Put on your big boy britches and let's have at it. The Lord speaks into this abyss of human
words and wisdom and says, who in the world is it that is talking all this
nonsense. You shouldn't talk about
things you know nothing about. While all
the participants in the theological gabfest that has been the previous 36 or so
chapters have affirmed the sovereignty of God they have not fully accepted that
reality. They have bounded it within
their theological framework. We tend to
do that, circumscribe limits for God and allow Him theaters of action. We don't do so without consultation of
Scripture, we do so because we honestly believe, but we still carry vestiges of
folk theology with us. Either God is
entirely sovereign which implies that "for those who love God all things
work together for good, for those who are called according to
his purpose" or He is not. Our problem
is that we believe we have a handle on what is good and what will produce
good. The truth is that we don't, only
He does. If He is not sovereign over the
concept of good, He is not sovereign at all.
What would have been the motivation for some of the mourners
who saw Lazarus raised from the dead to go tell the Pharisees? They had seen a miracle the likes of which
had never been done and their response to it was to go tell the teacher? Even so, the Pharisees and the council admit
that Jesus "performs many signs."
They somehow missed the obvious conclusion that they should perhaps
reevaluate what they thought of Him. If He
performed many signs then it would be a good idea to see what those signs point
to. A sign has a function, it points to
something. If I see a sign with a red
background and golden arches on it, I know that there must be a McDonalds
restaurant somewhere in the vicinity. That He might be of divine origin was the
one possible explanation but it was also the one they refused to consider. Would God act on Sabbath in a way that was
considered sinful? We know what Messiah
will do and from whence He will hail and this man is failing on both counts in
our opinion. God's sovereignty to do as
He wills within the limits He has set for Himself in prophecy are in
question. Our interpretation cannot be
the boundary.
The apostolic council sends its decision, in letter form,
via Paul and Barnabas and sends two others from Jerusalem, Judas and Silas, to
accompany them in order to verify its authenticity. It seems that they were very particular in
their instructions, very limited, and therefore we should take those
prohibitions seriously today. I sometimes
see comparisons made in order to justify sexual sin between laws concerning
diet or a mixture of cloths in a garment and we as Christians need to be able
to point to this decision and Paul's teaching in keeping with this decision as
the important point. The apostles laid
down what were the parts of the law that would apply not only to the Gentiles
but also for the Jewish believers. Did they
have the Holy Spirit or did they not and on what basis would we, 2000 years later,
determine they did not? Their ministry
and apostolicity was confirmed by signs, anyone who proposes to have the Spirit
and teaches in opposition to this should be required to prove equally their own
apostolicity. Either God is sovereign as
lawgiver or He is not.
No comments:
Post a Comment