Pascal's Wager

The seventeenth-century Christian thinker Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) came up with a provocative and controversial approach to shake people from their diversions. In his “Wager” argument, Pascal developed a line of practical reasoning with the very purpose of challenging anyone seemingly unconcerned with the perplexing issues of life.

An accomplished scholar in many fields, Pascal is probably best known for his presentation of the Wager. This argument appeals more to prudent and materially existent considerations of the human will than to reason per se.

What is the “Wager”?

Pascal designed the Wager for his skeptical friends who remained simultaneously unconvinced by the claims of atheism and of Christianity. He said that the uncertainties and risks inherent in the human predicament force individuals to make up their minds about God’s existence, and that the truthfulness of God and Christianity cannot be decided by an appeal to reason alone. Therefore people must make a prudent wager about whether God does or does not exist. You can’t get away from it - you must make a bet.

Pascal suggests only two possible choices or bets: 1) Belief in God and the making of a religious commitment (he speaks, of course, about commitment to the Christian God). Two possible outcomes can result from this choice: A person’s belief can be correct or incorrect. If a person believes in God and He actually exists, then according to Pascal the believer stands to gain everything. The payoff, so to speak, for a correct wager would involve infinite gain (eternal life with God in heaven). On the other hand, if a person chooses faith and God does not actually exist, then the believer loses nothing. In terms of a cost-benefit analysis, the person who wagers on God has everything to gain and nothing to lose.

The second recourse is to wager against God by disbelieving in Him and refusing to make a religious commitment. Two possible outcomes can also result from this choice. A person’s disbelief can also be correct or incorrect. If an individual does not believe in God and God does not exist, then the unbeliever gains nothing. On the other hand, if a person does not believe in God but God does actually exist, then the unbeliever stands to lose everything. The loss for wagering incorrectly would involve an infinite loss (eternal exclusion from the life of God). In terms of a cost-benefit analysis, the person who wagers against God has nothing to gain and everything to lose.

In light of these two scenarios, Pascal asserts that the prudent wager is on God. Adopting Christianity over atheism is a judiciously rational decision.

How can we as Christians use Pascal’s wager in dealing with our atheistic or agnostic friends? First, present the wager as described above to them. When the logic of the argument sinks in to them, then present to them this prayer:

God – I don’t know for sure if you even exist. Maybe you do and maybe you don’t. But I see the logic of having belief in you – that I have everything to gain and nothing to lose by belief in you. So God, if you are there, stimulate my faith in you and give me the understanding of what you would have me do to gain life after death by going to heaven. I don’t want this life to be all there is.

This simple prayer is not a prayer that brings salvation, but it is a start toward belief in God which can be stimulated by the Holy Spirit toward an understanding of Jesus Christ’s role in salvation and the ultimate choice of faith to make Christ the Savior and Lord of their life.

[Back to Home]

Voting

Every time we have a general election, like the one looming on the horizon, I kind of wonder, “How would Jesus vote? Or would He even bother?”

Some Christians believe that they should not only vote but be politically active. I recognize that perspective and respect those who hold it, but I still have reservations about “jumping on the bandwagon”.

As you probably know, it’s still difficult to convince some within American Christendom that it’s okay to vote for anyone or any cause that is not Republican. For many Christians, God must be a Republican.

Absolute affiliation and allegiance with any political party is out of character with our citizenship in heaven (Philippians 3:20). I believe that uncritical devotion to any political interest can be a fatal attraction that leads us away from Jesus into the clutches of the state.

People might ask you how you are going to vote. I don’t believe that we should answer how we are going to vote or even if we are going to vote.

Beyond that, I don’t think pastors, priests or ministry leaders should get involved in using their platforms to urge people about who or what they should vote for – or even whether they ought to, or ought not, vote in the first place. Know this: there is no New Testament teaching that directs Christians to attempt to influence or change political institutions.

I am thankful that I live in a country where a separation between church and state exists. After all, the church needs to be protected from the state. Some Christians will hear me say that and nod their approval. But then I have to add that this safeguard goes both ways.

The other side of that safeguard is that the civil government needs to be protected from the church. Religious fundamentalism and extremism in our world today presents a contemporary, compelling and chilling example of what can happen when such checks and balances do not exist. I believe the church – the body of Christ – best functions in its culture as a believing minority, rather than a moral majority. Christians are described within the pages of the New Testament as pilgrims, strangers, resident aliens and ambassadors, rather than wheeling and dealing political power brokers.

