Again, as footnoted in my notes, I want to credit the author for the title of this blog and the notes from Sunday. Bryan Chapell is the author and I'm thankful for his insight that has helped me and allowed me to teach others as he has taught me from his writing.
What follows are some thoughts from what I said Sunday regarding the Scriptures reflecting Christ's person and work. We determined that when we see the pattern of Father stating the indicative that is the basis for the imperative we have the framework to handle grace and holiness.
That's what I want to write about just a bit.
I have been continuing to marinate on that statement since I wrote it down last week and only now has it produced something worth mentioning.
It's hard for most of us in the South to properly handle grace and holiness without becoming antinomian or a legalist. Our pendulum tends to swing far in the opposite direction of our raising.
The Scriptures are what bring balance to that swing in the other direction and must continue to hold us in the divine center on this issue.
If I were a legalist before I discovered the grace of freedom in Christ from a law, then I might become a drunk or glutton.
If I were antinomian in my behavior in the abuse of freedom before I discovered the grace of imitating God, then I might turn into a suit wearing, KJV swinging spiritual beat down waiting to happen on some poor unsuspecting soul.
What has to go is the misconception of grace and holiness being at odds. The Scriptures do this for us. We just truly have to become people of the book and not pretend people of the book making up our own stuff as we go to suit the notion of the day.
I am a child of God. I have been bought at a price. I am free to enjoy all things to the glory of God. Therefore, I must imitate the God who I am a child of, who purchased me and made all things to enjoy.
There seems to be tension there, and perhaps there is, but it's a holy tension. It's good and to be wrestled with.
Paul says things like..."all things are free for me but not all things are beneficial (loose quotation)."
He says things like..."I will not be mastered by anything (again a loose quotation)."
Paul enjoys the grace of being set free while imitating the holy character of God.
What is that tension we feel?
Paul makes much of the conscience, informed by the Holy Spirit, being how we determine what we as individuals do or do not do. He teaches this in the context of community and considering the other while not hindering freedom.
This is the tension of knowing God as his child, enjoying him, being family with others who are likewise children, and allowing them the freedom to be who Father wants them to be without looking down on them or reviling Father for allowing them to do something we think not quite right.
We are children. We are to act holy as Father is holy, but not according to law, but Holy Spirit conscience. We have to do this in community with others. We have to wrestle with the tension of being different from our other family members and being ok with it.
All of this because the indicative comes before the imperative and we can't reverse the order. We are children who are called to imitate Father and let each other imitate Father as they are compelled by Father.
Adopted and trying to imitate Dad, though not like everyone else.
Wrestle with me...
mj
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think I may have taught on something similar to what you are discussing here in my Sunday School last week. I started with Matthew 12, went to Hosea 6:6, and finally to Micah 6:6. The tension we feel about the grace vs. law issue is how far to go before we cross "that line." We don't want to cross that line, whatever it is. And the line is probably different for each of us. "The basic problem in human relationship is that of freedom." (Boundaries, Cloud and Townsend) Freedom both for ourselves, and for others.
Paul said, "I do not set aside the grace of God..." yet he kept himself in check when it came to the abuse of said grace. "Be ye therefore imitators of God..." Yet neither was Paul a legalist. I think he just tried his best to follow Christ and no one else---not even other ministers of the Gospel.
I hope I understood your blog well enough for these comments to apply. I don't always understand your theological jargon. But that's okay. I'm not sure God has called me to understand it. But I suppose he has made his word plain enough when I have needed it.
Yours in Christ,
Amy Henry
I'm especially struck by something you said at the end, about all of us imitating Father the way we're called to and not necessarily the same as everyone else. I think this is really profound. Could you elaborate more on that?
Post a Comment