How Great is the Darkness!

Jesus said, "The eye is the lamp of the body; so then if your eye is clear, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light that is in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!" (Matthew 6:22-23)

A couple of events during the past week have brought this passage to mind. While Jesus was likely talking about the eye being the source of light and knowledge coming into a person's mind and how the gateways to the mind need to be clear and holy, it seems to me that the principle holds true for the church as well.

The gateways into the body of professing believers surely influence the way the church as a whole thinks and processes information--pastors, authors, filmmakers, and musicians write, speak, and sing about ideas and transmit their understanding of God and His word to the pew-sitters in congregations all across the world. If these eyes, these gateways of light, are clouded or blind, then those who receive their input will process skewed or erroneous information, and they will live according to faulty conclusions.

This week I was reminded of that in two very disturbing circumstances. I went to a wedding this past Saturday, and the preacher looked the groom in the eye and told him he is a sinner, and that when he sinned against his wife, he would have to repent, and when his wife, who is also a sinner, sinned against him, he needed to forgive her.

He went on to say that this sinning, repenting, and forgiving in marriage is an illustration of the gospel and how Jesus and the church function.

Wait a minute! The groom is supposed to represent Jesus, and he is a sinner? The bride is supposed to be spotless and pure, and she is a sinner? Marriage is supposed to be an illustration of a holy union, not an adulterous tryst. I wanted to stand up and ask, "What sin will he commit? Adultery? Wife beating? Child molestation? How dare you suggest such a wicked idea!"

And then they said their vows, promising fidelity, support, love, etc, all after the pastor insisted that they wouldn't keep these vows. It was sick and twisted, a slap in Jesus' face. I can't imagine how these two could speak these vows knowing that they would intentionally violate them, assuming they believed this pastor's words of darkness.

A few weeks ago I received a textbook for potential endorsement, and yesterday I had some time to look through it, a Christian worldview book for teaching children about God. Although I had some minor quibbles with the approach, the subject matter was reasonably true until I came across this line, an exhortation to Christian children:

"In the meantime, if you should happen to sin—and you will sometimes—you need to seek God’s forgiveness as soon as possible."

This is horrific. Can you imagine that this could possibly be a good way to teach children, to insist that they will sin?

Johnny, don't steal. Oh, but you will sometimes, and then you have to hurry and ask forgiveness. Don't fornicate, but you will sometimes, so be sure to ask forgiveness. Don't rape, murder, or take drugs, but since you will sometimes, be ready to ask forgiveness.

The absurdity is mind boggling. How can we avoid the accusation of madness if we command our children to do something and then tell them they won't obey our commands? How can our children look at us as anything but raving lunatics if we exhort them to holiness and then insist that they cannot achieve what we request?

And the confession for forgiveness part is also an illogical mess. What happens if they don't ask forgiveness? This is the dilemma that the anti-holiness crowd constantly runs into. On one hand, they say that 1 John 1:9 is an everyday thing to do, confess and be forgiven, but they get hung up when you ask, "What happens if a Christian doesn't confess? Are they not forgiven? Will they go to hell if they don't confess?"

Then they'll say, no they'll be fine, because all their sins have been forgiven past, present, and future. (Of course, they have no biblical proof for this faulty assertion.)

Okay, then why confess? There seems to be no need if their sins are already forgiven.

Well ... uh ... because it says to confess?

True. It does say to confess, and it says that confession brings forgiveness and complete cleansing from all unrighteousness. This is an if/then statement. If you confess, you will be forgiven. Doesn't that imply that lack of confession will mean lack of forgiveness and cleansing? If not, then why make the statement at all if forgiveness is granted no matter what? And, of course, if they're completely cleansed, I assume they'll never sin again.

And then they usually get angry or try to change the subject.

Their doctrine is ridiculous, and it's so tragic that it has become the default in church circles. Surely the eye has become a pit of blackness.

Confession in 1 John 1:9 is the confession that brings about forgiveness and salvation, and salvation brings about complete cleansing from all sin. There is no other reasonable way to interpret it.

It's frustrating and sad. The church holds on to this sinning doctrine so doggedly all the while exhorting their congregants to be holy. What a strange lot they are! Be holy, but you can't be holy. Go and sin no more, but you will sin every day. Love God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind, but you will never be able to do that.

This is madness. This is darkness so black, the blind are truly leading the blind into a pit. This love of sin and the comforts of false security will surely cause millions to be among the crowd who call out to Jesus, "'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?' And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." (Matthew 7:22-23)

This is what the church today has fallen into, a completely warped view of reality, a twisted mindset that cannot even see its own clownish behavior. God help us!

(Artwork by Ed Miracle: http://www.miraclesart.com)

Misunderstandings in the Epistles

One of the main arguments people make for the existence of sinning Christians relies on the epistles to the churches. They claim that Paul and others refer to the letter recipients as saints, yet describe ongoing sin among the church people. Therefore, they think, there must be sinning Christians.

The problem with this approach is the assumption that a greeting that refers to the readers by a descriptive label means that every single person who might read the letter or referred to in the text must also be labeled the same. Such an assumption is not true, and the text of the epistles proves that this leap is not warranted.

A proof of my assertion comes in 2 Corinthians:

"Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you--unless indeed you fail the test?" (2 Corinthians 13:5)




Paul refers to his audience as saints in the first chapter, but here in chapter 13, he tells the people to test themselves to see if they are in the faith. Why would he do that if he believes they are all, without exception, saints and true believers? They wouldn't make sense. And what is the test? The context indicates it is whether or not they are sinning.


Note verse 2: "I have previously said when present the second time, and though now absent I say in advance to those who have sinned in the past and to all the rest as well, that if I come again I will not spare anyone."



And verse 7: "Now we pray to God that you do no wrong; not that we ourselves may appear approved, but that you may do what is right, even though we may appear unapproved."



Even though Paul referred to them as saints, he still tells them that disobedience would indicate that they are not really in the faith. This passage alone should be enough to prove the point, that when Paul mentions sinners in the church, he is not including them as true saints in the church.

I’m not going to go over every letter that refers to saints and every proof that sinners in the church are not really saints, but I will focus on the letter that is used most often by opponents of holiness—the book of 1 Corinthians. Once it is established that Paul uses “saints” in his greeting while knowing that sinners among his readers aren’t truly believers, that fact can be used to prove that he uses the same practice in other letters.


I will begin this analysis with a passage that many use to prove sinfulness among Christians.

1 Corinthians 3:1-3
1And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to babes in Christ. 2I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, 3for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?

Many people will confess, no matter what their position is on the subject at hand, that no relatively large church will contain only true believers. There may be false professors of faith, interested seekers, or even skeptics who were dragged into the congregation by a friend or relative. It seems reasonable that Paul would know this and would write in such a way that all parts of the body would receive proper instruction. This kind of all encompassing teaching would require some kind of wording that would allow the readers to understand who among them is to receive the message. For example, such wording of identification is made in the following passage.

1 Corinthians 5:1-5
1It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father's wife. 2And you have become arrogant, and have not mourned instead, in order that the one who had done this deed might be removed from your midst. 3For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this as though I were present. 4In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

This is about a man who apparently had a sexual affair with his father's wife. Notice that Paul says that there is "immorality among you," indicating that this person is a part of their group while at the same time not insinuating that this is an indictment directed against all of them. More important, the construction of verse 5 reveals that the man in question is not a Christian.

Follow this line of thinking carefully. When Paul says that he is delivering this man to Satan "that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus," he is stating a purpose for his disciplinary action. The reason that he is delivering the man is the hope of salvation for him. If this man were already saved, the purpose would not exist, and the statement would not make sense. This is a clear example of Paul singling out a non-Christian from the group in order to deal with him properly. In Paul's second epistle to the Corinthians, he makes an appeal that is in the letter to the church at large, but it is meant for only the unbelievers among them.

2 Corinthians 5:19-20
namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were entreating through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.

Those who are believers in the group would not need such an appeal, because they have already been reconciled to God. The next appeal also makes more sense if it is perceived as being addressed to unbelievers only.

2 Corinthians 6:1
And working together with Him, we also urge you not to receive the grace of God in vain-

Since this verse comes immediately after an appeal to receive initial grace for salvation and is followed (6:2) by another request to come to salvation, it is written to tell the unbelievers how to receive the grace they need. Since Paul appealed for some to come to Christ, it is impossible for him to have considered all of the Corinthians in his reading audience as Christians.

Again in 1 Corinthians we see Paul stating his assumption that his readers are saved, and in the same breath he qualifies the statement with the possibility that they are not.

1 Corinthians 15:1-2
Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.

It is valuable to examine other places where Paul and other writers change their focus from one sub-group within the addressed group to another. In Ephesians chapter 2 Paul makes it clear that he is addressing Christians (vs. 19-22), but notice the change to a different audience in the first two verses of chapter 3, "For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for the sake of you Gentiles- if indeed you have heard of the stewardship of God's grace which was given to me for you," and in verse 6, "to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow-heirs and fellow-members of the body, and fellow-partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel." Paul is addressing Gentiles in general, some of whom may not have even heard of Paul's "stewardship" of grace or of the great news mentioned in verse 6. A quote from later in the chapter indicates that Paul did not assume that his audience in the passage was made up of believers but seemed to assume that they were not.

