UNDERSTANDING THE WILL OF THE LORD

 

Postmodernism has infected virtually every religious organization in the United States. Tragically, it has not left churches of Christ untouched. In their book, The Jesus Proposal: A Theological Framework for Maintaining the Unity of the Body of Christ (Siloam Spring, AR: Leafwood Publishers, 2003), Rubel Shelly and John York vigorously promote postmodernism. A few brief excerpts from this unbelievably illogical and unscriptural book will prove my point. "Postmodernity challenges the notion of 'objective, dispassionate knowledge' from which the knower disengages himself' (pp. 17-18). Shelly and York argue: '''Scripture only' can easily be turned into bibliolatry - worship of the book itself or a particular translation" (p. 29). They ask: "What if the goal is not to be doctrinally sound? What if, in a relational model, people once again focus on Christ instead of each group's particular set of proof texts and practices" (p. 31)? Are these two postmodernists not aware that Paul commanded Timothy and Titus to preach "sound doctrine?" How can we focus on Christ if we are not honoring "sound doctrine?" Sound doctrine must be the foundation of our relationship to God and to fellow Christians.

 

Is it ever legitimate to refer to another person's literary production as being juvenile? Tim Woodroof’s book, The Church That Flies: A New Call to Restoration in the Churches of Christ (Orange, CA: New Leaf Books, 2000), falls into that category. Please judge for yourself as a read a few brief statements from his book. "Our attempts to restore New Testament forms are at a dead end" (p. 2). So is it alright to have on the Lord's Table whatever elements we choose and partake of it as we please? He criticizes faithful gospel preachers for debating "verb tenses and necessary inferences" (p. 8). Does he not realize that Christ himself debated "verb tenses?" Tim mentions such matters as congregational and a cappella singing and having women to make announcements in the worship assembly. He then affirms: “The debate over such matters is exhausting precisely because is seems so irrelevant" (p. 12).

 

Churches of Christ are not the only groups struggling with the impact of postmodernism on their work and worship. Most conservative religious groups are experiencing some difficulties with postmodernism, especially with the Emerging Church movement. Brian McLaren is the most prominent national leader in the Emerging Church movement. He has written extensively on biblical subjects. One of his books, A Generous Orthodoxy (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), outlines many of the views of this movement. Before I read some of McLaren's beliefs, I need to ask you: Who gives Brian McLaren or anyone else the right to be generous with orthodoxy? The word "orthodoxy" means right belief or right view. It is equivalent from a biblical viewpoint to the term, "sound doctrine." Do we have a right to be generous with "sound doctrine?" Paul commanded Titus: "Speak the things that become sound doctrine" (Tit. 2: 1). "Sound doctrine" and only sound doctrine is healthy doctrine. Any deviation from sound doctrine is unhealthy.

 

McLaren admits to being "mischievous and unclear." He affirms that being clear is "sometimes overrated, and that shock, obscurity, playfulness, and intrigue (carefully articulated) often stimulate more thought than clarity" (p. 23). I wonder why the apostles requested of Jesus: "If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly" (John 10:24). They were not interested in "shock, obscurity, playfulness and intrigue." McLaren expresses "doubts about the long-term value of highly emphasizing doctrinal distinctives" (p. 32). Is the death of Christ for our sins a "doctrinal distinctive?" How can anyone who claims to be a Christian doubt the long-term value of this great truth? He betrays his motives when he confesses: "I cannot even pretend to be objective or fair" (p. 35). So should we be subjective and unfair?

 

The most powerful refutation of the Emerging Church movement is Dr. D. A. Carson's book, Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church: Understanding a Movement and Its Implications (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003). Dr. Carson says the Emerging Church movement "means taking into account contemporary emphases on tolerance; it means not telling others they are wrong" (p. 29). In a workshop in Nashville, McClaren told the audience that he "has come to think that social history is more important than intellectual history" (p. 30). Dr. Carson affirms: "Much of McLaren's aim in his writing and lecturing is to explode the certainties that he feels have controlled too much of the thinking of Western Christian people in the past" (pp. 30-31). Finally, Dr. Carson says concerning postmodernism: "The 'old, old story' may not be the true, true story, for we continue to grow, and even our discussion and dialogues contribute to such growth" (p. 34).

