The Way Which Seems Right I

“There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”
‭‭Proverbs‬ ‭14:12‬ ‭KJV‬‬

The way which seems right to a man; what is that? Well, let's analyze that statement. Most people believe that this means any old way of the world that seems right to a person, such as, drinking, clubbing, fornicating, and any other behavior or action that is prohibited by evangelical dogma. I don't believe that is so. 

What seems right to most people is some kind of religious observance, or something that is agreed as moral and right by society. The way that seems right to most people is the way that will make the person seem good and acceptable. The way that seems right to an individual is the way in which the knowledge of good and evil (the wisdom of the world) judges good actions from evil actions and right actions from wrong actions. Yet, Proverbs states plainly in two different passages the same fact. The end of the way that seems right, always ends in death. 

The reason for this in my view is that the act of acquiring the knowledge of good and evil resulted in death. It only makes sense that exercising the knowledge of good and evil would bring the same result. To explain it further, Paul called the Law the ministry of death in 2Cor 3:7. He explained that the letter kills but that the Spirit gives life. The reason is that with the knowledge of good and evil, the Law will merely always show us that we fall short. It will kill our spiritual hope in our ability to be righteous before God. One cannot use the knowledge of good and evil to know that they are right with God. They can only know that by faith.

It is here that it must be seen that the way that seems right to a man is only possible as the result of the knowledge of good and evil. Without the knowledge of good and evil, one could not possibly know the way that seems right. Right or wrong would not exist to the person who does not have the knowledge of good and evil at his or her disposal. Therefore, merely exercising our inherited condition from the garden fall results in death.

This is why the legal constitutional use of scripture as it was designated under the Old Covenant is the ministry of death. Jesus overcame death and proved that God will stop at nothing to have a relationship with humanity. His resurrection shows that God will always cause triumph for humans. So then, when one looks at it correctly, the way that Jesus came to show us, when one by faith accepts the act of redemption, the way that seems right to humanity is overthrown. It does not seem right to a woman or a man that God would simply declare us righteous, based upon the faith and actions of another, but that is exactly what He has done through Jesus Christ.


This should not surprise us at all because God clearly declared mankind righteous before the fall. In Genesis 1:31 it is stated. This information of God's plan and actions predates the garden experience. It is only with this understanding that the chronology of Genesis truly makes sense. It is written that;
Gen 1:31 " God saw all that He had made, and it was very good. Evening came and then morning: the sixth day." Notice, God's creation including male and female was not just good, before he included mankind he said that his creation was good, but after the creation of humanity, he said it was VERY GOOD!

Stay tuned for part two coming in a few days, but let me give you a preview. In view of this, why are so many striving so hard to please him with works, meetings, etc?

Reformation, Transition, Transformation

The single most profound effect the church has experienced over the last five hundred years is the Reformation. After all, all the denominations of the protestant world are the result of the Reformation. It is interesting that during that time, that is the beginning of, and formation of the reformation was a time of upheaval. Families and friends were divided over what they believed to be true. People were labeled heretics, and sometimes killed. The Reformation was not a smooth transition. No, the people involved in it paid a real price for change.

I believe that we are in the beginning of another change in Christianity. This change will be even more profound than the last one. It is definitely a transition period, and that is obvious wherever one looks these days within the ranks of Christianity. For some reason, people do not readily welcome change. It is disquieting to say the least. Institutions provide a stability of sorts, and they do not relinquish power and control without a fight. The fact remains that Christianity, the church is in transition, and the very heart and soul of the kingdom is at stake. Transition is an action and for every action there is a counter reaction. Evangelical Christianity has a large reactionary element these days and for a time, it will grow even more intense.

This is obvious as you look at the various battle grounds with lines drawn in the proverbial sand. Marriage, gender, social justice are the areas where the battle rages. These are the areas of action and reaction. However, the real change is happening at a more basic theological place. This is the only area where the change that comes from transition will find its ultimate fulfillment in transformation. What must and will take place is a change in how one views the scripture and the gospel. The root of the current transition is doctrinal. So many want to avoid this but, alas it cannot be done.

As a blogger, I have a modest but larger than average amount of Facebook friends. I am asked to add a few weekly. What I see as I look at my news-feed is a fundamental divide that seems to be widening and growing more and more toxic. Of my Facebook friends, I dare say that 80 to 90% are there because of Christianity and my blogging about it. Because I have a definite belief in Jesus as Savior and Lord, I realize that my writing, at times, attracts both sides of this divide. Yes, I have the outspoken action oriented people, and I also have the outspoken reactionary  individuals. I am confident that many, probably most of both sides, are very sincere and have sincere faith in Jesus Christ. Yet, they are in every way polar opposites, and if I were to get them together in a room, no doubt a fight would break out that would not bring surprise if it turned violent. 

