true.
So what's the solution? We need someone or something who is able to deal with the problems that we have within us, the brokenness I talked about in the paragraph on the first assumption. We also need someone or something from whom we receive our validation, love and happiness, and who can enable us to then live a life which isn't enslaved by trying to meet the expectations of others, but is also not orientated around ourselves and so becomes selfish. Who or what could possibly meet those needs?
I was found by the person who can, and I'd love to introduce you to him. He knows both you and me intimately, he knows our fears and he knows our failings. He knows how broken we are, because he knows us better than we know ourselves. And he loves us both, despite knowing the darkest parts of our hearts. He loves us not because we're worthy of his love, not because we're lovely and lovable. He loves us because he is inexpressibly, inexhaustibly, entirely selflessly loving. He loves us to make us lovable, to make us lovely, to make us valuable. He's the kind of person who is so selflessly loving that you could in fact describe him as love itself. He's the kind of person who would lay down his life for you. And in fact he did, because the person I'm talking about is Jesus, and in history (this is a historically verifiable fact) he was crucified by the Roman Empire. And that brutal murder of an innocent person is the biggest event in history so far. Why? Because his crucifixion was a swap of identity. When he was executed, he took the punishment, the consequence, that we have placed on ourselves through all of our selfishness and brokenness, and dealt with it. That gives a permanently blank slate to anyone who accepts this swap, and takes away our shady record, our guilty places, our dark secrets. And in exchange for taking our brokenness he gave us his identity, full of all its loveliness and worthiness and honour and righteousness and selflessness and goodness and wholeness and integrity and consistency and love. That means, for anyone who agrees to be a part of this, that we have forgiveness for all of the problems that we have created, and all of the problems that we could have fixed or prevented and yet didn't. No more guilt. It means that our identity is found in the most worthy and admirable person in all of history past, present and future, so there is no longer any need to crave validation.
But notice I was talking in the present tense at the start of that previous paragraph. That same Jesus who died 2000 years ago is alive today. Again, the historical evidence is all in its favour, and if you're interested in that kind of stuff leave a comment and I'll do my best to show you it. You see Jesus overcame death, because Jesus is God, God with us. We have all of the love and happiness we need because the same Jesus who died for us out of love to take away our ugliness and give us beauty, that same Jesus is alive today and loves us with a love that gives an inexpressible, incomprehensible, overwhelming joy, and that liberates us from enslavement to the opinions of others and the fears of ourselves.
Perhaps this sounds amazing to you, perhaps the sounds like the solution you've been looking for. Then why not find out more? Read the Gospel of Mark or John, or find a Christian friend or colleague and talk it through with them, or go to a Church and ask the people there. Then go for it.
Or perhaps this sounds unthinkably ridiculous to you. In that case I challenge you, find another solution and see if it works, if you can, come back here and tell me about it. If you can't, then what's to lose in just looking into the facts, investigate Christianity, investigate its claims, investigate the evidence, you might just find that it's not so ridiculous after all.
4 May 2015
25 Jan 2015
Don't forget the Gospel
It's SO easy to forget the fundamental truths of the Gospel. The Church in Galatia (http://tinyurl.com/l4o9s79) had forgotten one of the basic truths of the Gospel, that we are saved by grace (God saving us because He loves us not because we earned it), and had turned back to the Law (trying to be good in order to be saved (which doesn't work, see Genesis 3-Revelation 22)).
Right near the start of his letter to them, Paul says this (Galatians 1:6-7a), "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel - which is really no gospel at all." We soon find out that in Galatia the Church was being led astray by false teachers who were promoting physical circumcision as a sign of the Law, a sign that has no place in Christianity, and that this is what was leading the Galatians astray. But we too can quickly lose sight of the truths of the Gospel, and not just because of false teaching.
Throughout Galatians Paul explains and proclaims how we are saved by grace, how the law cannot save us, and how in Christ and the grace that comes through Him we have forgiveness and redemption and become heirs with Christ. He pleads, he rebukes and he encourages. The loving frustration of Paul is so clear in the way he writes, as he sees that the Galatians have something SO good and are on the verge of simply forgetting it and running after something which harbours only weariness, despair and death.
