Zach’s Theological Musings

  In a recent post I mentioned an observation that people who have a dishonoring attitude toward their parents often take on, in some sense or another, a “surrogate parent” (or “parents”) to fill the void. As an addendum, I would like to warn against a particularly subtle, deceptive, and destructive way this can happen: when God is put in the position of “replacement parent”.

  Now, make no mistake about it, God definitely is the ultimate, true Father of all who have received and believed in His Son Jesus Christ (John 1:12). But that is just as true for those who have a great relationship with their biological parents as it is for those who have a sour relationship with them. His role as true, eternal Father does not replace the role and respect due to the physical, earthly mother and father He ordained to give to each of us. Receiving His Heavenly Fatherhood only intensifies, rather than diminishes, our responsibility to honor our earthly parents in ways pleasing to Him.

 And [Jesus] said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written,

   “‘This people honors me with their lips,
   but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me,
   teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

 You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.”

 And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ But you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, “Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban”‘ (that is, given to God)—then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do.” (Mark 7:6-13)

  I think Americans have a hard time wrapping their heads around the above passage. Did Jesus really scold people for “giving money to God” (we could say, “giving to the Lord’s cause”) rather than to their parents? Yes, that is my understanding of this passage. But doesn’t Jesus command us to hate our “own father and mother…” compared to our love and devotion to Him? Yes, absolutely. I will be the first to acknowledge and proclaim that fidelity to God trumps everything else in life (Matt 10:34-39). So if God wanted you to give your money to the temple rather than your parents, then by all means that is what you must and should do. But that’s not the way He wants it. The way He wants us to honor and obey HIM is through honoring our parents, which includes providing for them in their old age. If you wrap a pious explanation around sinful disobedience to God’s command, it remains just as repulsive, in fact more so; not only is your heart far from the Lord, but you have “covered over your tracks” by honoring Him with your lips. This kind of hypocrisy made Jesus quite angry.

  Just as then, so now, the “traditions of men” (e.g. pop-evangelical psychology) reject and make void the commandments of God whenever we (explicitly or implicitly) tell people that it is OK to dishonor their parents because God is now their real Father.

  Christian citizens submit to human governments because God the Great King commands them to. Christian wives submit to their husbands because Christ the Forever Bridegroom commands them to.  Christian children (including adult, grown children!) honor their parents because the Father commands them to. The Lord’s Kingship, Husbandship, and Fatherhood do not undermine our human-to-human responsibilities. Indeed, because I have a Benevolent King I can deal with the wickedness of human leaders, because a woman is so deeply known and pursued by the Lover of her soul she can live with her husband’s shallowness, because our Father in Heaven raises and cares for us in all the right ways we can accept the fact that our parents didn’t.

  When we are not fully satisfied in God, all human relationships go awry because we will inevitably try to extract the infinite satisfaction we were designed for from finite beings. When we are fully satisified in God, then no one can disappoint us because we need nothing from them, the only “need” we have is spread the love, forgiveness, understanding, mercy, grace, and kindness that overflows from us in abundance (Rom 13:8). The image of a “God-shaped vacuum” appears to have come from the following quote by Blaise Pascal:

What else does this craving, and this helplessness, proclaim but that there was once in man a true happiness, of which all that now remains is the empty print and trace? This he tries in vain to fill with everything around him, seeking in things that are not there the help he cannot find in those that are, though none can help, since this infinite abyss can be filled only with an infinite and immutable object; in other words by God himself. [Pascal, Pensees #425]

Our fallen, sinful parents leave a “Father-shaped vacuum” in each of our hearts. When God fills that vacuum we are not freed from the obligation to honor our parents, we are freed to honor them fully, from the heart, regardless of circumstances and without expecting anything in return.