Ephesians 3:14-19
For this reason, I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name, that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man; so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; and that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fulness of God.

Paul's prayer is that these people would be strengthened "so that Christ would dwell" in their hearts. Having Christ dwell in a person's heart is practically a definition of being a Christian, so if Paul's reason for praying for this spiritual strength was for the indwelling to come about, it would not make sense if they were already believers and already indwelt. Also notice the second purpose for the prayer, "so that you ... may be able to comprehend with all the saints ... " Paul assumes that his particular audience does not, at the time of the reading, comprehend the love of Christ. This is something that "all the saints" do know. If they were saints, then they would also know the love of Christ, and if they knew, there would be no second purpose for the prayer.

The writer of Hebrews uses the same method of addressing particular people among a larger group.

Hebrews 10:26-29, 39
For if we sin willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain terrifying expectation of judgment, and the fury of a fire which will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? ... But we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul.

The writer warns the group about falling away and then states that "we" are not in that group. How could the writer warn a reading audience about something of which they are not a part unless he is temporarily changing the focus of his address? The warning makes no sense unless this change of audience focus is understood.

The point is that Paul and other writers change their focus to a particular audience from a general audience in many places. In the case of 1 Corinthians chapter 3, this particular audience consists of unbelievers that are in the church, Paul's general audience.

Let us look more closely at the shift in Paul's particular audience in the 1 Corinthians 3 passage quoted at the beginning of this chapter. In verse 3 Paul wrote, "For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?" The use of "among" indicates again that there are some in the group who are guilty of the charge and probably some who are not, so when he says, "are you not fleshly," he must be referring to those who are guilty. It would not make sense to ask this question to those who are not guilty of his accusations. But does this mean that this specific, fleshly group in focus is not made up of Christians? It is not clear that they are unbelievers from a surface examination, but the fact that they are not true believers can be brought to the light as follows.

Notice the "could not" in verse 1. The past tense indicates that Paul is talking about a time in the past. To what time was he referring? It seems that the reference is to a previous event mentioned in chapter 2, verse 1, "And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God." This first meeting with the Corinthians was probably the time when Paul first introduced the Gospel to them. Paul goes on to explain that the "natural man" cannot understand God's wisdom, and he sets this kind of man against one who has received the Spirit (2:11-14).

Therefore, in verse 1 of chapter 3 Paul refers to his first presentation of the gospel to them and says that he could not speak to them at that time as to "spiritual men," those who have received the Spirit (2:12, 15), but as to "men of flesh," the "natural man" of 2:14. They could not have been saved at that time, because they had not heard the gospel yet. As has been pointed out before, "men of flesh" is not descriptive of Christians, because the flesh is crucified in a believer (Galatians 5:24). Therefore, when Paul says, "you are still fleshly," he means that they are still not Christians, in the same state as when he first presented the gospel to them.

This does not mean that all of the addressed Corinthians are fleshly or unsaved, only those who are part of Paul's current focus in the verse. Since Paul said that "there is jealousy and strife among" them, he was indicating that this is not true of all of them. Only those who are guilty of the jealousy and strife would be considered fleshly by Paul, and only those are unsaved.
Babes in Christ

The use of the term, "babes in Christ," does not prove that the Corinthians were "baby Christians," but actually gives more proof that they were not believers at all at the time to which the verse refers. The word for babes here is not the word used in 1 Peter 2:2, where "babes" is used in a positive light. The word in 1 Peter is a form of brephos, the word commonly used for a small child or infant, a young person who would be expected to grow into an adult. The word for babes in 1 Corinthians is nepios, a simple-minded or immature person, definitely a negative word in most contexts.

It is interesting to note that Paul uses the same word to the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 14:20, "Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be babes, but in your thinking be mature." Paul wants his hearers to be babes in the things of evil. Of course he does not mean that he wants them to be baby, evil people, or newborn in evil and growing in it. He is saying that he wants them to be removed from evil by being ignorant in the things of evil.

In the same way, Paul says that he had to speak to the Corinthians as those who knew nothing about the things of Christ, because this was probably their first hearing of the gospel. The term "in Christ" does not mean that the people were in Christ in the way that Christians are in Christ, just as someone who is a babe "in evil" would not actually be in evil in the way a truly evil person would be. Since Paul wants his readers to be babes in evil and since he really wants them to be totally separated from evil, to be a babe in evil must include separation from it, a separation that is due to ignorance or inexperience. In the same way, to be a babe in Christ is to be ignorant of Him and separated from Him because of ignorance. The same word for babe and the same kind of message is given in Hebrews chapter 5.

Hebrews 5:12-6:2
For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for some one to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. For every one who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil. Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of instruction about washings, and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.

Here the writer has turned his attention to a group within his audience that is having a problem with understanding the "elementary teaching about the Christ." If they do not understand these things, repentance from dead works, faith toward God, and the others listed, how can they possibly be Christians? The answer is, they cannot. Further study makes it clear that in nearly every place in Scripture, this word for babes is used to refer to one who is in ignorance, not to one newly born.

The word is also used in a passage which is familiar to many.

1 Corinthians 13:11
When I was a child, I used to speak as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.

The word for child, in each usage, is a form of nepios, and it is again used to describe someone who is ignorant. The following passage also promotes this idea.

Ephesians 4:14
As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves, and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming;

The word for "children" is again a form of nepios and again it refers to someone who is ignorant or foolish. When the Scripture writers wanted to refer to someone as a baby Christian or a child in the faith they used other words such as brephos, which was mentioned before, or teknon as in the following verses.

1 Timothy 1:2
to Timothy, my true child in the faith: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.

Titus 1:4
to Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.

Philippians 2:22
But you know of his [Timothy's] proven worth that he served with me in the furtherance of the gospel like a child serving his father.

In these verses, as in other passages, Paul uses teknon to describe a child in the faith, either someone who was newly reborn or someone that he feels that he bore himself as a spiritual offspring. When he uses nepios, however, he is describing people who are ignorant in whatever context the word is used. In 1 Corinthians 3, since he calls them "babes in Christ," they must have been ignorant concerning Christ, at least at the time to which he was referring.

Paul is using this "babe" title to give a warning to the group of unbelievers. They have adopted a position that the one who has taught them is the means by which they are measured. In the following passage, Paul reveals that this reliance on human teachers will not work.

1 Corinthians 3:10-15
10According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But let each man be careful how he builds upon it. 11For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12Now if any man builds upon the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, 13each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it, because it is to be revealed with fire; and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. 14If any man's work which he has built upon it remains, he shall receive a reward. 15If any man's work is burned up, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as through fire.

Paul is teaching that certain structures that are built upon the foundation will be burned up. It is commonly held that these structures are works of men, but this interpretation does not fully fit the illustration given. In verse 9 Paul asserts that the people are God's building, the ones who sprouted from his and Apollos's care (verses 5-6), and in verse 10 the illustration is expanded. Paul laid the foundation ("I planted") and another is building upon it ("Apollos watered"). This indicates that the builders are "servants through whom you believed," "God's fellow workers" (verses 5 and 9). They are ministers of the gospel.

The warning in verse 10, "let each man be careful how he builds upon it," is addressed to these ministers. The one who preaches the gospel is the man whose "work will become evident." Since the foundation is Jesus Himself, a person, it is reasonable to assume that a building set upon this foundation is also people ("you are ... God's building"). The testing mentioned in verse 13 is the revealing of the true nature of the people who are resting on the foundation, a determination of who is and who is not a true believer.

This figurative method of discrimination is not unusual in the Scriptures. In Matthew 3:12 the chaff is burned while the wheat is saved. In Matthew 13:30, 42 the tares are gathered and burned. In Revelation 20:12-15 the unbelievers are thrown into the lake of fire. There are other references, but these passages clearly demonstrate that the Bible often uses the illustration of fire burning unbelievers in judgment and believers being saved from the fire.

A minister of the gospel will be saved even if some of his "converts" are not, and this is truly a great loss for him (verse 15). Once again in verse 16 Paul reiterates that the people are a building, a temple, and verse 17 gives more proof that the people are the object of the burning discussed in verse 15.

1 Corinthians 3:16-17
Do you not know that you are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are.

The temple is the building erected on the foundation, which is Christ. The temple is cleansed of its false parts (verse 15), but if any man destroys the temple, destruction is in store for him. The "any man" may still refer to the teacher, the builder in verse 15. If this is the case, he would probably be a false teacher rather than a good teacher who merely has false converts. The good teacher is saved because his purpose was to build the temple in truth, but the false teacher destroys the temple and is destroyed as a result. It is also possible that "any man" now refers to a false convert among the true parts of the temple. Verse 18 demonstrates this possibility.

1 Corinthians 3:18
Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become foolish that he may become wise.

Paul seems to have changed his focus from a teacher to individuals in his readership. In that case, the destruction of that man could be part of the cleansing of verse 15, the man's desire to destroy the temple being the "evidence" (verse 13) of a bad part of the building. In any case, it should be clear that Paul is not talking about the works of individuals in the passage; he is expounding on the quality of the lives of people in the church and on whether or not they are truly saved.