One of my favourite verses in the Bible at the moment (if we should have favourite verses ;)) is Galatians 5:1 which says, "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery." It takes me right back to John 19:30 describing Jesus' last words on the cross, "... Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit." When Jesus died on the cross he dealt with all of our sin forever. In case we weren't sure, he said it himself (and with words God (including Jesus) created the universe, with words Jesus calmed the storm, rose the dead.. you get the idea, when Jesus says something is, it is..).
When we forget the fundamental truths of the Gospel, lies and fears creep in and we begin to despair and lose hope. We need to remember that it is finished, that Christ has set us free and that we need to stand firm and not let ourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
Sometimes we get so aware of our own sin, so convicted by it, that we lose hope and grow sad, because somehow we have forgotten the truth of the Gospel that we are saved by Christ and that He has set us free and that by the Spirit we will be changed if we continue in Him.
Sometimes we don't realise our sin and in pride or in distraction become so obsessed by the world and by things limited to this life and we forget the beauty, humility and majesty of the Gospel, we forget the immense love of God for us and all that Christ has done for us.
Either way all we need to do is remember the Gospel and turn our focus back to Christ and by the Spirit everything will follow.
Stand firm. It is finished.
Right near the start of his letter to them, Paul says this (Galatians 1:6-7a), "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel - which is really no gospel at all." We soon find out that in Galatia the Church was being led astray by false teachers who were promoting physical circumcision as a sign of the Law, a sign that has no place in Christianity, and that this is what was leading the Galatians astray. But we too can quickly lose sight of the truths of the Gospel, and not just because of false teaching.
Throughout Galatians Paul explains and proclaims how we are saved by grace, how the law cannot save us, and how in Christ and the grace that comes through Him we have forgiveness and redemption and become heirs with Christ. He pleads, he rebukes and he encourages. The loving frustration of Paul is so clear in the way he writes, as he sees that the Galatians have something SO good and are on the verge of simply forgetting it and running after something which harbours only weariness, despair and death.
One of my favourite verses in the Bible at the moment (if we should have favourite verses ;)) is Galatians 5:1 which says, "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery." It takes me right back to John 19:30 describing Jesus' last words on the cross, "... Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit." When Jesus died on the cross he dealt with all of our sin forever. In case we weren't sure, he said it himself (and with words God (including Jesus) created the universe, with words Jesus calmed the storm, rose the dead.. you get the idea, when Jesus says something is, it is..).
When we forget the fundamental truths of the Gospel, lies and fears creep in and we begin to despair and lose hope. We need to remember that it is finished, that Christ has set us free and that we need to stand firm and not let ourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
Sometimes we get so aware of our own sin, so convicted by it, that we lose hope and grow sad, because somehow we have forgotten the truth of the Gospel that we are saved by Christ and that He has set us free and that by the Spirit we will be changed if we continue in Him.
Sometimes we don't realise our sin and in pride or in distraction become so obsessed by the world and by things limited to this life and we forget the beauty, humility and majesty of the Gospel, we forget the immense love of God for us and all that Christ has done for us.
Either way all we need to do is remember the Gospel and turn our focus back to Christ and by the Spirit everything will follow.
Stand firm. It is finished.
9 Jan 2015
Some helpful videos
Excuse the cheesy music, it may put some of you off. To others it may be helpful. Whatever the case, I thought the content of what was being said in these videos was excellent and well worth a watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=or-TWUh72vs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0elhYaESJkY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-pLRM0rgjE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejto7en2mKU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=or-TWUh72vs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0elhYaESJkY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-pLRM0rgjE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejto7en2mKU
25 Nov 2014
Hello again...
I'm no longer a trainee, I finished at the end of August. Nevertheless, I found this blog a helpful place to process some of my thoughts, and a few people seem to follow it, so I think I might continue it.
We'll see if it goes anywehere.
We'll see if it goes anywehere.
30 Sept 2014
No longer a trainee!
I have finished my time as a Church youth work trainee (I in fact finished a few weeks ago). But I've decided to continue this blog provided I have time. I have recently started as a university student, and will hopefully write some posts soon.
I can only thank God for His provision of this last year and this next stage in my journey here, He is full of blessings and sometimes works through the ways you least expect.