  That abortion is a unspeakably horrific act of murder against the most defenseless of human beings is an obvious moral fact which I have addressed, for example, in: Of Course It’s A Baby and Sonography (see also the entire abortion category on this blog, and don’t miss http://menaretheproblem.info while you’re at it). That the staggering scale of such murders for convenience’s sake makes “Holocaust rhetoric”, if anything, too gentle and mild is an obvious numerical fact which I have addressed, for example, in Postman (see also the numbers at the bottom of my abortion quotes page, all from pro-abortionist sources mind you). Thus when we hear that an abortionist/murderer such as Dr. George Tiller has been killed the natural question is, “Is it right or wrong to murder murderers to stop them from murdering?”, to which I am compelled to answer, at least at this point in my life, “Whew… hmm… that is a very important, very heavy, and very difficult question.”

  I must say I certainly don’t resonate with the majority of the American Christian pro-life movement that is so quick to stand up and unequivocally condemn the murder of an abortionist/murderer. Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait, “hold on”, I want to scream. If we really believe in our own rhetoric, for example that a 9/11-scale slaughter is happening on our own (American) soil every single day, and if we applaud the soliders who go out to engage in bloody warfare following just one single 9/11 tragedy, then isn’t it at least worth considering the possibility that lethal force is justified to stop the actions of a determined, ongoing baby-killer? I think so. I really don’t want to make unfair blanket accusations about people’s motives, but I’ll just say that my impression from the writings of some such Christian leaders is that they are more interested in avoiding a public outcry than they are in grappling with the difficult issues and standing for the truth.

  On the other hand, I’ve read some of the writings of people who have been arrested for anti-abortionist violence (e.g. at the Army of God website) and I certainly don’t resonate with a lot of what they say either. What I hear coming from many of them is a rebellious attitude toward government in general. I really don’t want to make unfair blanket accusations about people’s motives, but I’ll just say that my impression from the writings of some such people is that what they really want most is to vent a lot of pent-up anger and “stick it” to the US government, and that killing an “abortion doctor” (oxymoron) is one way they can feel justified about doing so. But from a Biblical Christian perspective, it seems to me that the governments that Jesus (e.g. Luke 20:19-26), Paul (e.g. Romans 13), and Peter (e.g. 1 Peter 2) commanded submission to were entirely wicked themselves. A submissive attitude toward human authority is not contingent on the worthiness of that authority. We put ourselves under them because in doing so we are directly and indirectly submitting to God (see, e.g., how David treated wicked King Saul with respect as “God’s Anointed” until God saw fit to remove Saul from the throne and from the land of the living).

  Human life. Made in the image of God. The baby, the mother, the father, the abortionist, and the abortionist killer. Whew. To take a human life is a massive thing. For that reason I don’t think you’ll ever find me shouting and waving a banner that says, “Kill the abortionists! Kill the abortionists!” At the same time, and for the very same reason, I don’t think you’ll ever find me affirming James Dobson, Al Mohler, or the many other “pro-life Christians” in their categorical condemnation of those who murder murderers regardless of the thought process and motivations that such a person might have.

  There are just such weighty Biblical issues on both sides of the question: to murder (ongoing, determined) murderers or not to? It seems to me that many doctoral dissertations in Biblical ethics could struggle over the issue for hundreds of pages and not reach definitive resolution. Presently, I can only offer a mere sampling of the issues:

