Once when Jacob was cooking stew, Esau came in from the field, and he was exhausted. And Esau said to Jacob, "let me eat some of that red stew, for I am exhausted!" (Therefore his name was called Edom.) Jacob said, "sell me your birthright now." Esau said, "I am about to die; of what use is a birthright to me?" Jacob said, "swear to me now." So he swore to him and sold his birthright to Jacob. Then Jacob gave Esau bread and lentil stew, and he ate and drank and rose and went his way. Thus Esau despised his birthright. Genesis 25: 29-34 ESV
An interesting scene, Esau is being more than a little dramatic, as the Scriptures would indicate. He is hardly dying, he is tired and hungry, and is willing to trade his birthright for the desires of his appetite. He is described here as despising his birthright, and used later by the writer of Hebrews as an example of those who grow weary of the sanctifying work of God. The Abrahamic covenant carried with it two branches, that of the material (the sands on the seashore), but most significantly that of the spiritual (as the stars in the heavens). It is God who is Sovereign over both, and the spiritual blessing is eternal, far out weighing real-estate or other temporal possessions.
Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord: looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled; lest there be any fornicator or profane person like Esau, who for one morsel of food sold his birthright. For you know that afterward, when he wanted to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place for repentance, though he sought it diligently with tears. Hebrews 12-17NKJV
In the same manner that Esau despised his birthright do we not also take lightly the cross? Though we are no longer under the law is it the work of grace that we should live unto the flesh? Should we profane the word of God by teaching that which is more appealing to our life style, or those of our friends who might take offense at some of God's word? Is that responsible apologetics, consistent with the doctrines set forth in the Bible? How will those who know us by the name we call ourselves, Christian, ever want to hear us speak of sin or the need of a Savior when we do not come bearing the truth in peace? Where are the pears telling me this is not an apple tree? It is a sad thing to see men, who do not claim Jesus as Lord, live humanist lives much more morally compelling than our own. As a young man not wanting the things of God, I clung to the words of David Hume, Socrates and Gandhi. In David I did not find a moral teacher and in the end, though an intelligent philosopher, his circular reasoning fell apart. But I still took solace in the moral logic of Gandhi, and his words echoed my own problems with the church: "I like your Christ, but I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ,' or as some others have stated that he most likely put it, 'Oh, I don't reject Christ, I love Christ; its just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ." That was all the confirmation I needed ,at least at the time. It reinforced my issue with the hypocrisy of those in church, but it did not resolve the issue of the hypocrite I couldn't see. Even at first light, when I came to suspect his existence, I decided to confront him myself, in the flesh. I did not take to knee, but rather tried to find hope in the religious, and in my own works. And yet it is still not a call to the holiness of the law which was insufficient, but rather a call back to your first Love. So lightly I held this thing, it was more like a necklace with a cross hanging on it or a tattoo of Calvary. I read where Paul cried out, "O wretched man that I am!" And now why was Paul calling himself wretched? This is disturbing for me because if I compare my life to his, my words to his, my walk with God to his, how is he after everything he has been through, wretched? Unlike me, Paul was not comparing his holiness to Gandhi, to himself to aim higher, or finding someone more wretched, like me, to be content with how far he has come. He is not sinning more, but rather comparing his holiness to God's, and exposing his every weakness. He does not crucify Christ anew nor despise the cross, but rather despises his sin.
For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before, "this is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them," then He adds, "their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more." Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin. Hebrews 10:14-18 NKJV
"There is only one way to have assurance of salvation: that is, to realize we are condemned, and be satisfied that the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ alone can wash us and cleanse us." - John Calvin
"The adoption of Jacob was founded on the sole good pleasure of God...lest men should attribute something to their own preparatory acts." John Calvin
An interesting scene, Esau is being more than a little dramatic, as the Scriptures would indicate. He is hardly dying, he is tired and hungry, and is willing to trade his birthright for the desires of his appetite. He is described here as despising his birthright, and used later by the writer of Hebrews as an example of those who grow weary of the sanctifying work of God. The Abrahamic covenant carried with it two branches, that of the material (the sands on the seashore), but most significantly that of the spiritual (as the stars in the heavens). It is God who is Sovereign over both, and the spiritual blessing is eternal, far out weighing real-estate or other temporal possessions.
Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord: looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled; lest there be any fornicator or profane person like Esau, who for one morsel of food sold his birthright. For you know that afterward, when he wanted to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place for repentance, though he sought it diligently with tears. Hebrews 12-17NKJV
In the same manner that Esau despised his birthright do we not also take lightly the cross? Though we are no longer under the law is it the work of grace that we should live unto the flesh? Should we profane the word of God by teaching that which is more appealing to our life style, or those of our friends who might take offense at some of God's word? Is that responsible apologetics, consistent with the doctrines set forth in the Bible? How will those who know us by the name we call ourselves, Christian, ever want to hear us speak of sin or the need of a Savior when we do not come bearing the truth in peace? Where are the pears telling me this is not an apple tree? It is a sad thing to see men, who do not claim Jesus as Lord, live humanist lives much more morally compelling than our own. As a young man not wanting the things of God, I clung to the words of David Hume, Socrates and Gandhi. In David I did not find a moral teacher and in the end, though an intelligent philosopher, his circular reasoning fell apart. But I still took solace in the moral logic of Gandhi, and his words echoed my own problems with the church: "I like your Christ, but I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ,' or as some others have stated that he most likely put it, 'Oh, I don't reject Christ, I love Christ; its just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ." That was all the confirmation I needed ,at least at the time. It reinforced my issue with the hypocrisy of those in church, but it did not resolve the issue of the hypocrite I couldn't see. Even at first light, when I came to suspect his existence, I decided to confront him myself, in the flesh. I did not take to knee, but rather tried to find hope in the religious, and in my own works. And yet it is still not a call to the holiness of the law which was insufficient, but rather a call back to your first Love. So lightly I held this thing, it was more like a necklace with a cross hanging on it or a tattoo of Calvary. I read where Paul cried out, "O wretched man that I am!" And now why was Paul calling himself wretched? This is disturbing for me because if I compare my life to his, my words to his, my walk with God to his, how is he after everything he has been through, wretched? Unlike me, Paul was not comparing his holiness to Gandhi, to himself to aim higher, or finding someone more wretched, like me, to be content with how far he has come. He is not sinning more, but rather comparing his holiness to God's, and exposing his every weakness. He does not crucify Christ anew nor despise the cross, but rather despises his sin.
For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before, "this is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them," then He adds, "their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more." Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin. Hebrews 10:14-18 NKJV
"There is only one way to have assurance of salvation: that is, to realize we are condemned, and be satisfied that the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ alone can wash us and cleanse us." - John Calvin
"The adoption of Jacob was founded on the sole good pleasure of God...lest men should attribute something to their own preparatory acts." John Calvin
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.