Describing a person as part of a building is not an unusual illustration in the Bible. In Ephesians 2:19-22 the people are called a building laid upon the foundation of Christ, and the building is called a temple, just as in 1 Corinthians 3.

Ephesians 2:19-22
So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow-citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, having been built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together is growing into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit.

Another example comes from 1 Peter.

1 Peter 2:4-6
And coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected by men, but choice and precious in the sight of God, you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For this is contained in Scripture: Behold I lay in Zion a choice stone, a precious corner stone, and he who believes in Him shall not be disappointed."

Once again the people are the elements that make up a building, a spiritual house of worship, and Jesus is the foundation of the house, the corner stone.

It might be simpler to see that this interpretation is true by looking at verse 12 of 1 Corinthians 3 and working backwards to discover the meaning. Verses 12 and 13 contain, "Now if any man builds upon the foundation with gold ... each man's work will become evident." In order to find out what is being built upon the foundation and what a man's work is, it must be determined what that foundation is. Verse 11 states clearly that the foundation is Jesus Christ.

Next, the identity of the people who build upon the foundation and what is normally built upon it must be ascertained. Verse 10 states directly that Paul laid the foundation and another is building upon it and that others also can build upon it (let each man...), but it does not identify who the other person (people) is or what is being built. Verse 9 says, "For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building."

Now we can see that the building is made up of people, the Corinthian church in this case. Who are the builders? They are the fellow workers of verse 9. A specific fellow worker is named earlier in verse 6, "I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth." The full context of the illustration points out that people are being built upon the foundation, Jesus Christ, and that the people who build are fellow workers with Paul, such as Apollos. It is also clear that the "work" of verse 13 is the labor for the gospel. "Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor."

The "labor" in this verse is the work of the gospel and corresponds to the work that each man does in verse 13. Comparing the rewards for labor in verse 8 with the rewards for "any man's work" in verse 14 gives further evidence that the working man in verses 12 and 13 corresponds to the laborer for the gospel in verses 5-9. It follows that the section concerning the works of a man from verse 10 of chapter 3 through verse 15 is a general statement regarding the outcome of the work of the gospel and corresponds to the specific example of the work of Paul and Apollos for the sake of the gospel among the Corinthians.

Verses 21-23 sum up Paul's purpose for the warnings in the chapter.

So then let no one boast in men. For all things belong to you, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or things present or things to come; all things belong to you, and you belong to Christ; and Christ belongs to God.

This demonstrates that the previous warning to the Corinthians was meant to teach them that their salvation condition is not dependent on their teacher, "whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas," but on their relationship with Christ, the quality of which should leave some of them in doubt.

All of this explanation of chapter 3 is put forth to show that Paul was giving a warning to those in the church at Corinth who were not true believers; they will be tested to determine if they have true faith, and they cannot rely on the status of their "builder." Such a warning was necessary because of the problem that the Corinthians had with wanting to maintain their status symbols (1:12). Therefore, Paul was not speaking to Christians in this passage, but warning the non-Christians in the church that their true nature would be revealed by fire.

We see this pattern repeated throughout the epistles, so the common notion that references to “saints” in epistle greetings mean that all the readers are Christians is not supported by the text.

Shame on Notre Dame

Notre Dame University has committed an indefensible crime against the unborn by inviting Obama to speak at their commencement this year and by giving him an honorary degree. Obama is the most ardently pro-abortion politician I have ever seen. He is an accomplice to pre-meditated murder, and this supposedly pro-life university is bestowing honors upon him.

The university tried to defend its actions in a number of nonsensical ways. They said they don't want to ban dialogue and want to encourage discourse. First, there should be no discourse on abortion. It is murder. Would they encourage discourse on exterminating Jews, on enslaving black people, or on slitting the throats of children? Hardly. Yet, they want to encourage discourse on the slaughter of the innocent unborn. Such hypocrisy is damnable.

And having Obama come to speak is not discourse. He lectured the students. He did not debate with them. And when some people tried to offer their opinions outside the commencement, they were arrested and put in jail. So much for discourse.

Notre Dame, you're not fooling anyone. You invited this evil usurper for fame and publicity, and you have sold your collective souls to the devil. May God help you to repent of this wickedness.



Click here for the website mentioned in the video.

The Accusers

Based on my observations, many people in the church of today have a habit of accusing people of sin in a strangely all-inclusive manner. Whatever their sin du jour is, they often sweep across everyone with a pointing finger. Apparently they think it’s somehow humble or “theologically correct” to assume that everyone is doing what they’re doing.

The photo illustrates my point. The sign says, “We commit the golden rule to memory and forget to commit it to life.”

First of all, who are “we”? The people in this church? If so, that’s not a church I want to attend. If they don’t obey the golden rule, they are being disobedient to God and are likely not people with whom I would want to fellowship. It seems odd to me that they would advertise their church that way. Might next week’s sign say, “We know all about ‘Thou shalt not kill,’ but we ignore it”? How about, “Adultery is wrong, but we do it anyway”? That a church would advertise their sin this way is truly troubling and certainly not biblical.

If they mean all people are like this, that’s quite an amazing claim to universal knowledge, and, of course, a faulty one. The Bible says that Christians are saints, and they are obedient in all things (1 John 5:18), so this sign really stands as Satan’s pointing finger, for Satan is the false accuser of the brethren (Revelation 12:10).

Yes, this sign is faulty and troubling, but it is, in many ways, a sign of the times. I have seen this kind of language used in many Christian circles. “We’re all sinners,” and “All young men lust,” and “We all fall into this trap,” and “We all wear masks to hide our true selves.”

The accusations, when considered with their inclusive language, are false. True Christians are not sinners, many Christian young men are chaste in body and mind, and some of us have shed all pretentious masks.

Why do many in our culture turn to this kind of negative, accusatory language? Are they hoping to feel better about their particular sins by assuming everyone else must be wallowing in sin with them? Is the false doctrine of the sinning Christian so deeply ingrained that their tongues follow the course set by Satan and his accusing minions? Can’t they see that such statements are not only false, they don’t even make sense?

If all people everywhere are caught in sin and are not obedient, the only practical conclusion is that it is impossible to obey. If that’s true, it doesn’t make sense even to provide the command, and it is certainly unjust to punish sinners eternally for committing sins they can’t help but commit.

Yet, the Bible says that it is not only possible to obey God in all things; it is the only true Christian life. No one who is born of God sins (1 John 3:9 and 5:18), and anyone who claims to be a Christian while still sinning is not telling the truth.

By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one who says, "I have come to know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. (1 John 2:3-4)

It’s crucial that we tell the truth about sin, obedience, and the gospel of Jesus Christ. We can be obedient in all things, and to make universal claims that we are not obedient is an insult to Jesus Christ, who has provided us with the power to obey, as well as the cleansed heart, brimming with love for God, that causes us to want to obey.

As always, I welcome civil comments. It won't be helpful to say that this post makes me the same kind of accuser that I am complaining about. I am pointing out a specific error that is displayed in public, a similar reproof to the ones Jesus made in Matthew 23. I am not making a false, general accusation.

Fathers - Comfort from Strength

As Father's Day approaches, I will occasionally post an excerpt from my book, The Image of a Father. You can buy an autographed copy from me for only $5 plus shipping by clicking here.

This excerpt is entitlted, "Comfort from Strength."

Fear of the unknown surrounds the young; strange shapes in the darkness, creepy sounds in the night, slithering creatures under the bed or in the closet. They all work together to make little hands clench the sheets and yank them over their heads until the dawn of the next day. Even the worries of the world—political unrest, wars, street crime, and kidnappings—can deeply disturb young minds. They hear the news and imagine the troubles sneaking into their own homes; they magnify the dangers, exaggerating them, having no experience to discern the real risks.

As Christian fathers we realize there is no need for fear. We agree with King David, “Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil; for Thou art with me; Thy rod and Thy staff, they comfort me” (Ps. 23:4). We know that our heavenly Father is a God of comfort as the apostle Paul so clearly taught. “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort; who comforts us in all our affliction so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God” (2 Cor. 1:3, 4).

From this passage, we learn without a doubt that we’re to reflect God’s comforting ways, passing his comfort on to our children. It is through knowing God, experiencing his comfort through our own trials, remembering his mercies when we wondered about the future, seeing his mighty works when we could not see how the days of trouble would end, that we have the confidence to stand now without fear.

Our children don’t have that luxury. They may not have seen a mighty God march to your rescue like the commander of a great army to save you from a dangerous predicament. Perhaps they weren’t there when God’s healing hand touched a friend of yours and brought him back from the brink of death. With few exceptions, they’ve never faced a fierce enemy and experienced deliverance from his evil intent. But if you’ve been a Christian for more than a few years, especially if you’ve done mission work on the gospel frontiers, then you have been there. You have seen God’s powerful hand move to thwart your enemies. You have felt his loving arms wrap around you in the midst of alarm. You have heard of his mighty deeds from brothers and sisters all over the world who have escaped the wiles of Satan, the crafty liar who would seek to stop the spread of the gospel.