• The idea of an “inalienable right to life” bestowed by the Creator smells more of Jeffersonian-Americo-deist philosopy than it does Biblical theology. Ever since the Fall of our father Adam, man only has a right to death (Gen 3, etc.). Babies have no right to life, nor do abortion doctors have any right to life. But then, just as mere men don’t have the right to life, they neither have the right to kill. Wouldn’t it be nice if everything was so simple and straightforward as to say that no human being should ever be the agent of another human being’s demise. But wait! There is more nuance to the Biblical picture because…
• While the sixth of the ten commandments is, “Thou shalt not kill”, the same Jewish Scriptures command the armies of Israel to slaughter the Canaanites, and command communities to execute certain classes of criminals. While Jesus said, “Love your enemies”, “Turn the other cheek”, and “Those who live by the sword will die by the sword”, the same Christian Scriptures also teach that governing authorities “do not bear the sword for nothing”. It seems that the reconciliation of these various principles is that killing is not an individual prerogative but a responsibility (in the form of war or capital punishment) of societies, and in particular “God’s appointed” leaders of societies (which, to add to the tension, includes a great many very, very evil men—see Daniel 4). So we could be tempted to say that while those guilty of involvement in the abortion process deserve to be executed, it is only the government that has God-given authority to do so. That line of thinking might prompt us to go no further than seeking legal venues to make the consequences of abortion the same as the consequences for involvement in any other murder. Indeed, I am personally convinced that: 1) in a just society abortionists should be executed, yet 2) in a society as unjust as ours it is sinful and wrong for an individual to murder an abortionist/murderer with vigilante motives—that is, as punishment for previous crimes committed, no matter how horrible, that the government has failed to prosecute. But unfortunately the issue at hand is too complicated to stop there because…
• “Professional” abortionists/murderers are almost certainly determined to return to their gory crimes day after day after day. In fact many of them will proudly state their intention to continue providing their “services”. Now, it is one thing to try to take justice for past crimes into your own hands; it is another matter to respond when you see someone walking in a wholesale, brazen, committed, ongoing occupation of baby slaughter. Which brings us to…
• At least in the Old Testament, it seems that “self defense”, including defense of the larger “self” of your family and your people, at least in some cases (e.g. Ex 22:2), is not only a right but in fact the obligation of a godly man. There is nothing honorable about a man who cowers in the closet and calls the police on a cell phone while an intruder hacks at his kids with an axe and rapes his wife. In the urgency of the moment it is his responsiblity to act forcefully. Or take a different scenario. A black boy is being led away to be lynched. There is no point in calling 911 because the Klansmen in white hoods are themselves the local police officers. What do you do? Though the extent of the similarities between the above scenario and the modern abortion scene are debatable, I would argue that the similarities are quite significant. But in any case, the main point is that one must grapple with a passage like:
• “If you are slack in the day of distress,
  Your strength is limited. Deliver those who are being taken away to death,
  And those who are staggering to slaughter, Oh hold them back.
  If you say, “See, we did not know this,”
  Does He not consider it who weighs the hearts?
  And does He not know it who keeps your soul?
  And will He not render to man according to his work?” (Prov 24:10-12)
• Yes, if you murder you are accountable for the blood on your hands. But (don’t miss the weightiness of this) it also seems, at least in the Jewish theocracy of the Old Testament, that if a community fails to deal properly with a murder then the blood the murderer shed is on their hands (e.g. Deut 21:1-9). Could it be that those of us who merely “sign petitions” and offer up lukewarm, half-hearted prayers while thousands of our defenseless neighbors are being LED TO SLAUGHTER,… that we actually have MORE blood on our hands, in God’s eyes, than those who have killed an abortionist in a desperate attempt to stop him?
• In other words, Biblically, only blood can remove blood stains (compare Rev. 7:14)! Which brings us to a right and fitting Climax, to the Person and the place on whom and on which we must continually fix our eyes: Jesus and His cross. Though more issues could be raised, our picture will only be clearly focused to the extent that Jesus Himself is at the center.

  Personally, I feel, at least for now, I cannot resolve the ethics of murdering murderers to my own satisfaction by attempting a systematic harmonization of the many, many, immensely significant, Biblical principles which must come in to play if one seeks to be faithful to the full counsel of God’s revealed will in Scripture. But on a practical level, looking to the Truth and Life Himself does give me some clarity in how I might move forward.

  Jesus conquered by dying. Any angry pagan can pick up a gun. Mohammed was quite adept at wielding the sword. It takes the Spirit of Christ to pick up a cross.

  On the one hand, perhaps killing abortionists is justified. I for one will certainly be slow to judge someone who is zealous to defend defenseless human life. Though I have yet to see it, I can hypothetically imagine someone fighting the abortion Holocaust in the ethically burdened and heavily constrained-”I don’t know if this is really best but is the best I know how to do”-spirit of Bonhoeffer; and I for one would want to publicly stand in solidarity with such a brother.