Just as I believe that Christians may attend a variety of Christ-centered, grace-based churches – or even, at times, choose not to attend any institutionalized church – I believe Christians may be brothers and sisters in Christ and cast their ballots in completely different ways. Beyond that I believe that Christians may determine for perfectly valid reasons not to vote at all.

As a Christian, I have no duty to force the culture in which I reside to live as a Christian society. On the other hand, I do have a calling to live out the life of Jesus in such a way that His love for all mankind is known in and through my life. This is in marked contrast to the reality present within some of Christianity where abrasiveness and in-your-face political dogmatism is seen as a litmus test of church membership. My liberty in Christ means that I afford liberty to others when their political opinions and convictions conflict with mine.

I don’t belong to a political party. I am an independent voter. When I vote I vote for the cause or the person, not the party with which they are affiliated. If I vote I vote for issues and individuals in spite of their connection with a political organization.

Democrat or Republican?

As a Christian, I am not a Democrat because…
* I don’t agree with many of the moral issues they support and endorse.
* It seems to me that many Democrats tend to value sex over marriage and career over family.
* I don’t think we need more government, I don’t think we need to spend more money – I think we need to use the money we have more wisely (but then the Republican party doesn’t seem to do such a great job in this area either).
* I am opposed to the self-righteousness of some Democrats who give me the impression that I should vote for a candidate simply because of their gender or race, regardless of their beliefs and convictions.

As a Christian, I admire the Democratic party for its…
* historic decisions to support civil rights, in particular to champion the cause of ending tacit government support of racism.
* Looking out for the underdog and the little guy, the working man and woman, the parentless and the poor. Unless I completely miss what Jesus is all about, these are core, Christ-centered issues (although, let’s be honest, these issues are not usually supported by the Democratic party for Christ-centered reasons).

As a Christian (and some will say, “How could you, as a Christian, say anything bad bout the Republican party?”), I am not a Republican because…
* Republicans seem to love the fetus but that same zeal and love for life seems to terminate at birth – what about the little ones who actually have been born and are in desperate straits?
* Republicans seem to bang the drums about certain moral value issues but remaining strangely silent about others. I do wonder if certain legislation is the price this party will pay to attract the “Christian vote” while having no commitment to other Christ-centered issues.
* Republicans seem to favor policies that help the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Compassion is not a word that immediately springs to mind when I hear the word “Republican” – but again, this critique generally applies to politics at large.
* I am concerned that Republican policies seem to care little about the environment. My mother taught me to clean up after myself and leave places I visited or used in as good or better condition than I had found them. I believe God would have us feel much the same about the creation He has allowed us to use. It’s His good earth, not ours.

As a Christian, I admire the Republican party for its…
* Support of the family and home and many of the values in which I as a Christian believe. However, that fact alone doesn’t turn me into a flag waving, drum beating Republican. I do not believe that Christian moral values are produced by political parties – Christian moral values are produced by Jesus. Atheists can be extremely moral people. The fact that good, moral atheists exist doesn’t mean I automatically support atheists and their platforms.
* Strong and unrelenting stand against crime and aggression, foreign and domestic.

How would Jesus vote? I don’t know. Would He vote? I don’t know.

If He determined to vote, I believe that by God’s grace I have a better sense of how He would vote than I did years ago (after all, since I have now reached the age when I can take advantage of some senior citizens discounts, I have to console myself that I must have gained some wisdom and insight along the way!).

My geezer-wisdom tells me that Jesus would probably tell us about voting:
“Treasure your freedom and choice to decide whether to vote, and, if you vote, exactly what decisions you will make. Thank God that there are still people around this world who are given the right to think for themselves. Avoid those who would manipulate you (even from pulpits). If you decide to vote, pray about the votes you intend to cast. And give others, even and especially within the body of Christ, respect as a fellow child of God when they differ with you. And remember this: My Father is in control behind the scenes of all politics."

[Back to Home]

Forgiveness and God's Grace

The Bible does say "forgive, and you will be forgiven" (Luke 6:37-38) and "forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors" (Matthew 6:12). However, these teachings are commonly misunderstood as causal statements - "if/then" statements. What these statements emphatically do not teach is that God's forgiveness depends on our forgiveness of others.

If God only forgives us as and when we forgive others, then we are earning God's love, mercy and forgiveness - a conclusion which is antithetical to the gospel. We are not in a position to earn any of God's free gifts - we can not cause him to act in our favor because of some meritorious action we perform. Further, if we can only "expect" God to forgive us if and when we forgive others, then we will never be completely forgiven by God.