As those who have seen and heard the works of God, we have experienced his comforting touch. It’s our duty, therefore, to extend that comfort to our little ones, so they, too, may feel the warm blanket of protection when they suffer the chill of the unknown.

Whether or not monsters really stalk our children from the dark corners of their rooms, tales of God’s protection will help them stare down the murky shadows, and they’ll sleep, heads uncovered, in blissful confidence and peace.

So what stories do we tell? What kind of tale would help our children see the light of God’s protection even in the darkest of times, such as what the Israelites experienced in Old Testament times? They were able to recount the horrible plagues God used to smash the pride of the Egyptian monarch, the parting of a sea that threatened to hem them in against the thundering chariots and the points of sharpened spears, and the conquering of terrifying giants who occupied the fruitful land God had promised. What could compare to those stories of awesome might?

At our home we receive mission magazines, and we delight in reading the stories of our dedicated missionaries in foreign and often dangerous countries. Whether at the dinner table or during our evening devotions, I enjoy watching the wide eyes of the younger children as we recount the dangers, even near-fatal encounters, from which God has rescued countless numbers of his servants.

Of course there are times when God chooses to allow some of his faithful ones to go home to heaven, but even then we emphasize that they’ve gone to a place of comfort, reaching the end of their earthly ministry as faithful soldiers of Christ. We can even rejoice with them. How great is the joy to die in the midst of service to God! Even stories like these bring comfort as the children picture a powerful angel escorting a martyr into a joyous “Welcome Home” celebration.

Along with sharing the stories of others, I frequently sprinkle in my own recollections. Some of God’s works in my life are quite impressive, and I enjoy glorifying the Lord by sharing those situations with my children. And it doesn’t hurt to tell them the same story more than once, for the effects it has on their hearts changes over the years as each child matures in wisdom and understanding. Stories that may seem “small,” God’s little mercies on a day-to-day basis, help our children see God’s intimate care, that he is not just concerned about the big issues—war, disease, and parting seas—but he truly does care for us more than the sparrows he counts in the fields. I tell them about the near miss on the highway, about how a stranger hailed me and gave me the wallet I had just dropped, and about an edifying e-mail from a Christian friend. I also encourage them to tell me about their activities, so we try to identify the events in which we can see God’s protection and resulting comfort.

Sometimes stories of faraway lands and recollections of times long past may not soothe a child who senses a closer, more present danger. Perhaps he’s experiencing a situation no story can address. Although you may unsuccessfully rack your brain to come up with a memory that parallels his troubling circumstance, there’s still a way to help your child find comfort. We don’t have to rely on a specific event God has already handled; we can rely on the immovable foundation of God’s character, the unsearchable depths of his wisdom, and the inestimable reach of his power. Simply put, there’s nothing God can’t handle, and this simple message brings comfort to almost any child. But there is one caveat—you have to live like you believe it; and I’ll explore that issue in a future post.

The Code of a Knight - Part Three

In the previous post, I listed three attributes of a “knight in shining armor,” part of the code of a knight, from my book Spit and Polish for Husbands. Those attributes focused on a knight’s personal character. This time we’ll look at three qualities of a knight’s duty toward others.

A knight seeks what is good for his lady. He never speaks against her honor. He serves her with faithfulness as he strives to meet the needs he is able to fill. He honors the feminine nature, gently caring for a lady as a vessel weaker in physical strength, while understanding her inner courage and spiritual potency. He knows that without her, he has no reason to raise his sword of defense.

Your wife is a treasure. Her value cannot be measured. She is a gift, not only to you, but also to all who have the pleasure of witnessing her distinctive feminine grace. Whether she looks like a model for a fashion magazine or a weatherworn farm girl, her heart is the source of her true beauty. As a knight, you must guard such treasure with your life. Your lady has willingly given up her own potential fortunes and attached herself to you, riding with you in your saddle to whatever horizons you choose. What a fool you would be to consider her a common vessel, an object that’s easily scorned and cast aside. No, although she gladly serves as your helpmate, you are to act as her servant, seeking her good, speaking her honor, and meeting her needs.

She is the reason you draw your sword. She is your inspiration for valiant conduct. Hers is the voice that whispers, “You are strong, my good husband! You can do what is right!” She straps your sword on your belt, fills you with sustenance, and prepares your bed when you return home from your battles, weary and in need of her gentle lap. Without her, you might be a lonely, ill-fitted wanderer, without vision, without passion, and without reason to protect those who count on your courage.

A wife is not a plaything. She is God’s feminine symbol of virtue. She gives her body to her husband, she gives her mind to making a home, and she gives her soul to God. She is far more than gold and jewels. Treat her like the unsurpassable gift she is.

Whether or not your wife lives up to these qualities is irrelevant. Even if she’s a shrieking shrew, it’s your calling to treat her as a holy vessel. May God have mercy on you if you have to live with a cold, contentious woman, but your grace, your potent leadership, and your patient endurance will combine to fashion the kind of man who, with God’s help, can soften her and melt her icy heart.

A knight places the well-being of his children before his own. He is there when they need him, and he never forsakes them, even to his own hurt.

Your children will look to you for protection, for guidance, and as a model for behavior. Don’t let them down. If you don’t spend time with them, teaching them in both word and deed, they will look to other people to find their way in life.

Ask yourself, Whom would I rather they follow: me, or their peers at school or church? Me, or the images of fathers they see on television? They will follow someone, and you need to be a man of valor, integrity, and consistency, a man they will gladly imitate.

A knight is generous. He gives to those who are in need, and he guards those who are weak and cannot defend themselves.

If innocent people are accosted, a knight will never stand idly by. He will spring into action, ready to raise shield or sword to protect someone who is unable to withstand the onslaught of evil. He is ferocious against the wicked, yet gentle with the innocent, especially with women and children.

A knight seeks justice, desiring the guilty to be punished and the blameless to be set free. He uses any prowess at his disposal to expose evil and exonerate and extol what is good, shining the light he bears in order to discern truth, never using it for self-aggrandizement. Although he is aware that all evil deserves punishment, he wields a hand of mercy, showing compassion for the penitent and offering forgiveness to the contrite.

A knight walks a steady balance of passion and compassion. He opens his hand to the begging waif and the weeping widow, not leaving their cups empty or their stomachs wanting. Yet he is ready to battle cold-hearted fiends who oppress the downtrodden, turning his giving hand into a fist of war. (See Revelation 19:11-16.)

Men, what is our response to needy people? Do we give food or money to a beggar in the street? Do we strive to place compassionate leaders in our governing bodies? Do we visit prisoners, encourage the elderly, and send money to missionaries? Do we go to mission fields ourselves?
There are many ways in which we can display our Christ like compassion, taking care to maintain soft hearts within our hardened bodies. The world is filled with frauds who beg for money, and thousands hold out empty hands for food with the same fingers that played video games on the spare television. Don’t let an imposter create calluses on your heart. Jesus faced His share of hypocrites, yet He continued to welcome those who came as children to His helping hands.

A knight strives to be the image of Christ, the forgiving warrior. Jesus stayed the executioners’ hands when they sought to stone an adulterous woman. (See John 8:2-11.) He fashioned a whip and cleared the way for praying Gentiles by overturning trading tables and chasing away moneychangers in the temple. And He will come again, mounted on a horse of war, bringing judgment to those who reject God’s holy Word.

Since these are the final three parts of the knight’s code, I give you these parting thoughts. This is indeed an Old Code, but it isn’t fragile. It has stood the test of time because it was erected on the solid foundation of the Word of God. Through the centuries, the Old Code has never been popular; its adherents may not even know of another man who holds to its standard. In the eyes of lesser men, the code’s most unfavorable quality is not a specific portion of its grand design or a particular rule of conduct; they fear the specter of a man who actually follows the code’s precepts.

Legions of men give lip service to the Old Code saying, “Oh, yes, we should all adhere to these principles.” But they refuse to believe in a man’s ability to obey it. While praising the Old Code’s virtues, they discredit the power to abide in them. As Scripture says, such men hold “to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power” (2 Timothy 3:5). They can’t seem to believe that any real men have the courage to trust in God’s regenerating work.

We, the modern knights of this age, must not listen to scoffers. We believe in the power of God to help us walk in the pure light of holiness. We will not deny the life-giving power of His Holy Spirit as we display the image of Christ on earth. With this profession of faith, we will add the final portion of the Old Code, a verbal confession, that God alone is the source of the power of godliness. While our humility displays an understanding of our lowly estate, our words must lift up the One who has granted us spiritual freedom. God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, is the emancipator. May that confession ever be on our lips.

The Code of a Knight - Part Two

In my previous post, I listed three attributes of a “knight in shining armor.” Those attributes focused on a knight’s discipline and preparation. This time we’ll look at three qualities of a knight’s personal character, the heart of the Old Code.

This is an excerpt from my book Spit and Polish for Husbands. If you're interested in purchasing this book from me, click here. If you want discounted bulk copies for a church group, maybe for Father's Day, or for a Bible study, please contact me - bryan (at) dragonsinourmidst (dot) com.