I can only thank God for His provision of this last year and this next stage in my journey here, He is full of blessings and sometimes works through the ways you least expect.
17 Aug 2014
"Religious Debates"
Here is some advice for Christians, atheists and people of other faiths, religions and standpoints when having chats about beliefs. I could really do with better putting these into practice myself.
1) Sort out who or what you mean when you say God - Most of the conversations about "god" that I have seen or been a part of have been about entirely different "gods". You cannot have a debate about two entirely different entities while thinking you're talking about the same thing. If you're talking about the God of the Bible then you need to establish the Trinity first and foremost, because the God of the Bible is three persons, Father, Son and Spirit, as one God and His entire identity is built around that fact. Think about it, if two people are trying to have a conversation, but one is talking about surrealist art and the other is talking about water bears (look them up, they are so cool), it's just not going to work, and both people will probably go away thinking the other is an idiot.
2) Be honest - if you don't know why you think something, say so. If you think that something's stupid, say so (but nicely and with explanation).
3) Listen, being patient and sincere - your conversation isn't going to go anywhere without patient and sincere listening.
4) Get on the same page with your definitions - when I say, "faith", I don't mean belief without evidence, when I say, "religion", I don't mean Christianity. Unless you know what each other means, you'll be having entirely different conversations (kind of like point 1).
5) Set a point to your debate and stick to it - conversations can easily devolve into meaningless and irrelevant blatherings. If you're talking about Heaven, for example, don't start talking about whether or not there can be such a thing as a perfect apple (this actually happened to me once, I was just as much to blame as the other person (if not more), and it completely ruined our conversation). Make it clear what you want to talk about at the start, and if the conversation drifts too far then pull it back, even if it leaves unanswered questions.
6) Don't just have one conversation - it's in most people's nature to resist change, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary of what they believe. Not only that, but conversations like this often say lots of things with lots of content in each thing. Basically, people need time to process. One conversation rarely achieves anything, and you'll probably need to spend most of it getting on the same page about what you each believe, so make sure you talk more than once.
7) Don't always worry about the fact that the other person might want you to change your mind/"convert you" - People usually have debates because they care about truth/the other person and they want that person to agree with them. Note that doesn't mean that they want to force you to think the way they do. In fact they almost certainly don't want to force you, because otherwise they probably wouldn't be debating with you. Actually, the fact that someone is taking the time to talk with you probably shows that they really care about you.
8) Be logical, structure your conversation and make a visible note of the points that each of you makes - these things are really helpful for getting a conversation to go somewhere, and also for making sure that you don't forget, repeat or contradict the things you have already established. Not only that, but people tend to need "more than a feeling" to entirely change their "world-view", and are not likely to be convinced by illogical, unsubstantiated arguments. Talking through the logic and evidence behind what you believe, even if that wasn't originally what brought you to think the way you do, can really help.
9) I know it's the same point again, but it really does matter... Make sure you each know what the other actually believes - otherwise you'll be having entirely different conversations, and it just won't work.
1) Sort out who or what you mean when you say God - Most of the conversations about "god" that I have seen or been a part of have been about entirely different "gods". You cannot have a debate about two entirely different entities while thinking you're talking about the same thing. If you're talking about the God of the Bible then you need to establish the Trinity first and foremost, because the God of the Bible is three persons, Father, Son and Spirit, as one God and His entire identity is built around that fact. Think about it, if two people are trying to have a conversation, but one is talking about surrealist art and the other is talking about water bears (look them up, they are so cool), it's just not going to work, and both people will probably go away thinking the other is an idiot.
2) Be honest - if you don't know why you think something, say so. If you think that something's stupid, say so (but nicely and with explanation).
3) Listen, being patient and sincere - your conversation isn't going to go anywhere without patient and sincere listening.
4) Get on the same page with your definitions - when I say, "faith", I don't mean belief without evidence, when I say, "religion", I don't mean Christianity. Unless you know what each other means, you'll be having entirely different conversations (kind of like point 1).