  However, even if such actions may be justified, it seems to me that there is a more uniquely Christian way that should be pursued with even more wholehearted zeal than the octane that drives someone to commit homicide. What if we who know abortion to be “murder” refrained from the possibility of murdering an abortionist/murderer and instead murdered our own greedy, gluttonous self and its lifestyle in order to ensure that, at the very least, no person in our country could EVER claim financial motivation for killing a baby? What if the “pro-life” community guaranteed all expenses would be paid for any pregancy in our nation? (I’m not talking about socialized medicine, but in any case I would plead with any self-ascribed Christian Republicans to value life infinitely more than any economic philosophies.) How about if presented abortion clinics with an offer that for every woman they referred away to a crisis pregnancy center, we would pay them TWICE the money they would get for performing an abortion? Essentially the offer is, “Here take ALL of our money, ALL of our property, ALL of our possessions (we don’t need them), and let the babies live. Please!?!” (Again, what I’m talking about isn’t socialism, but it is not Republicanism either. It is about something far more important than the entire political system, which is raw Christ-following without watering down His life-overturning First and Second Greatest Commandments!) Sounds like a fabulous trade to me! Oh yes, I know that such a plan leaves open enormous doors for us to be taken advantage of. Fine. Let your gift be abused and misused. That’s what Jesus has done for us.

Zach Harris
Longmont, CO

  Ephesians 6:2:

“Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), “that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land.”

  Deuteronomy 5:16:

Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your God commanded you, that your days may be long, and that it may go well with you in the land that the LORD your God is giving you.

  Deuteronomy 27:16:

‘Cursed be anyone who dishonors his father or his mother.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’

  Note, in particular, that these promises and threats are issued within the context of the covenant community of God’s people. I find strikingly recurrent “quality of life” patterns in two distinct classes of Christians whom I know well enough to discern such things in.

  Camp A are those who speak with a certain bitterness, resentment, and/or ingratitude towards their parents—that is, if they speak of them at all; you can be friends with someone in this camp for several years and never hear them mention their parents because they prefer not to talk (or think) about them. People I know in “Camp A” generally have most or all of the following traits in their life:

1. Recurring attempts or thoughts of suicide, or at least a general “wish I was dead” mental/emotional state. Ongoing (not just temporary) depression.
2. Often there are “replacement parental figures” who take the place in the person’s affections that rightfully belongs to the parents who bore and raised them. (Yes, issues of adoption and such may complicate things here. But probably the best response, in the spirit of God’s command, is simply that a special, irreplaceable place of honor should be given in your heart to EACH of the people who played a parental role in your life: biological parents, adoptive parents, foster parents, AND spiritual parents, not just one or the other.)
3. Continual, seemingly unresolvable conflict and strife in certain (generally family) relationships. This is significantly more intense than the occasional, resolvable conflicts that those in “Camp B” face.
4. Continual, seemingly unconquerable sin, temptation, and suffering issues. Again, while those in “Camp B” obviously also face sin, temptation, and suffering, there is a marked distinction in the way that these issues seem to dominate the lives of people in “Camp A”.

  Camp B are those from whom you hear a generous, honoring attitude towards parents. Their parents certainly weren’t perfect; people I know in this camp include children from divorced and unbelieving households. Nevertheless, those in “Camp B” long for any faults and sins their parents might have to be made whole in Christ more than they long for “justice” to be served. They don’t make much of any wrongs they may have suffered from their parents, but rather embrace their parents with the unrelenting love and forgiveness that they themselves have received in Christ. As mentioned above, while those in “Camp B” certainly have bouts of depression, conflict and strife, and while they certainly face even prolonged temptation and suffering issues, these things do not dominate their spiritual joy and quality of life in Christ in the way that those in “Camp A” are dominated.

