All The Eggs In One Basket


As I read through the major and minor prophets—Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and so forth—one theme seems crystal clear. Whether God, through the prophets, was issuing warning, announcing judgment, or rebuking His people, the behavior that came up time and time again was that Israel was supposed to worship God only.

Sure, from time to time the prophets also talked about oppressing orphans and widows; not keeping the Sabbath; rulers, priests and false prophets leading the people astray; even the killing of their children in false worship.

The bottom line, however, was that all the ugly, sinful behavior the people engaged in, was linked to breaking the command to love God only. This passage from Deuteronomy spells things out pretty clearly:

“Now, Israel, what does the LORD your God require from you, but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all His ways and love Him, and to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to keep the LORD’S commandments and His statutes which I am commanding you today for your good? Behold, to the LORD your God belong heaven and the highest heavens, the earth and all that is in it. Yet on your fathers did the LORD set His affection to love them, and He chose their descendants after them, even you above all peoples, as it is this day. So circumcise your heart, and stiffen your neck no longer. For the LORD your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe. He executes justice for the orphan and the widow, and shows His love for the alien by giving him food and clothing. So show your love for the alien, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt. You shall fear the LORD your God; you shall serve Him and cling to Him, and you shall swear by His name. He is your praise and He is your God, who has done these great and awesome things for you which your eyes have seen. (10:12-21)

In truth, all the elaboration and explanation shouldn’t have been necessary because God stated what He wanted in a very clear commandment which He placed first in the Ten Commandments:

‘I am the LORD your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.You shall have no other gods before Me.’ (Deut. 5:6-7)

No other gods. First, Scripture makes it clear that there ARE no other gods—only idols, false angels, pretend gods who wish to usurp God’s sovereign rule.

Despite God’s clear instruction, the people of Israel became enamored with the culture around them. The Egyptians, for instance, had all kinds of false gods. When, after 40 years of wandering in the wilderness, God’s people reached the Promised Land, they found a number of other cultures who worshiped a different set of false gods, so they decided to add them to their pantheon.

But God had said, put your eggs all in one basket. Don’t trust Yahweh, the living God, and Baal and the Asherim and Molech, and Chemosh, or any of the other gods that the people around them worshiped.

Today we might be tempted to scoff a bit. After all, we are not superstitious. We do not worship the Sun or bow before a statue made of gold or wood or stone.

But truth be told, we in our sophisticated Western culture are not any different from those ancient Middle Easterners. We just hide what we’re doing. We say God is on the throne, but here in America, Sunday evening church services are almost non-existent because people who say they follow Christ are too busy with work or sports or family or some other leisure activity to give God one day in the week. He can have an hour Sunday morning, and maybe even two if we’re “really involved” in our church. But the whole day? Well, churches have made it easy for us by doing away with that Sunday evening service.

We say we love God, so we read our Bibles for fifteen minutes, maybe even a half hour a day. We might even get a devotional on our phone or tablet. But in contrast we watch TV for a couple hours, or play our computer games into the late night hours.

We privatize our religion and don’t let the Bible inform our views about Covid-19 or race or the Fourth of July. We are pretty OK with adopting the attitudes of our culture—our divided culture—about such things.

I know, because I’ve done all these things, and I could go on and on.

I’m not about to make a list of what I think we should or shouldn’t do. How we should vote or think or what we should say. Each person is different, and God moves in different ways in all our lives. But I do think we should love God more than these—whatever these is to us. We should give up stuff that stands in our way, that keeps us from loving God with all our mind, heart, strength. ‘Cause all our eggs belong in one basket.

Photo by Rodolfo Clix from Pexels

Published in: on June 30, 2020 at 4:35 pm  Comments (3)  
Tags: , , ,

Morality In Fiction


Prager-ZachariasIn my recent brief series, Theology Versus Morality, (Parts 1, 2, and 3), I essentially took a stand for theology in Christian fiction while calling into question the validity of judging a novel by its morality. For example, in part 2 I said,

I tend to think too many Christians put the cart of morality before the horse of theology. In fact we advocate certain behavior without the foundational belief system that can rightly shape a person’s actions.

Later I added

When it comes to fiction, I think there’s a segment of Christian readers who want their brand of morality mirrored in the stories they read. In fact, for some, the morality might be more important than the theology.

I think that position is bad for fiction and bad for Christianity.

Does that mean that morality has no place in fiction? Should we write the story of adultery with nothing but a suggestion that a way of escape exists? That would be truthful to the way the world is and truthful to theology.

But is it sufficient for the needs of society?

I look at western society, and I see a growing cesspool of immorality. We have TV programs with titles like Scandal and Revenge and Betrayal. Others focus on the criminal mind and blood splatters and entries wound, with the intent to show the process of catching those who perpetrate psychotic and cruel behavior.

We have TV news magazines discussing yet another school shooting, one many people forget because “only” three children died.

Last night’s news carried stories of an old man struck down with intent by a hit-and-run driver in a gas station as he walked toward the office to pay for his gas and of a twelve-year-old and his mother living next door to a state senator (i.e., not your usual violent-crime neighbor) who were bound and gagged while a crew of four robbed their home on a Sunday afternoon.

Further, an NBA athlete was celebrated this week as the first openly gay player in any of the four major sports in the US.

Then on Facebook today, one topic of discussion revolves around an article about the growing advocacy for “polyamory” especially by the media. Clearly, if marriage is no longer allowed to be defined as a relationship between a man and a woman, why should it be limited to a single person with another single person, instead of multiples?