These two statements (in Matthew and Luke) are not suggesting that our forgiveness of others earns us God's forgiveness, but rather that our acts of forgiveness are evidence that we have been forgiven. The grammatical construction of these two verses should be as follows: “Forgive, since you have been forgiven” (Luke 6:37-38), and “as you have forgiven us our debts, we should also forgive our debtors” (Matthew 6:12). One cannot truly forgive others unless and until one has completely accepted God's forgiveness. We may truly forgive others because we are forgiven. That's not to say that "lower levels" of forgiveness (a human level of forgiveness) can’t take place apart from God's forgiveness in our lives - but the ultimate forgiveness we are enabled to pass on to others, God's forgiveness, is attributed only to him. We cannot truly give unless it has been given to us - we cannot truly forgive unless we have been forgiven.

There is another misconception some Christians have of forgiveness. God allows for us to separate the act of forgiveness from further actions we take. That is, we are able, by God's grace, to forgive someone while at the same time discontinuing our relationship with them. Christian forgiveness does not mean that we must subject ourselves to the same situation that led to the grief and pain in the first place. If, for example, a wife has been battered by her husband, and he seeks forgiveness - she may, by God's grace, eventually completely forgive him - but that forgiveness does not include returning to live with him. She may determine that her husband simply cannot behave in any other manner, and at this stage, apart from God's intervention which her husband may or may not accept, he is an abusive person. God does not expect us to return to abusive situations - the scene of the crime, as it were.

We must always remember that nothing we do can earn us God’s forgiveness and love. We gain salvation by a choice to accept Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. There is nothing we do physically to earn salvation. Our “good deeds” don’t count at all. Likewise, there is nothing we MUST do in the act of forgiving another person in order for God to forgive us. Rather, we can only really forgive another BECAUSE God has freely forgiven us.

[Back to Home]

The Narrow Gate

Matthew 7:13-14 is so often preached from the perspective of how hard it is to obey God and keep his laws. How does this apply in light of the grace of God?

Matthew 7:13-14 is one of those passages that seem to me to regularly be preached to mean something altogether different than the meaning that God intends. In fact, it may make my list of the top 25 most misunderstood and often misapplied passages in the entire Bible. This passage begins with Jesus' admonition to "enter through the narrow gate." However, as preachers and students of the Bible read these words it seems to me that many take their own feelings about what constitutes a difficult and narrow gate - and a wide gate and a broad road - and apply them to what Jesus is teaching.

We take our physical world, and the constraints that we experience and assume, "well, Jesus must be talking about how difficult it is to truly obey commandments and do the right thing. After all," we conclude (encouraged by religion), "look at the world. Just look at it. All those people just doing whatever they want whenever they want - they're on the broad road that leads to destruction."

But in this chapter Jesus is talking about misunderstandings that we have of God - and how we worship him - and how we treat (and mistreat) others - while thinking we are doing what God wants. For example, it is in the context of the entire chapter that Jesus gives the statements in vs. 21-23 - "not everyone who says "Lord, Lord" will enter the kingdom of heaven."
What really is the hardest thing for any human to do? To keep rules and regulations? To walk a "straight and narrow" religious walk? Or is the hardest thing for any human to truly trust in God? I believe it is easier to do "all the right things" and have all of our performance ducks lined up - than it is to truly accept God's grace. Accepting God's grace means that we surrender any and all attempts to control our life, and put our complete and total faith and trust in God's hands. Accepting God's grace means giving up any and all religious attempts to manipulate God, attempting to get him to do what we want him to do. That, in my mind, is far more difficult than trying to toe some religious line.

I believe the narrow gate is represented by those who truly do accept Jesus - those who embrace grace without reservation. I believe the broad road (again - remember that Jesus was talking in this chapter about those who were essentially trying to do the "right" things - not blatantly immoral and libertine folks) is about those are hurtling down a religious freeway, blissfully unaware that the only relationship they truly know and understand is with religion, not with God.

[Back to Home]

An Analogy of the Trinity of God

The doctrinal cornerstone of the Trinity which we can neither adequately picture nor explain has proved a stumbling block throughout the ages to many people’s belief in the God of the Bible. The inability to form a mental picture or to develop a complete explanation has caused many to wrongly conclude that the doctrine is contradictory or, at best, logically and rationally incoherent.

