Just Another Blog in the Wheel

Hi Pastor Steve, I have been thinking about your insightful sermons on living in righteousness. I have friends (religious Jews) in a health food store I shop in. In our conversations I feel a connection in complete righteousness (not that they’re without sin) with them that I feel I am talking with a brother in Christ. I seldom connect with so-called ‘Believers in Christ’ with such depth.

These Jewish friends are Believers in God the Father…or are they Believers? I know that sounds like heresy. (But one thing is for sure, they are righteous.) I know Jesus said that ‘No one comes to the Father but by Me’ (Christ). That makes me a bit confused. Are so called Christians who are NOT RIGHTEOUS consistently closer to Messiah than righteous Jews who believe in GOD?

I would appreciate any clarification of the confusion that I am having. Pastor Steve, I know this sounds like complete HERESY. (I know this H word is used in empty Christian circles a lot, but I know you can understand what I am saying and thinking.) I also work at a college with many Religious Jews who I love like Brothers. Many of them can put so called Christians to shame when it comes to righteousness.   Please help clear this up in my mind and soul. God Bless. Your FriendÂ

These are great questions. The sincerity of heart that is behind the questions is born of a purity and love that God greatly values. See Isaiah 57:1.

There are several dimensions if you would understand the answers. For example, there is a righteousness that is relative. Only God is righteous in the absolute sense. He cannot do, He hates evil. All humans are relatively righteous, both compared to God’s absolute standard and compared to prevailing societal standards. In this latter way both Noah and Lot were righteous, though Noah got smashed on vino and that led to his middle son being cursed, and Lot copulated with BOTH of his daughters. Nevertheless, compared to the rest of their generation they were righteous. Righteous in this sense (obviously) does not mean PERFECT (or ABSOLUTE).

When it comes to the norms of societal living, pious Christians will always feel more comfortable with those whose relative righteousness is evident when compared to the surrounding culture. We resonate with the pro-life convictions of Catholics, for example, who stand sentry at abortion clinics; we agree with Mormons who want to shut down porno palaces. On many of the hot-button moral issues of the day, we will find that “Biblical” cults (JW’s, even Muslims) have a better understanding than mainstream Christians. (You’ll see in time that it was a toning down of the Antithesis which led to the mainstreamers becoming useless, like the salt that lost its saltiness.) For convenience we can call this “external” conformity to God’s Law (but I do think “relative” is, overall, more helpful). This makes us happy whenever we see it, regardless of the motive.

But when we consider righteousness from another angle, we see very different things. If we think of God’s absolute righteousness, the only sane thought would be that we dare not bring ours to Him as if it speaks favorably for us, or as if it were good enough to make us safe on Judgment Day! We may think ourselves more righteous than our neighbor and we may be right! But if we think ourselves to be righteous enough for God to cover over our sins on our own account, we are crazy! When God’s absolute righteousness is beheld, we know, there really is not a righteous man on the earth who does not sin (Ecclesiastes).

This leads us to the consideration that, in a human righteousness that is truly pleasing to the Lord, there will of necessity be a humility, even a shamefacedness, on the part of the righteous. NO TRULY RIGHTEOUS PERSON THINKS HE HAS SOMETHING TO BOAST ABOUT BEFORE GOD. And that, Friend, is the key.

Keep in mind that epistemological self-consciousness does not ordinarily appear in history. The wheat doesn’t always seem to be wheat and the tares don’t always seem to be tares. But when the right circumstances appear, when the epistemological accelerators are in overdrive, as they are at the end of a civilizational age, then it is very common for things to show themselves as they are.  At a time of the collapse of social restraints, only those who have religious convictions will even care about living morally, because the earthly reward for righteousness necessarily requires a culture that prefers righteousness to wickedness. Or, at the very least, does not regard them as the same.

Consider the attempt to invest homo-ism with the sacred cloak of marriage. It is the bottom rung of the ladder, the final step before the descent into the abyss. Here man’s willful blindness has reached its ultimate condition, when men don’t merely sin, but when men cease to call it sin, making repentance impossible. Why repent of righteousness or neutrality? If homo vs. hetero is just a personal choice, like taking the Belt Parkway or taking the streets to your uncle’s house, who would expect someone to repent for his choice? They are morally equal.

The God of the Bible is dead—or deaf—and everyone is “free” to do their own thing. Even freedom has been redefined; it once meant the liberty to serve God in accordance with conscience. Now it means to do anything sexual you want to do. So, as Bavinck so brilliantly foresaw, the twentieth century ended, not with a narrow attack on a Christian doctrine or two, but in a (temporarily) victorious assault on all religion. Any faith which reaches out to, which appeals to a god who even resembles the true God, any faith or person or group of faith-adherents who think that by that appeal a true norm has been discovered which may regulate people’s behavior or limit people’s choices, or favor someone’s morality, anyone who asserts that a Word from a deity may establish the foundation of any point—whether of knowledge, ethics, social policy, tax rates—is necessarily and by definition a faith that must be excluded from public debate because derives its knowledge in an unscientific manner. We no longer live in a nation where religions are protected from discriminatory laws; rather, we live in a nation where law is protected from all religion (except one). Therefore, our culture actually thinks it believes that all religions are equally valid. But they need to finish the sentence! They are equally valid because they are all alike invalid because predicated upon revelation and not original knowledge discovered by man.

We practice the equality of all religions in this: not one of them (except the one that doesn’t call itself a religion) has anything of value, let alone authority, to say to any part of real life. Their content is alike thought to be derived from a “revelation” of the deity. But since man, following the serpent’s proposed epistemology, now openly declares that he can only truly know something if he’s first tested it, it follows that nothing can be “known” by faith. “How do you know eating that fig will kill you unless you first test it by eating it?” This is why, Friend, every perversion must be discussed. Nothing can be known to be sin just because some people believe it is sin. By faith things can only be believed.

But everyone knows that people believe all sorts of crazy things. Should leprechauns make public policy? Or elves? For something to be known, however, it doesn’t matter who believes or doesn’t believe it; it must be tested by our methods. If it is said to be true following our experiments, then one may say he knows “X” to be true. How do we know our methods are universal, invariant, eternally so, and that they will always lead to certainty? (Shhh! Don’t tell anybody!) We simply BELIEVE they do and will!

And above all else, it is in relation to Jesus Christ that all persons are revealed for what they are. He is God’s Supreme accelerator. When Christ appears, there is no neutral place to hide. If you are not for Him, you are against Him. His appearance puts everyone to the test. He is God’s method. If we love Jesus, we love God. If we do not love Jesus, we do not love God. Read the Gospel of John and see how plainly this is taught. But why is it so? What does it actually reveal? Can’t you be really, really righteous and yet disbelieve in Jesus? No. It is impossible. And there are several reasons for this but I’ll only fluff the subject here. Maybe more on Sunday.

1) God sent Jesus in a context. He sent Him to the Jews, who knew the story of Joseph, but would repeat it. They had said to Moses, “Who made you boss?” and they would say the same to Jesus. Jesus’ loved them and did miracles to prove He was the One to Come. But they said His miracles came from the devil!! What hope is there for someone who believes that? As long as Jesus stays away from the Jews, they appear o-so-righteous. But send Him in close and you’ll discover what they think of Jesus, God, Moses, Isaiah-every one who is God or from God. Why is that?

2) Because, “seeking to establish a righteousness of their own,” they ran past God’s (perfect/absolute) righteousness. Consequently, because their deeds are not of true, full faith in God in Christ, their deeds, while often externally comporting with God’s commands, are done out of a different motive, they emerge in a different atmosphere, one that is proud, not humble, filled with self and boasting of superiority.

As to professing believers in Christ who live lawlessly, the Bible says they are false brethren. They are NOT Christians. That is why we feel no kinship with them. They have not the Spirit. See Romans 8:5-8. It is truly a revelation!

I hope this helps.

Love in Him,

pastor steve