There’s more, from the LGBT community successfully advocating here in SoCal for children to pick the bathroom, locker room, gender sports team, based on how they feel, not on their biology, to the new idea for losing weight based on Yoga meditation and fasting during certain phases of the moon.

The muck and mire of the world is thick and growing thicker.

So do Christian novelists simply tag along, showing society as it is, without addressing morality in our stories? Do we write to the edge, and when the edge shifts further from us, scurry along behind in an effort to catch up? Quite honestly, I think that description fits too much Christian fiction.

Many of the strictures that writers complained about are gone. Christian fiction has characters that are divorced, have affairs, drink, see ghosts, see demons–all things that once were considered taboo. But as general market fiction played at the edges, Christian writers begged to be allowed the same latitude.

The problem, as I see it, is that this move toward a reversal of moral constriction is built on the same error as that which established the legalistic mores in the first place–theology does not undergird the view of morality.

Interestingly, apologist Ravi Zacharias, in a discussion Saturday with radio personality Dennis Prager, identified three levels in which philosophy is passed on: (1) argumentation–reason; (2) art–the imagination; (3) “kitchen table conversation”–the daily statements of belief. To influence society, then, Zacharias says we must argue from reason, illustrate in our art, and live out our beliefs. The problem he says, is that we try to do number three without number one and number two.

Exacerbating the problem, I believe is something G. K. Chesterton identified:

Nothing sublimely artistic has ever arisen out of mere art … There must always be a rich moral soil for any artistic growth.

So if society has lost its “rich moral soil,” how is art to illustrate the theology (philosophy) that underpins our beliefs?

In other words, we are in a downward spiral–a morally vacuous society that cannot produce art which will show us how to live morally.

There but for the grace of God are we all.

But God does give a greater grace. He is “opposed to the proud but gives grace to the humble,” Scripture says.

So, what if Christian novelists determined to know nothing but Christ, and Him crucified? What if we painted theology into every corner of our art–and won awards doing so? What if we stopped fighting to get cuss words into our stories or stopped counting the number of times the characters break the Ten Commandments, and started writing to show what God is like, to show His Son, to the best of our ability? What if we gave stories that illustrated the power of forgiveness or love for an enemy, neighbor, or stranger, or for God? What if our stories show what we say we believe?

Wouldn’t that be a step in the process of influencing our society to get out of the morass we are making?

A Look at the Much Maligned Law of God


I’m reading in the book of Deuteronomy in the morning. This is a book I’ve grown to love, in part because it clarifies an important theme running through the Bible.

Deuteronomy, you may remember, includes (as does Exodus) the Ten Commandments. The much maligned Ten Commandments. On one side, atheists are clamoring for the Ten Commandments to disappear from court houses and statues and cornerstones.

On the other hand, professing Christians are disparaging the Law because it does nothing but induce guilt. From The Shack:

[Jesus talking] “My words [expectancy instead of expectation and respond instead of responsibility] are alive and dynamic—full of life and possibility; yours are dead, full of law and fear and judgment. That is why you won’t find the word responsibility in the Scriptures.” (p. 205)

Perhaps the character Mack’s words were legalistic, but the passage says “full of law” as if that’s a bad thing. I could point out what Paul says about the Law serving as a tutor, but I want to focus on Deuteronomy today.

Moses is passing on some last words of wisdom to the people of Israel before he dies. As he recounts what they’ve been through and what God has done for them, from time to time he says something like this:

Now, Israel, what does the Lord your God require from you, but to fear the Lord your God, to walk in all His ways and love Him, and to serve the Lord your God will all your heart and all your soul and to keep the Lord’s commandments and His statutes which I am commanding you today for your good? (Deut. 10:12-13)

The key, I believe, is this: Before we are to walk in God’s ways, we are to fear Him (hold Him in awe). Before we are to serve the Lord, we are to love Him. In other words, Law divorced from relationship with God is self-effort and probably selfish, too.

But relationship with God will result in obedience and walking in God’s way—i.e. in His Law.

The last part of the verse above states that the commands are for our good. For Israel, Moses spelled this out as some remarkable, tangible gains—no barren women, an increase in the fruit of the ground, an increase in their herds and flocks, no drought, victory over nations mightier than they, prolonged days in the land, and so on.

For those of us in the Church, God’s good means, above all else, continued fellowship with Him. Sin separates us from God; obedience, in contrast, brings us near, as does repentance.

Throughout Scripture I see these steps:

    -fear God and love Him
    -obey Him
    -receive His blessings or rewards

But look how different that looks if we make some alterations.

    -obey God
    -receive His blessings or rewards

Seems to me, that particular false teaching leads to legalism.

Or how about this:

    -desire God’s blessings or rewards
    -obey Him

That false teaching leads to the health-and-wealth ideas which in turn make people mad at God for “letting them down.”

Moses keeps relationship with God front and center. Here are just a few passages:

    – fear Me and keep all My commandments (5:29)
    – you shall love the Lord your God … these words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart (6:5-6)
    – you shall fear only the Lord your God … you should diligently keep the commandments (6:13-17)
    – you shall fear the Lord your God; you shall serve Him and cling to Him (10:20)
    – love the Lord your God, and always keep his charge (11:1)
    – to love the Lord your God and to serve Him (11:13)
    – to love the Lord your God, to walk in all His ways and hold fast to Him

Seems clear to me. Relationship first, and from it flows obedience.

Published in: on October 7, 2009 at 2:03 pm  Comments (5)  
Tags: , , ,
%d bloggers like this: