Hidden Blessings

The sweetest blessings are the ones far beyond our reach – the ones that seem unattainable, the ones for which we must wait the longest. The Book of Ruth is a book of delayed and completely unexpected blessing.

Because of a severe draught, Naomi and her husband left Israel to settle in a foreign land – Moab. Her husband died shortly after this. Her two sons married women of the land. However, before they conceived, both of her sons died and Naomi was left with two seemingly barren Moabitess daughters-in-law – Orpah and Ruth – and without hope of grandchildren.

It seemed as if her life was over. She had lost everything. It even seemed that “the hand of the Lord had gone against” her. She therefore ordered her daughters-in-law to return to their families where they would have better prospects of finding a real life.

Meanwhile, Naomi had heard that the draught in Israel had lifted, and she was determined to return. Orpah returned to her people. However, Ruth wouldn’t, and she memorably pleaded:

• “Don’t urge me to leave you or to turn back from you. Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there I will be buried. May the Lord deal with me, be it ever so severely, if even death separates you and me.” (Ruth 1:16-17)

Nevertheless, Naomi had despaired of her faith in the wake of such misfortune. Upon her return to Bethlehem, when she was greeted by her old friends, she responded with gloom:

•  “Don’t call me Naomi [pleasant],” she told them. “Call me Mara [bitter], because the Almighty has made my life very bitter. I went away full, but the Lord has brought me back empty. Why call me Naomi? The Lord has afflicted me; the Almighty has brought misfortune upon me.” (Ruth 1:20-21)

Back in Israel, the young Ruth proved her virtue. Instead of receiving the attentions of young suitors, she offered herself to Boaz, Naomi’s relative – the one man by whom Ruth could bare grandchildren for Naomi (Ruth 3:10)!

By the inscrutable grace of God, she conceived immediately and bore a child named Obed. This turned out to be such a wonderful and unexpected blessing that:

• The women said to Naomi: “Praise be to the Lord, who this day has not left you without a guardian-redeemer. May he become famous throughout Israel!  He will renew your life and sustain you in your old age. For your daughter-in-law, who loves you and who is better to you than seven sons, has given him birth.” (Ruth 4:14-15)

Grandchildren were considered a great blessing, far more than they are today. There is no doubt that the women had any idea that their invocation regarding a “guardian protector” was prophetic. However, Naomi’s grandson Obed had been fated to beget Jesse, and Jesse, David the King of Israel.

We cannot contain such honor unless we have been prepared for it through periods of tears and loss. The more the cistern is carved and scraped out, the more water it will hold. The more disappointments and hardships, the greater capacity to contain blessing! Otherwise, the weeds of pride and arrogance, which abound in fertile soil, would choke out whatever good might be growing alongside.

Instead, we require a regular pruning to keep us healthy, as Jesus explained:

• “I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.  He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.” (John 15:1-2)

Some trees will kill themselves by their own growth if not pruned. However, the Lord is close to those He has cut back, the broken-hearted (Isa. 57:15; 66:1-2). Through David would come the promised King Messiah, and in His lineage, we can find many of the broken-hearted. The foreigner Ruth, a Moabitess, is accompanied by the prostitute Rahab, and a woman who had lost a number of husbands – a woman who had to seduce her father-in-law, Judah, in order to have children.

Naomi had no idea of the glory that would proceed from her. She had thought herself a victim of God, but He was preparing for something glorious through her – for the Savior of the world.

Are the Hebrew Scriptures Barbaric?

Skeptics denigrate the Old Testament in a number of ways. The atheist Richard Dawkins termed the God of the Old Testament a “Genocidal Maniac.” Others take issue with the Mosaic Laws, claiming that they are barbaric, citing the punitive requirement of an:

• Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. (Exodus 21:24-25)

In support of their position, they cite Jesus, who they claim had revised this primitive and embarrassing legal code:

• “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.” (Mat. 5:38-41)

However, it seems apparent that Jesus is not correcting the Mosaic Law but rather its abuse within 1^st century Israel. For one thing, the conclusion that Jesus was correcting Moses’ law violated everything else He had taught. He had started His Sermon on the Mount with a warning:

• “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.  For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” (Mat. 5:17-18).

We are therefore constrained to interpret what follows, not as the abolishing of the Law, but as the correcting the abuse of the Law.

Had Jesus instead prefaced His remarks by saying, “It has been written,” then a case could be made that He was correcting the Law. However, He instead prefaced His remarks with, “You have heard that it was said.”

In contrast, instead of, “You have heard that it was said,” He responded to the Devil’s temptation by unequivocally citing Scripture:

• Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.”

In all of His corrections in the Sermon of the theology of His day, Jesus never uttered, “It is written!” Besides, He clearly affirmed the necessity to live according to “every word that comes from the mouth of God” – the very thing that the Torah always asserted. After having insisted that man must live by “every word,” it’s simply unreasonable to suppose that, in the next chapter, He was disposing of many of these words.

Also, had He been teaching against the Mosaic Law, He would have been brought up on capital charges. However, such charges were never brought against Him.