  In summary, the clearest distinction I can make is that the lives of those in “Camp B” exude a certain powerful shalom (peace) that is absent from “Camp A”.

  These distinctions can also be made within different periods of the life of a single individual. I can personally testify to periods of parental-dishonor in my heart during which I suffered the devoid-of-peace curses described above even when times were “good”, and periods of parental-honor in my heart during which I experienced persevering shalom even when times were “bad”.

  Yes, of course I know what pagan pop-psychology would say: “These `Camp A’ people were abused and neglected by their parents, so it is no wonder if they are screwed up and bitter about it.” But far more than even any experiential evidence I could offer, I would remind brothers and sisters in Christ to accept the diagnosis direct from God’s word: You may have suffered the most horrifically unspeakable things at the hands of, or under the closed eyes of, your parents, but the spiritual havoc you wreak in your own life, closing doors to blessing and opening doors to cursedness, by failing to honor your parents from the heart as God wants you to, is worse that what anyone else did do, or could do, to you!

  Thus this post is not merely meant as a descriptive analysis, but rather a plea: Receive the blessing that God has promised! There is a level of peace and joy in life available far beyond what you have experienced even as a professing Christian. I am not saying that there is a state of having something “more than Christ” in the Christian life. Rather, I am saying that “Camp B” is part and parcel of the normal Christian life, but that by choosing to live in violation of God’s command (Camp A) you have blocked yourself from fully experiencing the true blessed life in Christ. Repent! And receive the blessing! From someone who has spent time in both camps, I say PLEASE put away ALL bitterness and seek a heart of genuine honor toward your parents, and see if God isn’t faithful to His promise!!!!

  For more on this, see the very first entry posted to this blog: Honor Your Parents.

  In my post “Not Far from the Kingdom of God” I made this comment, “[The Pharisees’] problem was that they totally misunderstood and misrepresented God’s Law.” Let me expand on that a bit.

  We often hear the Pharisees described in terms that make them out to be the apex of strict, (Mosaic) Law-abiding Judaism. Some people will talk about how the Pharisees not only kept the 613 commandments of the Torah, but even built their own hedge around the Law to be sure they didn’t come close to violating any of it. With such a picture as our backdrop, we sometimes then get the impression that Jesus comes along and says, “Hey everybody, can’t we just lighten up and obey the spirit, rather than the letter, of the Law?”

  In response to the ideas summarized in the above paragraph I say: wrong, wrong, and wrong. First, the Pharisees may have been perfectionists when it came to obeying the traditions of the Pharisees, but not when it came to the Law of Moses.

The Pharisees and the scribes asked [Jesus], “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?”

And [Jesus] said to them, “… Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.” He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.” - Mark 7:5-9 NASB

Experts at setting aside the commandment of God, that’s what the Pharisees were! They weren’t strict (Mosaic) Law-abiders, they were Law-neglecters!

  Second, did the Pharisees build a hedge around the Torah, in order to be careful to obey everything written in it (cf. Deut 6:3)? No way!

“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.” - Matt 23:23

The Pharisees did indeed build such tightly woven hedges with respect to certain traditions that even a gnat couldn’t fit through their filter. But when it came to “the more important matters of the law” the Pharisees opened the gates wide enough for whole herds of camels to come trucking through.

  The problem with the Pharisees wasn’t that they were over zealous for the Law. God has never been angry with anyone for being over zealous for His Law. The longest chapter in the Bible is Psalm 119, and verse after verse extols the beauty of God’s commands, decrees, precepts, statutes, and laws. I don’t think that Jesus is angry with the Psalmist for being over zealous for God’s Law. The problem with the Pharisees was that they were under zealous for major portions of God’s Law, such as all that stuff in the Law about justice, mercy, and faithfulness.