So what is the key for this period of transition? Is it still more reformation or is it something quite new, is it transformation? I think it may be beneficial to define the three terms in the title, Reformation, Transition, and Transformation. They are defined as follows:

Reformation; the action or process of reforming an institution or practice.

Transition; the process or a period of changing from one state or condition to another.

Transformation; a thorough or dramatic change in form or appearance; a metamorphosis; the induced or spontaneous change of one element into another by a nuclear process.

Reformation does not work because it does not change the underlying structure. It merely reforms it. The change that we face, and the necessary characteristics of that change is transformation. It has to change at the most elemental level. It is nuclear. The main premise of this blog is that Christian doctrine as we know it today is fundamentally, elementally flawed. It is flawed in the following ways:

1. The view of scripture is flawed. It is viewed as a legal constitutional document when it should be viewed as the story of redemption.
2. The doctrine of Christ is flawed as it does not see Christ as the all in all.
3. The doctrine of atonement is flawed as it is viewed in a penal substitution way and not as Christ being victorious.
4. The doctrine of last things is flawed as it does not see that all things have already been made new and that the new heaven and earth, the New Jerusalem, is a current reality to be apprehended by faith.
5. And most of all, the doctrine of the actual transformation is flawed because it does not acknowledge that grace and justification are the sole ingredients to the ultimate change. 

If one were to take the time to read in depth the articles on this blog it would be easy to find out that the above points are correct and that Christian doctrine is so flawed that nothing outside of transformation will correct it. I challenge you to thoughtfully read this blog from beginning to end and allow the scripture itself to speak to this. There is more than enough scripture cited in this blog to make up for the lack of it in this post.

As for me, I will settle for nothing short of total transformation!
 
 

God became the *ALL IN ALL* through Jesus Christ, Do we believe it?

Let's take a look at Paul's prayer for all disciples and see what we find out about Jesus actually being "God all in all (1Cor 15:28.) You find the words of this prayer in Ephesians chapter one.

"Eph 1:17-23 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: (18) The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, (19) And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, (20) Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, (21) Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: (22) And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, (23) Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all."
 

We know that in the risen Jesus the fullness of the godhead dwells in bodily form Col 2:9. Why is it that so many churches are putting the emphasis on Yahweh and not Jesus? If you listen to most sermons, most Sundays, you will find that God generically is worshipped and proclaimed, and that Jesus is relegated to a subservient place. He may get two or three minutes at the end of the sermon in the altar call but for the most part that is it.

In 70AD, at the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem, the fact is, that Jesus enemies were put under his feet. God had manifested who his sons and daughters really were and they were all, both Jew and Gentile that believed in Jesus. The kingdom was turned over to God except that the fullness of the godhead dwells in Jesus. Jesus is God. In Revelation 19 we are told that Jesus is King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

Therefore, our preaching should solely be about Jesus, and our worship should go to Jesus solely. This is the gospel message. God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, and when it was reconciled, God chose for the fullness of the Godhead to dwell bodily in Jesus Christ.


Look at the Prophet Isaiah's words: (Isa 9:6-7 NLT) " For a Child is born to us, a Son is given to us. The government will rest on His shoulders. And He will be called: Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. (7) His government and its peace will never end. He will rule with fairness and justice from the throne of His ancestor David for all eternity. The passionate commitment of the LORD of Heaven's Armies will make this happen!" It is as plain as day, I used the NLT to make certain that we did not misunderstand the message... The Son that was given, the child that was born is EVERLASTING FATHER. Let's get our priorities straight and begin to worship Jesus with the worship he is due!

Does the author of the book of Hebrews, equate sin and unbelief and are they synonymous?

As we have shown before in many articles on this blog. Jesus and his first century followers redefined the phrase word of God, and used a solely redemptive hermeneutic that saw Jesus as the fulfillment, and purpose of all the scripture. This makes progressive revelation very important. Progressive revelation means that the Spirit gave more and more specific details about prophecy as prophetic events unfolded and that the revelation that came later must temper our view of previous revelation. Along with this, it likewise makes sense that the Spirit would speak with in the cultural development of people. This makes looking at what the New Testament writers wrote very important in determining what the exact meaning of passages, phrases and words was. One cannot take the previous revelation at face value.

It is obvious when one reads Hebrews 3 & 4 that the writer equates sin and unbelief. In fact, I think that it is safe to say that when one looks at the term sin, missing the mark, that the first definition one should use is unbelief. The original sin in Genesis was a sin of unbelief. Adam and Eve believed Satan who had contradicted God instead of believing God, so the sin, that entered into the world (Romans 5:12) was unbelief. So let's look at a different and perhaps more correct way to write Romans 5:12...