Jews reject the Trinity as a violation of God’s oneness. Muslims mock its “mathematical absurdity” as proof that their beliefs make much more sense than do those of Christians. Daniel Webster received public ridicule for his acceptance of it: “How can a man of your mental caliber believe that three equals one?”

More than 500 Scripture verses, Old and New Testament, refer to God as both singular and plural. We can somewhat picture an analogy for the Trinity of God with some characters we design on a computer screen. These screen people occupy only the two dimensions of the computer’s screen, while we reside in three. And for the sake of analogy, we can pretend they are able to physically think, feel, and know.

We can try to imagine what would happen if we brought one of our three-dimensional hands into contact with the two-dimensional computer screen people. If we were to touch their plane with the very tip of one finger, they would see us as a single point, a point that can, as the finger touches and withdraws from the plane, appear and disappear at any time. If we were to touch their plane with the bottom side of an extended finger, they would see us as a line. If instead of a finger extended straight out, we were to touch their plane with the bottom side of a curled up finger, they would see us as a curled line.

If the screen were not a solid barrier to us, we could push a finger perpendicular into their plane and this time the screen people would see us as a small, slightly irregular circle. If we were to push it deeper, they would observe us as an enlarging irregular circle. If our finger were to penetrate their plane at some other angel than the perpendicular, they would now see an elongated ellipse which would enlarge depending on the degree of penetration.

So from the screen people’s perspective, the finger could appear at different times as a point, a straight line, a curved line, a small irregular circle, a larger irregular circle, an elongated ellipse of variable size, or not even appear at all. They could easily conclude that the same finger is six or more different entities, each manifesting some distinct characteristics. They might never discern that the six-plus manifestations were all governed by one entity and one source of operation.

The analogy illustrates at least to some degree how we can misunderstand God’s contact with our world. Because He manifests Himself to the human race at different times and in different ways, we may conclude that God is not one but several deities or that He is one totally changeable, unpredictable, and undefinable deity.

Let’s take this illustration of the screen people and the human hand further. Suppose we penetrated the screen plane with two, three, or more fingers, and each of these would enter at a slightly different angle from the others. We could bend our pointer finger so that the fingertip just touches making a small dot, while at the same time our thumb passes into the plane sideways making an elongated ellipse, and our middle finger passes straight through the plane perpendicularly making an irregular circle. If we move these fingers, they may appear to the screen people to be functioning in complete independence of each other.

What the screen people could not see, nor even comprehend, is how the various circles and ellipses can be united into the closed surface, that is the skin, that encloses a body (or even a part of it, the hand).

The reverse difficulty could just as easily occur. If we were to pass our fist pressed tightly together through the plane right up to the wrist, the screen people would attest to the oneness of our hand while remaining ignorant of, and perhaps arguing against, the plurality manifest by our separate fingers.

Now what if the screen people became theologians. In response to the revelation of various cross-sections of our fingers, one group of screen people might become the equivalent of convinced polytheists, certain that multiple higher beings exist who can never be treated in any context as one.

In response to the revelation of the wrist cross-section, another group of screen people might become the equivalent of monotheists who insist that the one higher being can never, in any context, be two or more.

We can even imagine much debating among screen people who saw dots, lines, circles and ellipses, staying still or moving, appearing or disappearing. At some point one group might band together to found the Church of the Three Circles, while another group launches the Elliptical Society, another the Two Circle Fellowship, another the Science of Lines, and yet another the Church of the One True Ellipse.

The great irony of the disagreement about the higher being is that none of these groups and individuals has more than a tiny clue about who that being is and what that being can do.

What if one bold group of the screen people dared to acknowledge both the plural and singular manifestations of the higher being as possibly connected? Some of the smarted screen people may have studied our contacts closely enough to see that we first appeared as dots, but then the dots enlarged to form slightly irregular circles, which then flared out as the flat hand passed further and became one elongated sausage shape.

And what if some members of this screen group had received and read some electronic code from the person to whom the hand belongs. Based on their confidence that the code came from outside and spoke of possibilities beyond their screen life, this group might be willing to accept what they cannot picture, that a three-dimensional being does exist and can exist as a fourness and oneness simultaneously, continuously, and permanently. They could the draw up a Quadrinity doctrinal statement.

They would never, as part of the screen world, be able to picture these truths. But with some trust in the motivation of the higher being to make contact and explain him or herself truthfully (say through electronic messages), and perhaps by using their research in higher-dimensional math problems, they would have a justifiable faith in the fourness and at the same time oneness of this being from another dimension.