5) Set a point to your debate and stick to it - conversations can easily devolve into meaningless and irrelevant blatherings. If you're talking about Heaven, for example, don't start talking about whether or not there can be such a thing as a perfect apple (this actually happened to me once, I was just as much to blame as the other person (if not more), and it completely ruined our conversation). Make it clear what you want to talk about at the start, and if the conversation drifts too far then pull it back, even if it leaves unanswered questions.
6) Don't just have one conversation - it's in most people's nature to resist change, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary of what they believe. Not only that, but conversations like this often say lots of things with lots of content in each thing. Basically, people need time to process. One conversation rarely achieves anything, and you'll probably need to spend most of it getting on the same page about what you each believe, so make sure you talk more than once.
7) Don't always worry about the fact that the other person might want you to change your mind/"convert you" - People usually have debates because they care about truth/the other person and they want that person to agree with them. Note that doesn't mean that they want to force you to think the way they do. In fact they almost certainly don't want to force you, because otherwise they probably wouldn't be debating with you. Actually, the fact that someone is taking the time to talk with you probably shows that they really care about you.
8) Be logical, structure your conversation and make a visible note of the points that each of you makes - these things are really helpful for getting a conversation to go somewhere, and also for making sure that you don't forget, repeat or contradict the things you have already established. Not only that, but people tend to need "more than a feeling" to entirely change their "world-view", and are not likely to be convinced by illogical, unsubstantiated arguments. Talking through the logic and evidence behind what you believe, even if that wasn't originally what brought you to think the way you do, can really help.
9) I know it's the same point again, but it really does matter... Make sure you each know what the other actually believes - otherwise you'll be having entirely different conversations, and it just won't work.
12 Jul 2014
God's Morality and the Law
I was having a good chat with an
excellent friend of mine who is an atheist. We sadly ran out of time for
our conversation, but we left each other with some questions to think
about and answer. The first of his to me was, "If there are so many
different views from the same book (the Bible), how can we trust any of
them?" And the second, which it is my hope to answer in this post, was,
"How do you justify God based on some of the Old Testament laws which
aren't the most just or civilised?"
Both of which are excellent questions. I will attempt to answer both, but for now here is my attempt at writing an answer to the second (I find talking much easier than blogging :P).
To the people who have been waiting for this, I'm very sorry, life has been busy and I've been struggling to answer this in less than a 3 page essay (there are lots of laws to cover). Instead I've decided to opt for a less satisfying but hopefully more useful way of answering. Instead of detailing all of the specifics, going through each type of law, looking in detail how the New Testament picks up on the Law and so on, I'm instead going to take a more general approach, which will leave many questions remaining, but should hopefully equip my friend/whoever reads this to work out the details, should they want to (or you'd be welcome to ask me more specifically too).
Of course, knowing me, this probably won't work and I'll end up having to post the 3 page essay. God-willing it will work, though, as I think a 3 page essay is more of a slog to read than my friend was hoping for.
We'll see.
On with the post.
"God's Morality and the Law."
I think the most helpful place to start would be to ask why God gave the Law to the Israelites, and then to explore that.
So, why did God give the Law to the Israelites?
The Bible tells us in Exodus 19, just before God starts giving out the first sections of the Law.
Have a look with me at Exodus chapter 19 verses 1 to 6:
"On the first day of the third month after the Israelites left Egypt—on that very day—they came to the Desert of Sinai. 2 After they set out from Rephidim, they entered the Desert of Sinai, and Israel camped there in the desert in front of the mountain.
3 Then Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain and said, “This is what you are to say to the descendants of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: 4 ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”"
God's making a deal with His people, the Israelites, having just rescued them from slavery and death in Egypt. His deal with them basically goes along the lines of, "If you fully keep my laws, then you can be my people, and I will make you holy (perfect and set apart), set you apart from all the other nations, and allow you to be with me."
From this we get the first purpose of the law:
1) To make God's people stand out from the nations around them.
If we look at the law with this perspective, things start making sense that didn't before. Let's compare and contrast a few examples of how the Law that the Israelites had differs to the way the nations around them tended to do things:
The Law The Way Other People at the Time Did Stuff
Feed the poor and vulnerable Exploit the poor and vulnerable
Reset wealth every (I think) 70 years The strong are rich, the weak are poor.
to prevent long term rich/poor divides
and to rebalance wealth
Women have some rights Women have no rights
The punishment should fit the crime I'll exact vengeance however I like
2 or more testimonies to verify a crime No real judicial system
Don't do prostitution, or sell people Prostitution! Sell your daughters too!
as prostitutes Have sex shrines to worship wooden idols!