"Rom 5:12-14 Therefore, just as unbelief entered the world through one man, and death through unbelief, in this way death spread to all men, because all did not believe. (13) In fact, unbelief was in the world before the law, but unbelief is not charged to a person's account when there is no law. (14) Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who did not disbelieve in the likeness of Adam's transgression. He is a prototype of the Coming One."

This is precisely why Romans 6:17 mentions obeying from the heart. Obeying from the heart is believing the gospel message plain and simply, and it is what puts one in right standing with God. The actions that current evangelical dogma calls sin is merely a symptom of unbelief. Here is where an entire fellowship, believing the gospel, and that grace is the driving force will reinforce an atmosphere of rest that will promote love, and supernaturally transform individuals. Getting this concept right... that in the New Covenant sin and unbelief are synonymous... is very important in setting that proper atmosphere.

So let's get back to Hebrews and the use of sin, disobedience, and unbelief. When you read Hebrews 3:17 - 19 it becomes glaringly obvious that the writer interchanges sin, unbelief and disobedience. This is a concept that one needs to bring back to the entire scripture. The proof in the pudding so to speak is Hebrews 10:26-27....

Heb 10:26-27 For if we deliberately (disbelieve, sin, disobey) after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, (27) but a terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire about to consume the adversaries.

The above passage receives the clarity that the writer of Hebrews intended. There has been so much made of this verse, but the reality is simple. If we willfully disbelieve after hearing the truth. There is not other sacrifice for sin.  The preponderance of the evidence mounts for a drastic paradigm shift from evangelical dogma.

 

 

Do you have a New Covenant paradigm or and Old Covenant paradigm? How to recognize which

Let me make this clear. If you are a Gentile believer, then the only possible covenant for you to be under is the New Covenant. Yet, this blog has been devoted to recognizing and correcting error in the doctrine of the evangelical church. Let me broaden that to the church in general. While I am writing with the evangelical Christian in mind, what I write is true about the entire Christian Church. Let's revisit this premise one more time to be sure there is clarity. There is a big discrepancy between the doctrine of the church fathers and the doctrine of the first century apostolic writers who wrote the New Testament. The first century apostolic writers wrote that the word of God was the gospel, and that scripture had a solely redemptive purpose. How can I make that assertion you ask? That is easy, Jesus stated it in John 5:39-40 and again in Luke 24:27; 43-45.

However, if you listen to most Sunday morning sermons across the world, you will find that you are taught that the entire scripture is the word of God, and that the focal purpose of scripture is to modify behavior and lifestyle. Most treat salvation as a one time experience from hearing the gospel message, and then go on to teach an Old Covenant approach to the Law. I have many times referred to this as "Nike Slogan" Christians whose motto is "just do it!"

So what is a New Covenant paradigm anyway? That is simple. It is a paradigm that puts Jesus Christ and redemption at the forefront of everything. That is, every sermon, every song, every prayer, every praise and all worship. It is a paradigm that acknowledges and understand the pre-eminence of Romans 5:1. It is a paradigm that realizes that peace with God is the most important driving force in the transformation process. It is a paradigm that encourages rest in the finished work of the cross and total efficacy of the blood of Jesus in reconciliation.

The New Covenant paradigm acknowledges that God emptied his divinity to become humanity like us, and then forsook all ego in the humiliating death of the cross. It is the forsaking of the ego, with faith in the eternal that made all the difference in the world and is the reason that all of our devotion, worship, love should be focused on Jesus Christ and Him alone.

And still, every Sunday, the Old Covenant paradigm drones on and on in sermon upon sermon that seldom acknowledges the supremacy of Christ. The Old Covenant paradigm, ignores in practice, the Christ centered focus that heals the wounded soul. And the accuser of the brethren is given voice to tear down and discourage rather than build up and encourage.

As we have shown in other posts, what Paul meant when he authored "faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God" he meant very specifically that faith cometh from hearing the gospel. It is the gospel that encourages, and the seasoned saint needs to hear it often to be encouraged, and to overcome the works of the devil. The New Covenant paradigm will always uplift, and it will always center on the person and work of Jesus of Nazareth the Savior of the world! 

Arriving at the Paradigm Shift: A preponderance of evidence IV

Here is one of many such verses that shows that the first century apostles meant gospel when they used the phrase word of God.  Act 6:7 " The word of God continued to spread; the number of the disciples increased greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests became obedient to the faith." It is not the scripture that spread. No, it's the gospel that spread. In context it can mean no other thing. Now, this is but one of many isolated examples of a preponderance of verses in the New Testament writings that show the first century writers  redefining the phrase the word of God. When you look at all the passages, the preponderance is so great that it defies reason to wonder why no one sees it. I say that there is a theological reason. I think that over the years people fear that if one accepts the New Testament definition of the phrase "word of God," that the scripture somehow becomes diminished. That could not be further from the truth.