Even the best extra-dimensional analogies we humans could develop for Gods’ Trinity will fall short. We do not know the extent of God’s attributes, capacities, and extra-dimensionality. Though we certainly can expose more of God’s threeness and oneness to human comprehension, ultimately there are limits to what we can discover.


The intent of this analogy of our hand visiting screenland is to stimulate our thinking about God’s powers and attributes, including His triunity, from an extra-dimensional perspective. With the mind God has given us, we can surely develop more and better analogies with which to build our own faith and spark the faith of others.

How many of us are willing to admit that our view of God extends just slightly above the earthly horizon? If we laughed at the Quadrinitarians’ gross underestimates of their God, what can we say for ourselves? We must certainly sweep away doubts about God’s capacity to manifest Himself as a Triune Being – a TRINITY!

[Back to Home]

God's Nearness To Us

God’s nearness to us, His constant awareness of everything about us, is woven like a thread throughout the Bible. The reminders are pervasive, from Genesis to Revelation. Any message repeated so often must be important. And it must be one we will have some difficulty grasping.

To believe that God sees, knows, and understands everything about every human being; that He sees us individually, not as a generic group; that He stays closer to each one of us than we can stay to each other; that He sees our actions, hears our words, and knows our thoughts requires faith.

At times, it even seems we must simply take His word for it. And we do, but not always. Sometimes we forget. Sometimes we doubt. Sometimes we wish He were not scrutinizing our lives so closely, and then a moment later we fear that He has stopped seeing and hearing us – or worse yet stopped accepting us as we are, with all our foolishness and weakness.

God really is omnipresent. His omnipresence, of course, applies to ALL dimensions and realms, to those we live in (four space-time dimensions), and to those beyond what we can discover mathematically (ten space-time dimensions), and to those beyond what we could ever discover.

People say, “If I could just see God and have a human conversation with Him, I would believe!” We cannot help but think that the disciples had an easier time knowing Him, believing Him, understanding Him, trusting Him, and loving Him than we do. And when He said He was leaving, how on earth would they get along without Him? But Jesus promised He would not leave them to their own resources. By their choice of faith, the Holy Spirit (and Jesus Himself as Paul later teaches) would come to live in them. They didn’t understand how. But they couldn’t.

We can somewhat picture in our mind’s eye the kind of relationship we could develop with some characters we design on a computer screen. These screen people occupy only the two dimensions of the computer’s screen, while we reside in three. Given the right software, we could give them color and animation, and we could create splendid scenes for them to move around in, all the while sending electronic signals to let them know of our presence. In reality, of course, these two-dimensional beings would not possess the capacity to think, feel, and know anything in a physical sense like we do because atoms, molecules, brains, nerves, and so on require three large space dimensions. But, for the sake of the analogy, we can pretend they are able to physically think, feel, and know.

As their designers, we know everything about them. Whatever capacities they possess, we gave them. If we enable them to move about the screen, we know the possibilities and the limits of their mobility. Whether they come to recognize the fact or not, their existence depends entirely on us. They have not control over the power supply, the “on” switch, that keeps electricity flowing into the system that is their universe.

We can imagine the difficulty that Mr. and Mrs. Screen would have in comprehending us and relating to us. Could they be certain of our existence? Perhaps reasonably so, if they came to recognize their incapacity to create themselves or anything else in their screen environment, and if they discern that their power source is located outside their realm.

Could they perceive our three-dimensionality and how it compares with their two-dimensionality? Given adequate research, they may discover enough about themselves and their environment to recognize that a third dimension must exist for them to exist, but they will never fully comprehend what a difference that third dimension makes, nor will they be able to visualize more than two dimensions at a time.

A three-dimensional being (us) can approach their plane of the computer screen from the depth dimension and place a fingertip a hundredth of a millimeter from the body of either one of them. Despite this close proximity, Mr. and Mrs. Screen would be unable to detect the fingertip’s presence, much less understand and describe its physical characteristics.

As close as these characters may come to each other on the screen, they will remain unable to detect certain things about themselves, characteristics that we can easily observe from our three-dimensional perspective. All they can perceive of one another are various lines. If they are round, they may figure out that their bodies are circular by carefully moving around one another, but they will not see each other’s circles as we who look on from outside the screen see them. We can program them to rebound off each other and to make a certain sound when they do, but they have only growing and shrinking lines to indicate movement.

We observe something else about the screen people that they can never see. We can see what is inside them. The details and workings of their interior body parts, for example, are fully exposed to us. The amount of information we have about them is at least an order of magnitude (at least a factor of ten times) greater than what any of them possesses.

In this simple analogy, just one dimension separates the screen people from us humans. And yet, the advantage of that one extra dimension suffices to explain how we could be closer to the screen people than they are to each other, fully comprehending them inside and out, while remaining invisible and untouchable to them.

God’s dimensional advantage over us goes far beyond this one-dimensional difference. He can operate in a number of more dimensions. His capacity to maintain close and comprehensive contact with us – despite our incapacity to experience Him physically through our space-bound dimensions – becomes a living reality.

In “The Matrix” movie trilogy, a human being enters into the cyberspace of a computer program and interacts with it. In our analogy, visiting Mr. and Mrs. Screen by entering their cyberspace would bridge the gap. And this is exactly what the Trinity of God did. One Person of the Trinity, Jesus Christ, came and entered into the human four dimensions (three of space and one of time). And who stayed outside the screen to handle the controls? The Father within the Trinity.

By entering the computer program of the universe, and becoming like the creatures within the program, Jesus was able to teach and demonstrate aspects of His greater dimensions, even though human understanding was limited.

Making sense of His nearness (in fact, His living right within us when we choose to accept Him as Savior and Lord) is more important than physically sensing His nearness. Pleasure and physical nearness are good, but the pleasures and nearness available to us in His extra dimensions go immeasurably beyond what we can think or imagine, as His written Word declares.

In one sense, God’s invisibility and untouchability keep our yearnings focused where they rightly belong, on the supernatural realm that awaits us. His written Word combines with evidences in this spectacular but limited physical realm to communicate that His desire and plan involve transporting us, at some future moment along our time line, across our dimensional barriers into His super-dimensional realm.

Yes, Mr. and Mrs. Screen CAN jump off the computer screen and enter our living room with us and be like us.

We cannot begin to picture it, except perhaps by analogy, but it does make sense.

[Back to Home]

YOU Can't Live the Christian Life! Part Two

In Part One, I solidified the fact that only Christ in you can live your Christian life. Now what are the practical aspects of getting to know Christ in you personally so that you can trust him to live the Christian life for you?

Your mind wanders. You feel a sense of guilt when you get personal with Jesus in you. You also get sleepy. You don’t know what to talk to the Lord about. You get distracted. These are the present hindrances that you face in your prayer life. Is there a solution?

There are only two things that exist in our material realm that belong to and are native to the spiritual realm. One is the Scripture, which is God-breathed. The other is your spirit. Your spirit belongs to and is now part of the other realm – the spirit realm. Join these two elements together (your spirit and Scripture) and you have a key for dealing with these age old hindrances.

What I shall present to you is not the only way to enter into a meaningful fellowship with Christ within. It is simply A way. But we all need somewhere to begin, a starting point do we not?

You are about to enter into an ancient and greatly revered practice of the saints of all the centuries past, a heritage that has been passed down through two millennia of the Christian faith. You are about to turn Scripture into prayer.

Assignment One

Get alone. Get quiet. Calm your mind. Bask in the presence of Jesus within you for a time. Next, open your Bible to Psalm 23. Speak out loud, and TALK Psalm 23 to your Lord. Paraphrase or adapt something like this:
Lord Jesus, you are my Shepherd. You take care of me. You always have taken care of me. You are taking care of me now. You will take care of me in the future. I am a lamb. I was made for a shepherd. You are that Shepherd. And it is true, I have never wanted, and right now I have no real needs.

Take time to let this sink in. Then turn to Galatians 2:20 and adapt:
Jesus, I was crucified and died with you on the cross but now I live again with you living in me. And my life in the world is meant to be you living it for me and through me.

Take more time to let this sink in.

Maybe this is all your prayer life should consist of for many days. Do not read assignment two until you are very secure in assignment one.

Assignment Two

Assignment two is very similar to assignment one. There is one major difference, and that one difference makes all the difference in the world.

In assignment one, YOU were the entire center of everything that was prayed (see all the me’s and I’s). This is pretty typical of the vantage point of most of our praying, is it not?

Now you are about to go to a new approach, one you might never have taken before. You are going to step completely out of the prayer! Not once while proceeding on will you make a personal reference to yourself. This time you will be WATCHING the fellowship of the Father and the Son.

Your prayer from Psalm 23 might come out something like this:
Father, when Jesus was here on this earth, you were his Shepherd. He never had any needs. You met all his needs. You are all that Jesus has ever needed. Lord Jesus, while you lived here on earth, your Father was your rest. You rested in him. He replenished your soul. Your Father was your drink. He was your food. He was your full supply. Father, you are the righteousness of Jesus. You are his path. Jesus lived and moved in your righteousness. He followed you, and he glorified your name.

Notice that you are not part of the prayer. You just changed perspectives. Take time to let this new perspective sink in. Then continue with Galatians 2:20:
Jesus, you died on the cross by the will of the Father. The Father was in you before your death and the Father was in you again after your resurrection. The life that you led on this earth was always by the life of the Father within you. You lived by faith in the Father to direct his ways through you.

Again, nothing about you, only about Christ and the Father. Take time again to really acknowledge this new perspective in your relationship with Christ within you.

Assignment Three

You are going to reintroduce yourself back into the picture but only as a living union between you and Jesus. You are united with him. You can never be separated from him. The relationship is unique from anything known on this earth. But it is real and enduring – Christ/Bob; Christ/Mary; Christ/Joe; Christ/Jane.

Psalm 23 will probably come across something like this:
Father, you are the Shepherd of Christ/Bob – you take care of us in our union. We were made for a Shepherd. Father, by living your life in our union, we have never truly wanted and never will. Christ/Bob rests in you. You replenish the soul. You are our full supply. You are our path of righteousness. We, as a living union, will always glorify your name.

For as long as it takes, get settled in this concept of union with Jesus Christ. Think about you/him, you/him, in all that comes to your mind.

Galatians 2:20 becomes something like this:
Father, I know that Christ/Bob died on the cross but that this unique spiritual entity lives again – today, right now in the twenty-first century. And everything that we as a unit do in this world is done through the power of you, the Father, who continues to live his “Christian” life through us.

Assignment Four

Grow in this understanding. And what will you have gained in all this? You will have joined into the fellowship of the Godhead. You will be learning to differentiate between your spirit where Christ dwells in union, and your soulish emotions and will. You will have learned to love in this union of your spirit and the Spirit of Christ – to listen, to respond, to fellowship with him. And, hopefully, you will have learned (on more and more occasions) to absent yourself and simply enjoy the miracle of the Father’s “Christian life” living out from this union of Christ in you, as you, and through you.

[Back to Home]

YOU Can't Live the Christian Life!

Did the following scene ever take place?

“My Son, we have lived together in realms of the etermals, in perfect fellowship. But now you are going to earth. Earth is fallen, its inhabitants are sinful. The true Christian life can be lived only in the pure realm of the spirituals, in a perfect spirit. You can no longer live by my life on planet earth. When you go through that door into that other fallen realm, all will change! Down there you will no longer live in the fellowship of the Godhead. No, you must learn another way to live. It is not as high as the way you have known with me here. No, the way you live on earth is called the lower way to live the Christian life! From now on you must study your Bible every day, you must pray every day, witness, fast, tithe, speak in tongues (?), and go to church. These are the means by which one lives the Christian life on planet earth.”

Do you think such a conversation ever took place? Certainly not. When the Lord Jesus came to earth, he did pray, he did fast, and he did witness. But these things were the outward expressions – the overflow of an internal experience.

The question we must now face is, “Did Jesus Christ change the way he lived the Christian life once he got to earth?” Was there a radical change in the ground rules, or did the way remain unchanged, passing from the spiritual realm to the physical realm?

Take a closer look at Jesus the Christian. It was from WITHIN that the Lord Jesus grew in spiritual awareness. He began sensing an indwelling Lord…his Father! God the Father was living in Jesus’ spirit. The spiritual realm was inside the man named Jesus Christ. He lived on this earth, but the supply of living the Christian life came from his spirit.

His way of living the Christian life was (1) to go to his Father’s life, located in his spirit, (2) to draw upon that life, and (3) to allow that life to express itself in this realm, through his soul and body. The engine had not changed. The means of living the Christian life had not changed. The engine of the Christian life was still his Father’s life…in Christ.

To this point we have seen only three Christians – the Trinity in the eternals before creation! Then one member of the Godhead came to earth exhibiting the outliving of the Christian life for us here on earth. The fellowship of the Godhead entered into a kind of “stage two.” And nothing changed from stage one to stage two, except the backdrop!

Did the following scene ever take place?