Don't murder Burn your children alive to Baal
Don't self harm Self harm when people die so that gods
might let them have a better afterlife
Why can't I trim the edges of my beard according to the Law? Because that was part of the worship of false gods who people burned their children alive to at the time, and the Law is about setting me apart from them in a positive direction. (Which would no longer be necessary today, as beard trimming has nothing to do with worshipping Baal, but at the day it was)
The Law was a massive step forward for the people of the day. If the Israelites followed it then they would be the safest, fairest nation of the time.
Compared to the nations around them (and, with some laws, compared to us today), the Law would make the Israelites remarkably just, but it was by no means the whole way there. There were still big problems. It was only a step forward, not the whole leap, and there was a long way to go.
This brings us on to the second purpose of the Law. Remember the deal before? What was the condition? If God's people obeyed His laws fully, then they could be His people. But they couldn't. Even with a sacrificial system which enabled them to get retries, there was not a single one who managed to keep the Law fully.
2) The second point of the Law was to show the ineffectiveness of religion, and the need for something better.
Yes, that's right. The Law was designed to show up religion as useless.
I had better give my definition of religion at this point, as it may differ from yours. I define religion as, "A belief system in which participants have to earn salvation/enlightenment/whatever else by what they do."
By giving the Law, which wasn't even to the standard of perfection that God required, God was showing the Israelites/us that there's no way we can earn salvation. We just mess up. The Israelites couldn't even manage to obey the Law which didn't require the perfect standards of God and was just a step forward, how then could they stand any chance of keeping the Law if it had gone the whole leap and been up to the perfect standards of God?
The Law shows up religion, by my definition, as worthless and draining, as people are just too flawed to be able to earn a place as one of God's people.
The Law points us towards Christ, who provides a better way than religion.
(These ideas are not made up, they are picked up repeatedly in both the Old and New Testament. Although they will explain it with far fewer blunders than I probably have done! I can look at some of these with you. Romans and Galatians do this especially.)
So what then is my answer to your question? I think I understand it like this:
- Far fewer of the laws given in the Old Testament are as "bad" as you would think, just the "bad" ones are quoted far more than the rest.
- I also don't think that the Law shows us an exact representation of God's morality, but rather it should point us in the direction of it. When we see the laws as a massive step forward for the day, then we can start to see the direction which points towards God's morality. Things are taken another big step forward in the New Testament, but not because God's morality has changed (it's still more perfect than we can achieve).
- The Law should show us our sinfulness, our inability to match up to God's goodness and earn eternal life, and ultimately it should show us our need for Christ, who lived a sinless life, meeting God's standard's for perfection, and died on the cross as a substitute for us, so that we can have eternal life without having to earn it, simply by accepting Jesus' offer and giving our lives to him.
Both of which are excellent questions. I will attempt to answer both, but for now here is my attempt at writing an answer to the second (I find talking much easier than blogging :P).
To the people who have been waiting for this, I'm very sorry, life has been busy and I've been struggling to answer this in less than a 3 page essay (there are lots of laws to cover). Instead I've decided to opt for a less satisfying but hopefully more useful way of answering. Instead of detailing all of the specifics, going through each type of law, looking in detail how the New Testament picks up on the Law and so on, I'm instead going to take a more general approach, which will leave many questions remaining, but should hopefully equip my friend/whoever reads this to work out the details, should they want to (or you'd be welcome to ask me more specifically too).
Of course, knowing me, this probably won't work and I'll end up having to post the 3 page essay. God-willing it will work, though, as I think a 3 page essay is more of a slog to read than my friend was hoping for.
We'll see.
On with the post.
"God's Morality and the Law."
I think the most helpful place to start would be to ask why God gave the Law to the Israelites, and then to explore that.
So, why did God give the Law to the Israelites?
The Bible tells us in Exodus 19, just before God starts giving out the first sections of the Law.