  Paul, recalling his past as a Pharisee of Pharisees says, “I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers” (Gal 1:14). Yes, the Pharisees did have a form of zeal, but it was not a zeal guided by a right understanding of God’s Law (see Romans 10:2, Phil 3:6a). They may have appeared “blameless” in the eyes of fleshly man (Phil 3:4-6), but in God’s eyes they were clearly wicked, unclean, Law-breakers (Matt 23:25-28, Rom 2:17-27). The true Law of God makes man tremble (Ezra 10:3). Pharisaic traditions inflate a man with pride (Matt 23:6).

  We often refer to religious groups who enforce their own lengthy lists of laws in addition to the Bible as “modern day Pharisees”. That is often a fair description, but again, I disagree with the sentiment that says that such people are too focused on law. Usually the greater offense is not the laws they add to the Bible, but the commands they take away in the process. The reason that ancient and modern day Pharisees love to show off their gnat filter is to distract attention from the full grown camels rumbling around in their bellies.

  So then, when Jesus comes along His goal is not to abolish the Law and the Prophets, as if they were a bad thing, but to fulfill them. And He did not merely obey the “spirit” of the Law. Jesus, much more than the most rigorous of Pharisees, fulfilled the Law down to the smallest letter, down to the least stroke of the pen (Matt 5:17-18). When we think of the apex of strict, (Mosaic) Law-abiding Judaism, we should think of JESUS, not the Pharisees.

  You see, one problem with ascribing too much credit to the Pharisees as being Law-keepers is that it makes the Law look bad. If a Pharisee is what strict adherence to the Law looks like, then ugh, who wants to have anything to do with that? So then we start talking about “not being under the law, but under grace” and we often attach an entirely different meaning to that phrase than the meaning in Paul’s epistles. Paul, the great preacher of justification by faith apart from works of the Law, did not have bad feelings toward the Law itself. On the contrary, he agreed with the author of Psalm 119 that, “[The law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.” (Rom 7:12) Indeed, the goal of Paul’s gospel of grace was not to nullify the Law, but rather to uphold the Law (Rom 3:31).

  The Law, as God intended it, centers around love: first of all whole-hearted love for God, and then love for man. And from that center the Law extends to the weighty implications of love such as justice, mercy, and faithfulness. If we understand the Law as the perfect standard of holiness, righteousness, and goodness, then when we look at Jesus we see the ultimate fulfillment of the Law. And conversely, we should look to Jesus in order to properly understand the Law. If Jesus is what it looks like when the Torah is lived out to completion, then you really can’t blame the Psalmist for going on and on about the glory of God’s marvelous decrees, can you?

  Finally, let me touch on the implications of this to our own relationship to the Law. Certainly Jesus’ listeners must have been shocked to hear him say, “Unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 5:20). But I disagree with the teaching that says the Sermon on the Mount was merely intended to drive the disciples to despair of how hard it is to obey God’s law. Indeed, none of us comes close to fulfilling the Law of God, and that’s why the first word of Jesus’ public ministry was “Repent!” But I would argue that in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus truly meant that a son of the kingdom will walk in accordance with the Law more than a Pharisee would. If anyone treats the weighty matters of the law such as love, justice, mercy, and faithfulness with as much neglect as the Pharisees did, then he can’t really claim to be Christ’s disciple.

  In our sinful state the Law brings no power for righteous living but only condemnation. When we are united together with Christ who died and bore our condemnation, we are set free. Not set free for lawlessness, but set free from lawlessness for righteous living (Titus 2:11-14). Indeed, it is not James, not Jesus, not Moses, not the Judaizers, but Paul the apostle to the Gentiles, the apostle of justification through faith, who says,

“For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.” Rom 8:3-4

To the extent that “meeting the requirements of the Law” means “being like Jesus”, may it be said of me that I delight in the Law of God more than the most Pharisaic of Pharisees!

Mark 12:28-34:

  One of the scribes came and heard them arguing, and recognizing that He had answered them well, asked Him, “What commandment is the foremost of all?”