A knight keeps his word and performs what he has spoken. Whatever he commits to do, he will either do it or make arrangements to have it done, or he will die trying. Thus he is careful with his words, using wisdom and discretion with every utterance of his mouth.

A knight tells the truth in a world of lies, remains loyal in a land of betrayal, and works faithfully in a culture of excuses. Even his friends might think he is overzealous, and in this zeal he often stands alone. Yet his peculiar faithfulness makes him trustworthy, even in the eyes of pretenders. His loyalty is unquestioned, even among the unfaithful. If a lie of expediency whispers its desire to be told, a horde of lesser men will stampede to tell it. Not a knight of the Old Code. To speak a falsehood is to spew poison, and he will not allow a drop of venom to leave his tongue, even if offered the treasure of Solomon or threatened with his death.

Our culture celebrates the lie. It laughs at the deceptive antics of bumbling fools on television. It elects politicians who tell the most convincing fables. It winks at “white lies” that allow a man to skip an annoying meeting or avoid a tiresome caller by saying, “Oh, I can’t talk to him right now. Tell him I’m out to lunch.”

And with one shady statement, this man falls from being a knight to being a knave. He may think he’s running with the big dogs, but he’s really wallowing with the pigs.

Whether it’s an income-tax “miscalculation” or a “forgotten” appointment, the common man excuses himself time and time again. With each falsehood, his reputation slips into the shadows, where intentions lose their luster, excuses are peddled, and buyers are few.

Are we living in the shadows? What price do we place on our integrity? A few extra dollars in a tax refund? An escape from a pest? A way out of a jam? What could possibly be worth the stripping of our mantle of honor? And our shame is so much the worse if we make excuses, trying to explain why a code of honor doesn’t apply to us.

In contrast, a knight of the Old Code stands boldly in the sun. He carries no shame. He is unafraid of examination. The next time you look in the mirror, look yourself in the eye. Can you say without a twinge of conscience, “I am a man of honor”? If you can, great! Now, can you look your wife in the eye and say the same thing? Does she hold her hand over her mouth and start spewing laughter? Does she avoid your gaze and change the subject? Or does she embrace you and say, “I know. And I thank God for a man like you”?

Think about it. What kind of example does a liar set? If you allow yourself to tell lies, which lies will you allow your wife to tell you? How about your children? Will they give honest answers to a man who so casually splits his tongue?

Lying spreads like cancer and envelops an entire family. It spins a spider’s web, and it traps a liar in its sticky strands because each lie requires another to keep it from falling apart. A man may begin to believe his own lies, but it won’t take long for everyone else to forsake his word.

Whether it takes a hundred lies or a dozen for someone to lose faith with other people, it takes only one lie to sear his conscience and make him more able to tell the next. With just one lie, he violates the Old Code, and, should his wife discover his falsehood, his armor is stained in her eyes. Only the miracle of grace and forgiveness will ever remove that mark.

A knight keeps himself pure in thought and deed, rejecting association with influences that would cause other people to perceive stain in his character. In other words, he abstains from all appearance of evil.

Although there will always be someone willing to accuse us of wrongdoing, we knights must be careful never to give our enemies a real reason to call our character into question. This application is sometimes obvious: we don’t meet our friends at strip clubs, we stay away from bars, and we never wear T-shirts with questionable printed messages such as “So Many Girls, So Little Time.”

“But I have liberty in Christ,” a person may retort. “I’m free to do what I want as long as I stay away from real sin.” Yes, a strong Christian is free, but he must balance freedom with responsibility. We are not called to serve ourselves in our liberty, but to be beacons fueled by true purity, so that, as the Scripture says, “that you may prove yourselves to be blameless and innocent, children of God above reproach in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you appear as lights in the world” (Philippians 2:15).

We are to reflect to the world what we really are in our hearts, holy and pure. Our ability to remain unstained in this culture is the light that will draw other people to God. Why risk destroying our reputations by pursuing “freedoms” that are worthless in comparison to guiding someone toward the kingdom of God?

What about our wives? We vowed complete faithfulness to them. Do we display an aura of availability? Do we flirt? Do we spend one-on-one time with other women? Let us always realize that part of our duty as knights is to keep our armor spotless by abstaining from anything that would soil our reputation. The light we shine is easily dimmed in the eyes of others.

A knight is humble. He does not boast of his accomplishments, but he gladly exults in the virtuous deeds of his allies because other good knights will not boast of themselves.

If we successfully follow the Old Code, we’ll discover that we stand head and shoulders above most men. It’s not a sin to notice the reality of our upright character, but we should never let pride sneak into our brains. Without God we would be nothing, non-existent, without even an inkling of a thought. A man who ignores God, though he rule the world, is worthless and less than a blurry blip on creation’s eternal radar. Although we can develop massive muscles, brawny brains, and savvy spirituality, we’re still the creature, not the Creator. Walk humbly, men, knowing that we possess nothing that God hasn’t given us.

Remember, however, that with God-endowed power we’re conquerors for Christ. We can stamp a massive imprint on history. We’re rocks of strength, able to forge a radical difference in this world of marshmallow men.

Think about it. A knight in shining armor is not exactly normal, and I’m not talking about any earth-shattering acts he might achieve. When he simply takes out the garbage without being asked, a news crew (complete with a live-feed satellite van) could roar into his driveway to cover this “breaking story.” And when he changes a dirty diaper? Heaven help us! There’s sure to be live coverage, interviews with his elementary school teachers, and expert opinions from mental-health correspondents. No man in his right mind has ever attempted such a feat of nose-boggling dexterity! The world will lean closer to their television sets as a reporter asks, “How long has your wife been out of town?”

Seriously, every time we make a real sacrifice for others, we’ll shine like beacons in our spiritually dark world. How much more of an eternal impact will we make when we surrender every moment to God’s will? There may be no cameras, microphones, or blurbs on page fifteen of our local newspapers. Our sacrificial acts may pass unnoticed. Men who sacrifice usually bleed alone. But we seek not such rewards of this world: photo opportunities from media hounds, the massaging adoration of clinging fans, or even a pat on the back from sympathetic buddies. We seek only these words from the author and finisher of our faith, “Well done good and faithful servant.” And in these words alone we breathe soul-satisfying sighs. May our Lord always find us faithful.

Next time we’ll look at a knight’s duty toward others.

The Code of a Knight - Part One

I'm posting another excerpt from my book, Spit and Polish for Husbands. This code of a knight will be posted in multiple parts. If you're interested in purchasing this book from me, click here. If you want discounted bulk copies for a church group, maybe for Father's Day, or for a Bible study, please contact me - bryan (at) dragonsinourmidst (dot) com.

---------------
It’s tough being a good husband. Since our media insists that most men worship sports, relaxation, and a six-pack of beer, we guys don’t have many models of good behavior. To whom can we look in our quest to fulfill our marriage vows to love our wives and our biblical command to be like Christ for them?

There are many codes of conduct we follow in our culture, both written and unwritten. Some are so inviolable most of us would shudder even at the thought of breaking the code. Would we ridicule a crying child who has just lost his parents? Would we trip up a blind man who taps his cane on the sidewalk? Of course not.

Yet society embraces other behavior codes in principle while winking at those who violate them. There is little if any outrage expressed toward a motorist who breaks the speed limit, a taxpayer who inflates his deductions, or a store customer who notices the extra change he receives and pockets it for himself. Why? Because, “Everyone’s doing it.” Or, as some might say, “Nobody’s perfect.”

We live in a culture of excuses. “Pardon me for breaking my promise,” so many cry, “I’m only human.” And with this lame apology, many vows of fidelity are tossed away like yesterday’s newspaper, valuable and fresh one day, a birdcage lining the next. A man shatters a code of conduct without fear of retribution, because his fellows nod their understanding of his weaknesses.

Husbands, we need not conform to this weak, faithless confession. We can be so much more than the spineless men that many expect us to be. We believe that God gives us the power to honor the laws He lays down, to follow the path He calls us to tread. The code of conduct that God has established for us shines as a bright light in a world that condones darkness. God’s plan for men is established on the foundation of Christ our perfect model, built with the bricks of men who are unafraid to flex their God-given muscles, and held together by the mortar of masculine courage. With faith in God’s promises, we can follow that code. We can change the world.

I chose “knights in shining armor” as my illustration because of the magnificence of the legendary code of the knights, a system of character and conduct to which the warriors of old promised to adhere. The Old Code, as it is called in modern times, was based on the Bible’s description of a real man, the image of godly masculinity. It captures, in effect, the chivalry of days gone by.

Although popular media have attempted to canonize the Old Code in songs and poems, no ancient document, as far as I know, spells it out word for word. Therefore I will summarize it, having gleaned the code’s principles from several authoritative sources.
For this issue’s installment, I’ll focus on three aspects of a knight’s discipline and preparation.

A knight exercises his body in order to increase and maintain his strength. Without bodily discipline, he will not be able to defend those within his fold of protection.