 

Graham Johnston's excellent book, Preaching to a Postmodern World: A Guide to Reaching Twenty-first Century Listeners (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 2001), says concerning the postmodern movement: It "rose out of the study of language" and "concluded that any talk of objective truth is purely illusion.... One can never speak of knowing something objectively, or even state something is true because it corresponds to reality. Postmodernism, after all, maintains that a person can only say, 'according to my perception, this is true'" (p. 29). Does that not make each person the final judge of truth? The postmodernist says we cannot know anything except one fact: we cannot know anything. Tragically and inexplicably, there is not one human being on earth who can live by that worldview.

 

There is so much more I would like to say about the Emerging Church movement, but I have quoted from these authors because I want to speak to you today on the topic: "Understanding the Will of God." Paul told the Ephesians that God had made known to him the mystery (or the secret), that is, that Jews and Gentiles would be saved by the same gospel. He had written in a few words to the Ephesians about that mystery, "whereby when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ" (Eph. 3:3-4). Later in that same epistle, Paul commanded the Ephesians: "Wherefore be not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is" (Eph.5: 17). Charles Williams renders the verse: "So stop becoming senseless, but understand what the will of the Lord is."

 

Very briefly, let us examine this last verse. The King James Version uses the word "be," but the Greek employs the word "become." The word "foolish" means without understanding or senseless. The word "understand" (suniemi) literally means "the ability to bring things together and see them in relation to one another" (Rogers & Rogers, p. 444). In spite of the foolishness being promoted by the postmodernists, the Apostle Paul believed the Ephesians could and should use their reasoning power. If we do not have the ability to reason or if the result of our reasoning is not dependable, why would Bible writers urge us to reason? Isaiah quotes God as telling the Israelite people: "Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool" (Isa. 1: 18).

 

In our text, Paul urged the Ephesians to understand what the will of the Lord is (Eph. 5: 17). If the postmodernists were correct, he was commanding the Ephesians to do the impossible. But the postmodernists' view falls into the category of utter foolishness. It certainly is true that men cannot know or understand everything - only God can do that  - but we can understand enough of God's will to be saved from our alien sins and to walk in such a way as to be well pleasing to the Lord. If we cannot understand the will of God, how can God hold us accountable for doing it? Why will our Lord say in the day of judgment: "Well done, you good and faithful servant: you have been faithful over a few things, I will make your ruler over many things: enter into the joy of the lord" (Mt. 25:21)?

 

The word "understand" (suniemi) appears twenty-six times in the Greek New Testament. A review of some of the uses of the verb should provide some insight into man's ability to understand. Five times in the Parable of the Sower Jesus used the word "understand." He points out that some do not understand because "their heart has waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at anytime they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and turn, and I should heal them" (Mt. 13:15). Jesus further explained: "But he who received the seed into the good ground is he who hears the word, and understands it; which also bears fruit, and brings forth, some a hundredfold, some sixty, and some, thirty" (Mt. 13:23). Was Jesus teaching in this great parable that men can understand and will be judged for failure to understand?

 

On one occasion, Jesus warned his disciples about the "leaven of the Pharisees." The disciples did not understand what he meant. They "reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have no bread." Jesus knew what they were thinking and corrected their misunderstanding. "0 you of little faith, why reason among yourselves, because you have brought no bread? Do you not understand, neither remember the five loaves and the five thousand, and how many baskets you took up? Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets you took up? How is it you do not understand that I spoke it not unto you concerning bread, that you should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees? Then they understood how he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees" (Mt. 16:6-12).

 

If you are a serious student of the Bible, you know there are some extremely difficult passages in it. I have struggled with some Bible passages for most of my preaching life, and still have problems understanding them. But is that true of those absolutely essential passages we must understand to become Christians and to live for God? Think with me for just a minute on this well known passage. "Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also you have received, and wherein you stand; by which also you are saved, if you keep in memory what I have preached unto you, unless you have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: and he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve" (l Cor. 15:1-5).