The Lord Jesus calls Simon Peter aside to talk to him privately. “Peter, I am about to return to the other realm. There are some things we need to get straight before I leave. When I lived in my Father before I came here, he and I had a unique relationship together. Then I came to earth. Nothing changed; the Father and I simply continued living out the same relationship we had experienced in eternity. My Father continued supplying me with all of his life source. I lived by his life. While here on earth, he lived in me. We fellowshiped together each day by means of his indwelling. Peter, you understand all of that was for ME. This is MY secret to living the Christian life. But, Peter, I want you to get this clear! All that was for me and is not for you! You are fallen. You, Peter, must live the Christian life by other means than I do. Do you understand this? None of this living by my Father’s life. None of this indwelling Lord. Certainly never think, that you will be invited to join in the fellowship between my Father and me.

“The secret to the Christian life for you, Peter? Well, you have to live the Christian life by you own efforts. First of all (and above everything else), you have to live a good life. Watch out how you behave and how you dress. Do good. Be nice. Next, stop sinning. That is the heart of all I came to accomplish, to stop people from sinning so much! When tempted, bow your neck and determine not to sin. Next, you have to pray. Pray hard and long…every day. The Christian life for you is grunt, grit, and gumption. Read your Bible. Spend lots and lots of time in the Bible. Memorize some verses.”

(Uh, excuse me Lord, I have a problem here. I cannot read. And what is a verse?”)

Is this what the Lord Jesus said to Peter? If it is, then we are all stuck with a second-class way to live the Christian life. True, every element in that formula has merit, but that formula has never, and never will, contain the primary ingredients of the secret to the Christian life. This second-class way to live the Christian life for us peasants calls for a great deal of human exertion and outward performance. The outward things become all important. Pleasing God, or trying to by outward displays!

Take you choice. Each of us must choose what will be our central concentration: an indwelling Lord or an objective, outward performance; fellowshipping with him or trying to make him happy by being good and doing lots of nice things. We really do not have nay other options. Speaking personally, I have tried both, and there is no comparison.

His closest followers chose the way of an indwelling Lord and fellowship with that Lord. For them it was no choice at all because they had never even heard of the other way. And no wonder. “Pray and read your Bible” as being the Christian life had not even been invented yet.

Do you think the following conversation ever took place?

Peter is speaking. “Now listen up, you three thousand. I am only going to say this once. There are two kinds of Christians: those of us who live the Christian life by the same means Jesus Christ lived the Christian life – and then there is YOU! We apostles are in on this first way. But you are second-class Christians. You do not get the same equipment the Lord Jesus had, or that we have. You are peasants. You are to struggle. Did you hear me? Grunt! Grit! Strain! Use your will, your best effort!

“We apostles got to see firsthand how Jesus lived the Christian life. But you did not. Remember that. That puts you in a lower class. We lived with him. He dwells within us just like the Father dwelt within him. There is no way to pass on to you what we have. So, here is your way to live the Christian life. Work hard at doing things to please God. Read your Bible. (We promise to get it written as soon as possible. You might even have a chance to own a copy by about 300AD if you’re still alive and have lots of money.) Fast, go to church, tithe, and a few other things I will tell you about later.”

Was the above formula imparted to the three thousand as the secret to the Christian life? And is this what is expected of all the rest of us Christians who will come after them? Are you cut off from the fellowship of the Godhead? Do we get an intimate touch with a divine Lord only at the moment of salvation?

Basically what these formulas are saying is: Become saved – that is a truly spiritual, other-realm profound internal experience. BUT after that the Christian life is all grit, groan, and grunt. This kind of Christian life is on about the same level as “how to live the Muslim life,” or “how to live the Hebrew life.” Where is that which is truly unique to the Christian? A living, indwelling Christ is the “something” we have that no other religion on earth can offer. In fact, other religions never dreamed of offering such a wonder.

Take any other starting point than an indwelling Lord and you will end up with something terribly off course, incredibly short of the mark, indescribably shallow, totally unworkable, and probably just a hair away from humanism. What you are apt to find s not much more than a bootstrap religion. The greatest day you will ever live is the day that God, by revelation, shows you that you CANNOT live the Christian life. Human beings are the wrong species for living the Christian life. Furthermore, if you become the right species by faith in Christ as Savior and Lord, you are still the wrong person. The Christian life is – always has been – and always will be, the exclusive territory of the living God. He ALONE lives the Christian life! And if this is really a fact, then there really is a lot of unlearning and relearning to be done.

[Back to Home]