  Jesus answered, “The foremost is, “HEAR, O ISRAEL! THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD; AND YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH.’  The second is this, “YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

  The scribe said to Him, “Right, Teacher; You have truly stated that HE IS ONE, AND THERE IS NO ONE ELSE BESIDES HIM; AND TO LOVE HIM WITH ALL THE HEART AND WITH ALL THE UNDERSTANDING AND WITH ALL THE STRENGTH, AND TO LOVE ONE’S NEIGHBOR AS HIMSELF, is much more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”

  When Jesus saw that he had answered intelligently, He said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” After that, no one would venture to ask Him any more questions.

  This is one example of what I’m talking about when I say that I feel evangelical Christianity is sometimes uncomfortable with the gospel in the gospels. How could Jesus say to this scribe, “You are not far from the kingdom of God” following a discussion about the greatest commandments in the Law? Wouldn’t it have been better evangelical theology for Jesus to have said, “Repent of your sins, trust in my substitutionary sacrifice which is coming soon, and you will certainly be a son of the kingdom”? But that’s not what He said. And whatever God does say is certainly more fitting for the moment than what any person thinks God should have said.

  I do not believe that Jesus here was teaching that salvation comes through a man’s own efforts to fulfill the Law. On the other hand I don’t think that Jesus was teaching salvation by grace through faith either! One interpretive error that evangelical Christians can make is when we try to force everything in the Bible into the “faith vs. works” dichotomy. Don’t get me wrong, I fully believe that when a man put faith in Christ’s righteous life, Christ’s death in our place, and Christ’s victorious resurrection, such a man is declared righteous in God’s sight without regard to his record of sinful living (for that record is washed away at that moment). Hallelujah! But what God wants us to know and love about Him and what He has done for us consists of more than just the fact that His gift is received by faith rather than works, as important as that fact is.

  Take the above passage. The Pharisees, like all Jews, were (supposedly) anxiously awaiting Messiah and His kingdom. But when He came they missed Him. They didn’t merely ‘miss’ Him; they rejected, humiliated, tortured, and killed Him. Why? In large part because the kind of kingdom they were looking for wasn’t what Christ’s kingdom is like. That’s why Jesus spent so much time talking about, and demonstrating, what His kingdom IS like.

  The kingdom of God is where God’s rule is joyfully recognized. God always rules, everywhere. But His rule is generally spurned by man. Where there is righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost, that’s the kingdom of God! (Don’t you want to be a part of the kingdom?)

  I think the Pharisees would have agreed with this, in the sense that they were looking for a kingdom in which God’s rule, God’s Law, would be fulfilled. Their problem was that they totally misunderstood and misrepresented God’s Law. (I’ll have to expand on that statement in a subsequent post.) Jesus wasn’t fulfilling the “law”, i.e. traditions, they had made up, and therefore they assumed He couldn’t be the one to usher in God’s kingdom.

  But if you, like the scribe in Mark 12:28, can see that God’s Law is summarized in the command to love God and love your neighbor then when you look at Jesus you will see the perfect, joyful fulfillment of God’s Law. In other words, you will see the kingdom. At least one major reason this scribe was close to the kingdom was because he knew what to look for. He knew what the kingdom should be like.

  If someone is looking for the wrong kingdom, then telling them that “faith not works” is the way to enter the kingdom does them no good. There are many people today who are exercising “faith not works” to receive a “gospel message”, but it is a false gospel. If you have “received Jesus by faith”, and what that means to you is that you have trusted Jesus to give you a comfortable, prosperous, suffering-free life, then you are still dead in your sins and you are barreling down a path toward eternal suffering in hell.

  Biblical Christians needs to declare to the world not only how to enter the kingdom of God, but what that kingdom is like, lest people think we are inviting them into the kingdom of their own imaginations. And, as I’ve said before, when it comes to showing what the kingdom of God is truly like, the four gospels really shine. And Romans does too! And Exodus, Genesis, Daniel… Hallelujah! Praise God for His kingdom in which His glory lighting up the skies is our greatest delight, and in which all mankind loves one another as their own flesh.