Have a look with me at Exodus chapter 19 verses 1 to 6:
"On the first day of the third month after the Israelites left Egypt—on that very day—they came to the Desert of Sinai. 2 After they set out from Rephidim, they entered the Desert of Sinai, and Israel camped there in the desert in front of the mountain.
3 Then Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain and said, “This is what you are to say to the descendants of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: 4 ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”"
God's making a deal with His people, the Israelites, having just rescued them from slavery and death in Egypt. His deal with them basically goes along the lines of, "If you fully keep my laws, then you can be my people, and I will make you holy (perfect and set apart), set you apart from all the other nations, and allow you to be with me."
From this we get the first purpose of the law:
1) To make God's people stand out from the nations around them.
If we look at the law with this perspective, things start making sense that didn't before. Let's compare and contrast a few examples of how the Law that the Israelites had differs to the way the nations around them tended to do things:
The Law The Way Other People at the Time Did Stuff
Feed the poor and vulnerable Exploit the poor and vulnerable
Reset wealth every (I think) 70 years The strong are rich, the weak are poor.
to prevent long term rich/poor divides
and to rebalance wealth
Women have some rights Women have no rights
The punishment should fit the crime I'll exact vengeance however I like
2 or more testimonies to verify a crime No real judicial system
Don't do prostitution, or sell people Prostitution! Sell your daughters too!
as prostitutes Have sex shrines to worship wooden idols!
Don't murder Burn your children alive to Baal
Don't self harm Self harm when people die so that gods
might let them have a better afterlife
Why can't I trim the edges of my beard according to the Law? Because that was part of the worship of false gods who people burned their children alive to at the time, and the Law is about setting me apart from them in a positive direction. (Which would no longer be necessary today, as beard trimming has nothing to do with worshipping Baal, but at the day it was)
The Law was a massive step forward for the people of the day. If the Israelites followed it then they would be the safest, fairest nation of the time.
Compared to the nations around them (and, with some laws, compared to us today), the Law would make the Israelites remarkably just, but it was by no means the whole way there. There were still big problems. It was only a step forward, not the whole leap, and there was a long way to go.
This brings us on to the second purpose of the Law. Remember the deal before? What was the condition? If God's people obeyed His laws fully, then they could be His people. But they couldn't. Even with a sacrificial system which enabled them to get retries, there was not a single one who managed to keep the Law fully.
2) The second point of the Law was to show the ineffectiveness of religion, and the need for something better.
Yes, that's right. The Law was designed to show up religion as useless.
I had better give my definition of religion at this point, as it may differ from yours. I define religion as, "A belief system in which participants have to earn salvation/enlightenment/whatever else by what they do."
By giving the Law, which wasn't even to the standard of perfection that God required, God was showing the Israelites/us that there's no way we can earn salvation. We just mess up. The Israelites couldn't even manage to obey the Law which didn't require the perfect standards of God and was just a step forward, how then could they stand any chance of keeping the Law if it had gone the whole leap and been up to the perfect standards of God?
The Law shows up religion, by my definition, as worthless and draining, as people are just too flawed to be able to earn a place as one of God's people.
The Law points us towards Christ, who provides a better way than religion.
(These ideas are not made up, they are picked up repeatedly in both the Old and New Testament. Although they will explain it with far fewer blunders than I probably have done! I can look at some of these with you. Romans and Galatians do this especially.)
So what then is my answer to your question? I think I understand it like this:
- Far fewer of the laws given in the Old Testament are as "bad" as you would think, just the "bad" ones are quoted far more than the rest.
- I also don't think that the Law shows us an exact representation of God's morality, but rather it should point us in the direction of it. When we see the laws as a massive step forward for the day, then we can start to see the direction which points towards God's morality. Things are taken another big step forward in the New Testament, but not because God's morality has changed (it's still more perfect than we can achieve).
- The Law should show us our sinfulness, our inability to match up to God's goodness and earn eternal life, and ultimately it should show us our need for Christ, who lived a sinless life, meeting God's standard's for perfection, and died on the cross as a substitute for us, so that we can have eternal life without having to earn it, simply by accepting Jesus' offer and giving our lives to him.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)