Most men enjoy the thought of having muscular bodies, bulging biceps, rock hard abs, and pectorals that make their shirts bulge at chest level rather than over their belts. But for the majority, it’s just a dream. As the mind wanders into what it takes to get those muscles—gut-busting labor, hours of sweaty, lung-piercing agony, refusing a second slice of Boston cream pie—many men realize why they don’t already have that kind of body. It’s hard work! It hurts, especially missing out on extra pie!

As they say, “No pain, no gain.” The desires of the body are powerful, both in what it yearns for and what it cries out against. When the desires of the flesh rule the mind, the body relaxes, eats whatever it wants, and disdains exercise. It becomes flabby, and it drags the mind down with it, resulting in laziness.

We don’t need grotesquely overdeveloped Mr. Universe bodies. We need strength, tone, and physical vigor. Our minds are to gain control over our bodies, and the rigors of exercise help us to maintain that mastery. And, most important, the benefits of bodily strength spill over into spiritual virtue as we wake up with ease, face the labors of each day without dread, and give confidence to those whom we protect. Our mental faculties are more acute, and our discipline, by itself, gives us the confidence to rule over the desires of our bodies.

The bottom line (pun intended) is that our toned bodies will please our wives. No woman seeks to be married to the Pillsbury DoughboyTM. Although he’s a cute guy in his white chef’s hat, and he makes great chocolate-chip cookies, the greasy little gnome giggles when a woman pushes on his cholesterol-coated belly. When your wife pushes your waistline, you want her to say, “Wow! Now that’s a nice set of abs!” We can’t all be great cookie bakers, but I’m sure each of our wives will be glad to make the trade, getting an “Oh, boy!” instead of a doughboy.

I know some of you may have illnesses or handicaps, and you’re not able to get into great shape. That’s okay. Just commit to becoming as physically fit as possible. The goal isn’t measured by the size of your muscles; it’s accomplished in your mind’s control over your body. It’s the strength you exude simply because you have dominion over your desires. It’s the joy of victory in a world that accepts defeat.

Be strong for your wife; she’ll appreciate it. If you have children, they’ll love seeing a fit and trim dad. Your strength will give them confidence. Plus, the ability to have dominion over your physical body will allow you to triumph in your spiritual walk. Whether in food or drink, grief or anger, joy or exultation, you’ll be able to respond to your inner drives according to what is needful and proper.

A knight exercises his mind in order to keep his thoughts nimble, orderly, and disciplined against wandering. Many benefits of bodily self-control parallel those of mental discipline. A brain becomes flabby, in a sense, if it’s allowed to atrophy. How can we rightly divide the truth, defend the faith, and counter the wiles of the devil if our brains have turned to mush?

The mentally feeble Christian accepts what he’s taught without question. He decides to trust his pastor or a favorite television preacher, no matter how strange the teaching sounds. When it comes to brainstorming, he’s satisfied with a breezy drizzle instead of a holy hurricane. He is not like the Bereans, who were noble-minded, “for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so” (Acts 17:11).

We don’t need great intellects in order to prepare our brains for God’s service. Even if our IQs are lower than our body temperatures, we can still be ready to march as cerebral soldiers in the war against evil ideas and faulty theology. The first step is to read books written by great thinkers—interacting with their ideas, wrestling with their logical progressions, and questioning their conclusions.

A great book to launch such a mental quest is Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis. Although Lewis delves into spiritual subjects with intellectual rigor, he writes on a level that most people can understand. Another good idea is to take time to sample more than one side of an issue. For example, you could read Chosen by God by R. C. Sproul, and then pick up Elect in the Son by Robert Shank. For a greater challenge, work through some of John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion and then read a few essays by James Arminius or John Wesley.

In order to really get our brains into gear, we could participate in a discussion group with other men who wish to exercise their thinking skills. We should choose wisely. We need to be with humble men of controlled temperament who are willing to have their opinions challenged, and who are genuinely seeking biblical truth.

We can also discuss what we learn with our families. As we communicate wisdom, we’ll discover new insights or even holes in our understanding, giving us impetus to go back and study again. We must not let uncertainty discourage us. This is to be a lifelong pursuit. Just as our physical muscles will waste away without regular workouts, our brains will return to their former atrophied states if their only form of exercise comes from video games or insipid television programming. With our bodies, as they say, “You are what you eat.” God help us if the same is true for a media-manipulated brain.

A knight exercises his inner man in order to know and relate to God, the creator of man’s spirit, the aspect of man’s being that transcends the physical. Without eternal perspective, a knight’s physical and mental pursuits will count for nothing. Whether he slays dragons, rescues fair maidens, or even conquers kingdoms, if he dies and rots in the grave he has accomplished nothing of lasting value. Deep down, each knight knows there is something beyond this earth.

A knight’s quest for purpose begins in his heart. Being a man of God is a long, hard ride. He needs a reason to endure the saddle sores of daily self-sacrifice and to resist the bitter winds of tribulation. He first looks to his lady, the woman for whom he draws his sword. Yes, she is worth fighting for, even to the death, but like the flowers of the field she will also pass away. Only the Word of God lasts forever, and on the rock of this confession a knight can endure any hardships and withstand any storms.

To build on that foundation, a knight must seek wisdom—the basic source of spiritual nutrition that feeds his soul. Where will he find it? You guessed it, in the Bible. There’s no excuse for lacking in biblical knowledge. The greatest source of dynamic spiritual energy in the universe lies between two easily parted covers of leather or paper. It is gift-wrapped wisdom. It is spiritual adrenaline disguised as ink on paper. It is a smorgasbord for our souls. It is ready to eat, tastier than a military MRE, infinitely more nutritious, and, best of all, there are no dishes to clean up.
So, let’s study it! If we need help, there are mountains of good study guides and more than a handful of people at churches who will gladly help us to understand the basics of Bible study.

Once we’re reasonably equipped in these rudiments, however, we should learn to feed ourselves. A man alone with God and His Word is the first step in God’s plan for each person who calls upon His name. God seeks worshipers who love Him with all their hearts. And in our quiet places, in solitary communion with our Lord, we will digest the spiritual food and drink that will empower us for His service.

Having firmly embraced God’s Word, a knight gains confidence in God’s guiding hand. He finds reason to be courageous. He knows that God will always keep His Word, never leaving him or forsaking him. God is his security, his everlasting source of comfort. Although his wife offers many assurances, a knight doesn’t have to rely on any earthly source of security.

In the next post, I’ll continue with the code of a knight and look at three aspects of a knight’s personal character.

Skin Cancer

With the popularity of the movie Fireproof and its associated books, and the conversation in Christian circles regarding pornography, I am posting an excerpt from my book Spit and Polish for Husbands modified slightly for this post. This post is rated PG-13, so please keep that in mind.
------
There is an adulterous woman who lurks in the shadows, quiet and unseen, without consistent shape or physical substance, yet is more alluring than the street harlot and just as destructive as the motel tryst. She seeks your company, often posing as a damsel in distress. Her poses beg for your attention; they seek to be rescued from loneliness. Although she wears no clothes, she bears a sword, ready to cut your heart in two, setting body in conflict with spirit. From the slick pages of a magazine or the colorful images of a computer screen, she awaits your peering eyes, ready to strike with her naked dagger. She is the harlot of pornography.

Why do the hearts of so many married men become divided? Although they have wives whom God designed to meet their physical needs, why are they tempted to seek the pleasures of another? For many men, physical adultery is a well-recognized taboo. Physically violating the wedding vows, even in our permissive society, is still considered by most Christians to be a sign of unfaithfulness to God, an act that proves an unsaved spiritual state. (See 1 Corinthians 6:9.) A divided heart that leads to spiritual adultery, however, has not gained such public condemnation.

Millions of men dive into the cesspool of pornography, purposefully filling their eyes with forbidden fruit. Although they may never touch another woman’s body, their minds entertain the thoughts, their lusts traveling from woman to woman, gaining mental and even physical pleasure from the images these willing females produce.

What is the allure of these undressed and apparently sexually insatiable woman? With pursed, come-hither lips, she curls her inviting finger, exposing and caressing her smooth, airbrushed flesh. She is the image of desire, a lonely woman begging for a man’s fulfilling touch, and not just any man. She wants you. She’s begging for you to take her and have your way with her. She’s there for your pleasure. “Come and take me,” she calls. “I need you!”

And it’s all a lie.

The woman is a whore. She poses for money, nothing more, nothing less. She doesn’t care about any man who mentally rapes her with his eyes and mind. In fact, if you venture into her lair, she will likely disdain or even hate you, perhaps laughing at your weakness as she overpowers you so easily with a mere flash of flesh. How many men have allowed her to poison their minds, committing spiritual adultery with this harlot of hate who reveals her body while stealing a man’s soul?

For the lips of an adulteress drip honey,
And smoother than oil is her speech;
But in the end she is bitter as wormwood,
Sharp as a two-edged sword.
Her feet go down to death,
Her steps lay hold of Sheol.
She does not ponder the path of life;
Her ways are unstable, she does not know it (Proverbs 5:3-6).