 

The Apostle Paul mentions four facts about our Lord. He died for our sins; he was buried; he was raised from the dead; and he was seen. We may not understand why Jesus had to die. In fact, there is an enormous body of literature about the reasons Christ had to die. But we should have no problem understanding that he died for our sins according to the scriptures. Obviously, there should be no problem understanding Christ's burial. When people die, we bury them. We cannot understand the great power God used in raising Jesus from the dead, but we know God raised him from the dead. We should have no difficulty understanding the expression, "he was seen." The witnesses to Christ's resurrection establish beyond doubt that he was physically raised from the dead. Should anyone have difficulty understanding these great truths?

 

I am fully aware of those theologians who deny that men can know the will of God, but not one Bible writer ever took that illogical position. Do you remember how Jesus taught his disciples to pray? "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven" (Mt. 6:10). In the same great sermon, Jesus said: "Not every one who says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven" (Mt. 7:21). If lowly human beings cannot understand the will of God, how can God hold us accountable for not doing it? Our Lord assured his listeners: "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father who is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother" (Mt. 12:50). And did not Christ say to the Jews: "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself' (John 7:17)? Charles Williams take the tenses of the verbs into consideration in his translation of this verse. "If anyone is willing to keep on doing God's will, he will know whether my teaching comes from God, or merely expresses my ideas."

 

There is great confusion in our world about the plan of salvation. Is that because the Bible does not speak clearly enough about it? Our Calvinist friends continually stress the so-called "sinner's prayer," although the Bible does not say one word about it or even furnish a hint about it. Universalists teach that all men will be saved regardless of their beliefs or behavior. What does the Bible specifically and emphatically teach? The church of our Lord was established on the day of Pentecost. The Apostle Peter concluded his divinely inspired sermon by declaring: "Let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God has made this same Jesus whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ." The Jews were cut to the heart and asked Peter and the other apostles: "Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter answered and said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. ... Then they who gladly received the word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls" (Acts 2:36-38,41).

 

I am not going into detail about the purpose of baptism -"for the remission of sins"-but I ask you with utmost seriousness: Do you have any difficulty understanding what Peter told the Jews on Pentecost? Did he not command the believing Jews: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you?" What do the terms, "repent" and "be baptized," mean? Is the language so obscure, so complicated that the average person cannot understand it? Are not the other steps to becoming a Christian also plain and simple? Do you have any problem understanding faith and confession? What about becoming a Christian is so ambiguous that ordinary people like you and me cannot know what we must do to be forgiven of our sins and to be added to the Lord's church?

 

Can we also know what we must do as Christians so that we are able to enjoy God's approval as we do the will of God? If men cannot know the will of God, why would an inspired apostle write: "For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that you might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding; that you might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God" (Col. 1:9-10)? Would it not be foolish for Paul to pray that the Colossians "might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding" if we human beings are incapable of knowing the will of God? Paul adds: "Epaphras, who is one of you, a servant of Christ, salutes you, always laboring fervently in prayers, that you may stand perfect and complete in all the will of God" (Col. 4: 12).

 

The Apostle Peter urged his readers to submit to civil government. "For so is the will of God, that with well doing you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men" (1 Pet. 2:15). The same apostle reminded his readers of the persecutions they would have to endure. "For it is better, if the will of God be so, that you suffer for well doing, than for evil doing" (1 Pet. 3:17). Peter encouraged his readers: "Forasmuch then as Christ has suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves with the same mind: for he who has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin; that he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God" (1 Pet. 4:1-2). Does the Apostle Peter mean we can know and understand the will of God? I repeat what I said two times: If we cannot understand the will of God, how can a just God hold us accountable for not doing his will?

 

I have one final question for you to consider: What is the will of God? If you have the slightest doubt, a careful reading of Hebrews should remove that doubt forever. Following are the very words of Jesus Christ: "Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will, 0 God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, 0 God. He takes away the first that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all" (Heb. 10:7-10). The will of God for the Christian era is the New Testament, the new covenant, the gospel of Christ. We can understand it and must obey it. If you have not obeyed the gospel, will you not this very day confess your faith in Christ, repent of your alien sins and be baptized according to the will of God to have your sins remitted?

 

Winford Claiborne

The International Gospel Hour

P.O. Box 118

Fayetteville, TN 37334