If the majority teaching of the apostolic writers was that the word of God is the gospel, and that the purpose of scripture is solely redemptive it would give far more credence and authority to the scripture for many more people today. The agnostics and liberal theologians would lose 99% of their critical ammunition. I dare say that most of the biblical criticism crowd would lose the lion share of their arguments.

Seeing the biblical narrative as a redemptive metaphor while acknowledging the way in which it mirrors the development of civilization would completely silence the critics. I am fascinated by the way that the development of civilization as defined by spiral dynamics and integral theory lines up so exactly with the development spiral in the biblical record. If you are a serious biblical student you should take a look at these three videos by Doug King at Presence.tv. I would especially recommend the first post, but if possible, view all three. It makes sense that God would reveal himself within the cultural understanding of the people at the time.

I am trying to set your mind at ease. You need not worry because Jesus and his first century followers saw the scripture in redemptive terms only. Look at John 8:3-11. It is interesting to me that the Jews at the time of Jesus, all zealous for the Law (Acts 21:20) did not practice stoning adulterers. They only brought a single case to test Jesus' zeal of the Law. The truth is that they did not practice stoning of adulterers at all. However, they did stone what they thought were blasphemers (Acts 7.) The reason for this was they saw that some of the Christian teaching was challenging their status quo. My point here is that as culture changed, adherence to the law changed. They had found a way to make it so that virtually no one was stoned for adultery. I am not saying that they were tolerant of adultery but rather that they had changed the way in which they dealt with it.

This is why spiral dynamics is important in our biblical view. It is also one of the reasons for the doctrine that we have today. Christian doctrine has been handed down from the end of the second century forward and it is mostly constructed by the early church fathers and added too by subsequent writers. It is important to understand that the bulk of Christian dogma was constructed under the blue lens... for an understanding of the blue lens view the video links in this blog post.

Arriving at the Paradigm Shift: A preponderance of evidence IIl

In the last two posts I have talked about the preponderance of evidence that led to my paradigm shift. So this question comes to mind; what should this mean to the church, its doctrine, its worship, and its faith and practice? When I mention the church I mean those who are believing in Jesus as the redeemer. I mean the universal body of believers, the catholic church, small c.

First off, it only makes sense that when one identifies as a believer in Jesus Christ, that they would follow what Jesus, and his first century apostolic writers taught. This means that they would look at the scripture from a redemptive view and not as a legal constitutional document. It means that they would define and teach that the word of God is the gospel or Jesus the living good news. When John wrote that the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, he meant that the gospel (good news) became flesh and dwelt among men. He certainly did not mean that the scripture became flesh and dwelt among men. Therefore, the gospel should be the main focus of all Christians and Christian Churches. The gospel is as refreshing, if not more refreshing to the seasoned saint as it is to the new one. The gospel is the main defensive weapon against the accuser of the brethren. The gospel is the necessary re-assurance that promotes resting in the peace with the Father which only comes from justification by faith.

A follower of Christ should not use the scripture in a legal constitutional way. Even the instructions in the epistles that sound like commandments should not be viewed in a legal constitutional way. When they are the result is ALWAYS spiritual death and striving to please God in the flesh. They can only be efficacious when one is resting in redemption by faith alone. I am not saying that they cannot show the heart of God, and cannot be used to encourage godliness. I am saying that when they are used with a legal constitutional understanding or focus they always, always, always become a killing letter. This is precisely why the gospel has to be the main focus.

Christians, should worship Jesus. Paul tells us that in the risen Lord Jesus Christ, all of the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily (Col 2:9.) Further, Isaiah prophesied that would be the case (Is 9:6-7.) The King of Kings and Lord of Lords in Revelation 19 is Jesus. The name of Jesus is to be worshipped by every tongue, and every bowing knee. When Jesus is worshipped there is a special anointing that can come in no other way. It is the name of Jesus that saves, heals, cleanses, and comforts. Why is the name of Jesus mentioned so little, and so many sermons are just a rehashing of Old Covenant messages that do not in any way point to Christ. Jesus said that the entire scripture points to him (John 5:39-40; Luke 24:27, 43-45.) If you use the Old Testament scripture it had better point directly to Jesus if you are a Christian and if it does not you should not use it.

In faith and practice every Christian should be resting completely in Romans 5:1. If you are a following believer of Jesus Christ you should be allowing the love of God and peace with God to be the driving catalyst of your life. A proper understanding of the apostle's doctrine (Acts 2:42) would promote real transformation in the life of the believer. Not reformation. That seems to be the main business of the evangelical, institutional church, and it is just flat out the wrong focus. It is no wonder church doctrine is so far off the mark.

I am going to be writing in this vane for a while so why not go over a lot of these posts and see the preponderance of the evidence for a paradigm shift?