Pornography is a simple formula, although the user allows himself to be unaware of its devices. It invites wandering eyes to drink from its lovely pool, promising a quenched thirst. Alas! The thirst is far from quenched! The harlot’s drink is a pill of salt; it makes a man beg for deeper draughts, more skin, younger girls, views of lesbian encounters, until images alone are unable to satisfy. Each sip whets the addiction as a man is entrapped by the harlot’s poison, and his mind is imprisoned in pornography’s deadly snare. Solomon wrote, “For on account of a harlot one is reduced to a loaf of bread, and an adulteress hunts for the precious life” (Proverbs 6:26).

Jesus said, “Everyone who looks on a woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). Can a man claim that he looks at images of nude women without lusting, that his reasons for seeking the harlot’s exposed skin are holy? Hardly! This lust is adultery, pure and simple, and a man who pursues this course has broken his vows. And with whom has he mated? He has pursued a mere phantom. He has thrown away his virtue for colored dots on a printed page. He has cast away his wife in pursuit of pixels on a computer screen.

The Internet has certainly helped pornography purveyors capture a whole host of men. An innocent engine search may yield a dozen lurid descriptions, inviting a simple click to reach images of women who beg for your attention. No magazines to hide. No trips to the video store. No evidence of evil. One mouse click and a dozen smiling beauties await your caressing eyes. Simple curiosity leads many into the snare, trapping the minds of those who don’t dash for the exit in disgust. First a sip, then a draught, and the harlot has captured another lover.
But where is thy wife, O man? For whom hast thou cast her aside?

Drink water from your own cistern,
And fresh water from your own well.
Should your springs be dispersed abroad,
Streams of water in the streets?
Let them be yours alone,
And not for strangers with you.
Let your fountain be blessed,
And rejoice in the wife of your youth.
As a loving hind and a graceful doe,
Let her breasts satisfy you at all times;
Be exhilarated always with her love.
For why should you, my son, be exhilarated with an adulteress,
And embrace the bosom of a foreigner? (Proverbs 5:15-20).

Why do so many men seek strange flesh? The mystery of the unknown? The excitement of the forbidden? The desire to conquer? Any of these excuses is surely inadequate. There is simply no good reason, as Proverbs 6:32-33 reveals:

The one who commits adultery with a woman is lacking sense;
He who would destroy himself does it.
Wounds and disgrace he will find,
And his reproach will not be blotted out.

Let’s get real, guys. What’s this pornography stuff all about, anyway? Freak shows aside, more than 99 percent of the women in these pictures look pretty much alike, with body parts in the same places. Breasts are in front, buttocks are in back, there are two arms and two legs, and an epidermis holding it all together. There aren’t many surprise arrangements. There goes the mystery excuse. And we won’t conquer these women; they’re untouchable. In fact, if we lust after them, they’ve conquered us. We’ve fallen into their trap.

That leaves us with the excitement-of-the-forbidden excuse, the hormonal rush that accompanies the peek through the keyhole, the stolen view of what lies beneath the clothing, the places no one is allowed to see. “Come take a look, Mister, and I’ll show you something you’ll like … just for you.”

Get over it. These women aren’t giving you a private peak; they’re strutting their stuff for anyone with eyes. Forbidden? Yes. For your eyes only? Forget about it. These harlots put their bodies on show, inviting deeper draughts for paying customers. All they really want is your money. You can waste your endorphins on a lie, see hate masquerading as love, and the hormonal rush prompts the desire for more as each drink creates new thirst.

If you’re addicted to pornography, you need to meditate on reality—the truth of the hateful harlot. She’s a stalker, a seductress, a destroyer. She will poison your soul. She has nothing to offer that you haven’t seen before; even her body is just a fleeting image. She’s certainly not a damsel in distress, and it’s not your duty to rescue her, even in your mind.

Tell me, would you look at pornographic images with your wife? Would you sit down and say, “Honey, come take a look at this gal! Isn’t she hot?” May it never be! Such an act would be shameful. Yet this is a good test and a faithful standard to use in avoiding what is shameful. If you’re ever contemplating an act, ask yourself if you would do it in your wife’s presence. If the answer is no, don’t do it.

Say this along with me: “I will never do anything in private for which I would be ashamed in public.” Repeat this promise, and embed it in your mind.

Remember, too, that you’re never really in private. God always looks over your shoulder. Would you say to Him, “Get a load of this one, Lord! She’s a looker!” God forbid! Yet millions of men act as though God can’t see them. But He not only sees everything in your view, He reads everything in your mind. He is watching. Do we believe it? Do we care? Will we invite Him to inspect everything we view? Would we mind showing to Jesus Christ everything we bring up on our computer screens, every image our eyes rest upon in magazines, every television channel that makes us pause as we look for a decent program?

Isn’t this the test of faith? Isn’t how we act in private a true reflection of what we believe about God, that He is really who He says He is, the ever-present, omniscient Lord?

How do I know about pornography and its power? I once dove into that cesspool. Years before I became a Christian, I sought the excitement of the forbidden, the hormonal rush that made my heart beat faster and my teenaged hands shake with anticipation. Thanks be to God, my swim in the sewer was brief. Although I did not yet know Him, I believe God helped me discern the folly of allowing these images to control my mind.

Until I became a Christian, some of those images haunted my mind, stamped into my memory like a searing brand. Such is the power of a pornographic image. The chemical high makes it adhere to the mind. The memories fly like bats unbidden and lurk during both waking and sleeping moments.

Yet there is a cure. As we set our minds on the things above, where Christ is, memories of evil begin to vanish. As Paul taught:

If then you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God (Colossians 3:1-3).

Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, let your mind dwell on these things. The things you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, practice these things; and the God of peace shall be with you (Philippians 4:8-9).

Even if you have imbibed the poison of pornography for years, God can give you peace. Give your life to Christ, and He will shatter the unfruitful images as your mind learns to dwell on what is pure and honorable. Leave your adulterous ways behind, and God will help you walk in holiness, giving you the ability never to stray again in your mind.

Your wife is your one and only damsel. Never seek another. Let her breasts satisfy you at all times, and be exhilarated always with her love.

Excuses, excuses - Romans Chapter 7

When people defend the concept of sin in a Christian, the reasons they give for continued sin after salvation are often lame excuses. Strangely enough, words defending sin come from the lips of those who claim to love God. They say they try to obey, yet they continue to rebel against Him in some manner. This, of course, is unreasonable.

Does a reasonable person rebel against a beloved master? Does a servant of the Almighty lack the power to obey? Of course not. So the words a sinner uses to excuse his rebellious behavior are really a weak cover up. They either misrepresent God and His word or shift blame in a disingenuous manner.

One of the most common excuses for sin comes from Romans chapter seven. Many interpret Paul’s story of struggle with sin as one that occurred while he was a Christian, and, or so the excuse claims, if Paul struggled with sin, somehow that means that all Christians struggle, thereby creating an excuse that legitimizes sinful behavior in the individual.

There are many problems with both the interpretation of the passage and the application. It seems strange to me that anyone would point to another person’s sin and use it as an excuse for his own. For example, if a pastor of a church molests a child, would a layman in the church dare do the same and then claim the pastor’s example as an excuse? Would he dare say, “The pastor molested a child. So it stands to reason that I would, too”?

I assume everyone would agree that such an appeal is absurd. It would be a moral outrage. Yet, this is what people are doing when they compare themselves to Paul and his struggle. “Paul struggled with sin, so it stands to reason that I would, too.” This is exactly the same. There is no difference. It doesn’t matter if the sin is molestation, lying, lust, theft, or an unkind word. In every case, the idea of pointing out another person’s sin in order to exonerate oneself is a moral outrage.

But it’s even worse than that. In Paul’s case, he wasn’t even describing his life as a regenerate man. He was describing his life under the law, before Jesus stopped him in his murderous march toward Damascus, so an appeal to this passage as an excuse for sin is even more unreasonable.
So that readers won’t have to look up the passage, I will be quoting sections here.

Romans 7:1-13
1Or do you not know, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives? 2For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband. 3So then if, while her husband is living, she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress, though she is joined to another man. 4Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, that we might bear fruit for God. 5For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. 6But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter. 7What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "You shall not covet." 8But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. 9And I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive, and I died; 10and this commandment, which was to result in life proved to result in death for me; 11for sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, deceived me, and through it killed me. 12So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. 13Therefore did that which is good become a cause of death for me? May it never be! Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by effecting my death through that which is good, that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful.

Here is an overview of the chapter and its context: The first verse is meant to be a further explanation of truths declared in the previous chapter. Paul starts an illustration section in verse 1 of chapter 7 when he says, “Or do you not know brethren.” He then provides an illustration of bondage to law in verses 2 and 3. Following that, he brings the examples down to earth by relating the doctrine to the readers in verses 4 through 6. Paul goes on to paint a picture of bondage under the law from verses 7 through 25 and then describes what freedom from the law means in chapter 8, verses 1 through 11.

Now for the details. The first six verses of chapter 7 explain how a person escapes from the bondage of law; he must die to it. An example is given in verses 2-3, and Paul shows how the concept works for Christians in verses 4-6. Note the past tense in verse 5, "For while we were in the flesh.” This will become important later.

Paul has taken great pains to this point to make these statements clear:

1. Christians have died with Christ. (6:3)

2. By doing this they have died to the Law. (7:6)

3. By this they have also been freed from sin. (6:18, 22)

4. They have also become slaves of God and of obedience to God. (6:10-11, 13, 16, 22)

Verse 7 of chapter 7 starts an interesting view into Paul's life. He apparently is not satisfied with a pure, step by step theological analysis, but also wants to put meat on the discussion by placing his past life in the open as an example.

There are two deaths to describe in his illustration. First is the spiritual death to God that comes from sinning, illustrating Romans 6:23, "for the wages of sin is death." The second is the death to the law and the coincident rebirth to God, thereby demonstrating Romans 7:6, “But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound.” Both kinds of death are included to make the example complete.

Verses 7-13 of chapter 7 clearly speak about a past experience. The past tenses throughout show this, and the wording reveals that the first death, the death to God, occurred before Paul became a Christian. Verse 9 indicates that this death occurred when “the commandment came,” which is probably a reference to Paul's understanding of God's expectations of him, whether through the Old Testament written law or through revelations of conscience.

Paul, being a zealous Pharisee, certainly knew God’s law long before his conversion, so this coming of the commandment must also have occurred before his conversion. It will be important to remember that this passage (7:7-13) is about a past experience as I examine the next passage.

Romans 7:14-25
14For we know that the Law is spiritual; but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. 15For that which I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. 16But if I do the very thing I do not wish to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that it is good. 17So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which indwells me. 18For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the wishing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. 19For the good that I wish, I do not do; but I practice the very evil that I do not wish. 20But if I am doing the very thing I do not wish, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 21I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wishes to do good. 22For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, 23but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind, and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. 24Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? 25Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

In this section Paul switches from past to present tense in his illustration, without otherwise changing the time of the events. Verse 14 is certainly connected with the previous passage, because the word "for" is used as an explanatory introduction. There is also no change in the pronoun, "I." The person described in verses 7-13 is certainly a man under the law, so since the pronoun does not change, we should assume that this is the same man in verse 14, unless a change is given explicitly. But is this the same man under the same condition as in the preceding verses (7:7-13), enslaved to the law and to sin? Apparently so, because the verse says that he is both of flesh and sold under sin.

Remember that Paul has taken great pains to say that a Christian is freed from sin (6:18, 22), and now he says that he is sold into bondage to sin, or, more literally, sold under sin. It is also clear in verse 9 of chapter 8 that Christians are not in the flesh, “However you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.” Galatians 5:24 says, “Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.”

Christians are not "in the flesh" and have "crucified the flesh," but in Romans 7 Paul is saying that he is "of flesh.” This is certainly not a description of one who is a Christian. These two ideas, being of flesh and in slavery to sin, contradict the clear lessons that Paul has taught in this section of Scripture. Remember verse 5 of chapter 7 where Paul says "while we were in the flesh"? The illustration at hand describes this “in the flesh” time, but the obvious implication is that Christians are not in the flesh.

If Paul is not describing his present experience, then why does he use the present tense? With Greek, a tense does not necessarily indicate the time of an action; it is used to indicate the type of action that is being described. The time of an action may also be indicated (depending on the mood of the verb) but even then only the context will reveal it. When this passage is considered with its context, making the assumption that this is the present condition of Paul is at best, very confusing and at worst, impossible.

Using the present tense in an illustrative way (the "historical" present), even when reflecting on a past event or series of events, is not unusual. Paul uses much of chapter 7 to illustrate the truths explained in the previous chapters, especially the truths in chapter 6 in which the death of the old self is taught. To illustrate the death of this self Paul explains, starting in verse 1 of chapter 7, how bondage to the law requires death for release. His explanation includes an illustration in verses 2 and 3. Notice that the illustration is about a person's relationship to the Law and that it uses present tense verbs. It is followed in verse 4 by a "therefore" statement relating the readers to that illustration, that they have died to the Law in order to be joined to Christ. Paul follows with another teaching section from verse 7 to verse 13 explaining how people become bound by the Law and sin in the first place.

In order to better explain this teaching section, Paul again gives an illustration, and again it is about a person's relationship to the Law using the present tense. Paul's illustration technique is consistent, and he follows it up again with another "therefore" statement in chapter 8 verse 1 comparing the readers' position to that of the illustrated individual.

I’ll try to break this down in an orderly way:

We have two teaching sections that begin with “What shall we say then?”
Romans 6:1-23 is one of those teaching sections: “What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace might increase? May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?”
Christians are dead to sin, so they no longer sin, and the remainder of the chapter talks about that in detail. Then, Paul provides a present tense illustration in chapter 7:1-3 where he explains how death to the law brings about freedom from the law. Then, in chapter 7:4-6, Paul makes a comparison to his readers, “Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ.”

In a similar manner, Paul starts another teaching sections in 7:7-13, using identical beginning words, “What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law.” The teaching section goes through verse 13. Then, as he did in verses 1-3, he gives a present tense illustration in verses 14-25, followed by a comparison to his readers that begins with a “therefore.”

“There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death."

It should be clear that Paul is being consistent in his explanatory and illustrative way of teaching. He uses the present tense in both illustrations in order to describe truth about the law and its bondage. He is not making statements about his current life.

The present tense argument is truly weak. It cannot overpower the obvious contradictions between the condition of the man in the chapter 7 segment and the explicit descriptions of a Christian in the rest of the book, especially when a clear reason is given for the use of the present tense to make an illustration.

After telling about how he died to God spiritually, Paul uses the present tense to describe his ongoing sinful condition which occurred in the past, and then, in verses 24-25, he magnifies the awesomeness of the salvation that is in Christ. Finally, in Romans 8:1, Paul makes it clear that he is reverting back to the real present (not historical present) rather than the Greek "present" of the illustration when he writes; "There is therefore now no condemnation ... ". The "now" indicates that there is no condemnation for those who are free from the condition that he has just described. The "now" is in opposition to the time being illustrated immediately before the verse. If the chapter seven passage was really the present time and his present condition, then the “now” wouldn’t make any sense.

The present tense argument fails to prove that this is Paul’s condition as a believer. It is not possible for a person to be both enslaved to sin and not enslaved to sin at the same time. The person in the passage is enslaved to sin, and a Christian is not enslaved to sin. It is not possible for a person to be both in or of the flesh and not in or of the flesh. The person in the passage is of flesh, and a Christian is not in the flesh and has crucified the flesh.

Perhaps the most obvious contradiction between the person of this passage and the condition of a Christian occurs between 7:23 and 8:2. In 7:23, Paul is made “a prisoner of the law of sin,” and in 8:2, Paul says that those who are in Christ Jesus have been set "free from the law of sin and of death." Is a Christian a prisoner of the law of sin? The second verse says that he is not. Paul says that he is such a prisoner in chapter 7. A Christian cannot be both a prisoner of sin and not a prisoner at the same time, so Paul is not referring to a believer in the chapter 7 passage.

Again, the present tense argument is not strong enough to overpower the obvious contradictions between the condition of the man in chapter 7 and the explicit descriptions of a Christian in the rest of the section.

Therefore, this section of Romans chapter seven describes a man under the Law, before he becomes a Christian. Any professing Christian who uses this to excuse his own sin or somehow find a biblical description of sin in a Christian does so erroneously. The man with whom he is comparing himself is not a Christian. So those who see such parallels in their own lives are really finding evidence that they, themselves, are also unbelievers who need to cry out with Paul in his unregenerate state, “Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?” and then find the power of God to be set free from sin.

This explanation of Romans 7 is sufficient to prove that Paul is not writing about a Christian’s struggle with sin. It is about the struggle an unregenerate man who is under the law. It’s true that many unregenerate men have no such struggle. They don’t agree with the law that it is good. Yet, some unregenerate men do agree with the law, and Paul was one of them. This kind of unregenerate man is the topic of the passage.

My main point is that every appeal to Scripture that tries to “explain” sin in an individual professing Christian is nothing but an excuse. A person who loves Jesus will never sin. Christians have the desire and the power to obey, and that combination can never fail to bring about the desired results—obedience to God every minute of every day.

More on the fallacy of the appeal to the "present tense" argument:

Those who insist that the use of the present tense must mean Paul is relating his present experience don't seem to realize that their assumption is self defeating.

For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. (Romans 7:15)

If this is Paul's present experience, then he does not understand what he is doing at the present time. What is he doing? Writing this verse. He does not even understand what he is writing, so he would be doing something incoherent--writing something that doesn't make any sense. Also, writing this verse isn't what he would like to do. In fact, he hates writing it. This is an absurdity.

But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. (Romans 7:16-17)

If this is Paul's present experience, then his indwelling sin writing this Scripture passage.

So Paul not only doesn't understand what he is writing, his indwelling sin is actually writing it. If this is true, then how could we trust this passage? It is incoherent and is written by sin.

But those who claim this is Paul's present experience would also claim that they don't think the present tense refers to what Paul is doing at the exact moment of writing the passage. Paul is talking about recent events in his life.

If this is true, then Paul is talking about past events. Recent past is still past. Therefore, Paul is using historical present, not actual present.

Since an authoritative and coherent teaching must be historical present, then an appeal to the present tense to prove that this is Paul's present experience is destroyed.