What then was Jesus teaching against? In order to understand this, we first have to examine the “eye for an eye” principle in its original context:

·         Eye for eye, tooth for tooth…An owner who hits a male or female slave in the eye and destroys it must let the slave go free to compensate for the eye.  And an owner who knocks out the tooth of a male or female slave must let the slave go free to compensate for the tooth. (Exo. 21:24-27)

After presenting the “eye for an eye” principle, Moses provides some examples of how it should be applied. If a slave-owner knocks out a tooth or an eye of a slave, the Law didn’t require that the owner would have his eye or tooth removed, according to a literal erroneous interpretation. Instead, the principle was to be applied more figuratively – the slave would go free!

Rather than being barbaric, this principle required that the penalty fit the crime! It represented an advancement over the legal codes of Moses day that often imposed the death penalty upon a thief stealing a sheep to feed his family.

To what then had Jesus objected? To the abuse of the Law! It seems that the powerful had appropriated an “eye for an eye” to justify personal revenge. They had hijacked a sound principle of public justice for private use.

We have a way of “seeing” those things that justify our case. If we want to prove that the Bible is barbaric, it is easy to construe it that way. Many do! However, it requires more effort to understand this ancient collection of writings in the way that they were originally intended.

Incivility, Polarization and Death

I am shocked by the level of hatred I find on the net. Here’s one example of a dialogue based upon an Atheist Facebook posting:

• Prayer is like masturbation. It feels good for the person doing it, but does nothing for the person they are thinking about.

Sometimes, I just like to inject an alternate point-of-view. Here’s my response:

ME: It depends on to whom you are praying!

ATHEIST:  In case you haven't noticed; you're not welcome here! This is an atheist page, you can go elswhere if you don't like it! Why don't you go to your own dumb christian page and fucking stay there? How about that? And stop stalking us like some retarded internet pervert, you're even worse than them! Noone cares for what you have to say, so just go away!

ME: I am sorry to be the cause of consternation. Either you un-friend me or I'll un-friend you if that's what others want.

ATHEIST: First of all, we're not friends, second, which part of get the hell out don't you understand? This is no place for you, none wants you here, so go preach on your own page and leave us alone.

ME: You're speaking for others, but where are they?

This is not unusual. Actually, it’s almost representative. Interestingly, the respondent is a woman.

What does it suggest? Well, for one thing, it reflects the growing antagonism towards our faith. Jesus warned us about this:

• "All this I have told you so that you will not go astray. They will put you out of the synagogue; in fact, a time is coming when anyone who kills you will think he is offering a service to God.” (John 16:1-2)

It also reflects something else – the disintegration of our once great civilization. We are a body fighting against itself – no, warring against itself. In contrast to this, the late French scholar, Alexis De Tocqueville, wrote (cir. 1830) about the strong sense of mutual responsibility, common morality, and cohesiveness that the American people shared. He tried to fathom the basis of what he observed:

• I sought for the key to the greatness and genius of America in her harbors...in her fertile fields and boundless forests; in her rich mines and vast world commerce; in her public school system and institutions of learning. I sought for it in her democratic Congress and in her matchless Constitution. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great. (Democracy in America)

Suffering: A Gift or a Curse?

Suffering is a reality of life, especially the Christian life. In fact, rarely have I met a Christian who isn’t suffering, some intensely. And it is understandable and natural that we ask, “Why me, God?”

However, in order to answer this common and perplexing question, we need to make a distinction between the suffering and our understanding of it. Interestingly, for some, the suffering can be unbearable; for others, it is entirely bearable. What makes the difference? The way we understand it! If we understand our suffering as something necessary and therefore good, it becomes bearable. If we understand it as a curse, it feels like a curse.

Two friends both contracted incurable illnesses. One regarded it as a curse, a sign of God’s disfavor, and he experienced it as a curse. The other regarded his illness as a sign of God’s love and faithfulness and therefore regarded it as a blessing. He understood that God disciplines His children out of His great love, and therefore saw his disease as a gift from God (Heb. 12:5-11).

But is it really a gift or are we just conning ourselves? According to Scripture, if we want to reign with Christ and bear His image to the world, we must endure suffering (2 Cor. 4:10-11). Paul was arguably the greatest missionary known to the church. However, he had to be prepared for this great work and honor through extreme suffering.

In the process of persecuting the church, God struck him down with blindness. Then He instructed the faithful Ananias to lay his hands upon Paul to heal him of his blindness. Ananias complained that Paul was the leading enemy of the church. However, God revealed that Paul was His chosen one and that Paul would have to suffer terribly for Him:

•       . But the Lord said to Ananias, “Go! This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel. I will show him how much he must suffer for my name.” (Acts 9:15-16)

However, Paul learned to value his suffering:

•       . Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was pelted with stones, three times I was shipwrecked…I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked.  Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches.

The suffering seems to have produced great compassion in him.

•       Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn? (2 Cor. 11:24-29)

Nevertheless, he pleaded with God to remove a certain unnamed affliction. However, God informed him that He wouldn’t, and that by doing so would have an adverse affect on Paul. He subsequently came to understand that when he was weak, it was then that he became strong in faith through the grace of God (2 Cor. 12:7-10). Consequently, he came to regard suffering as a gift and not a curse.

I too have come to regard suffering as a precious gift. However, this understanding didn’t come until after decades of suffering depression, followed by panic attacks. Only in retrospect did I come to see that the suffering served to release me from psychological imprisonment unto a faith and a reliance upon Him through His Word, as David had reflected:

•       It was good for me to be afflicted so that I might learn your decrees. (Psalm 119:71).

Paul also explained that suffering served as a trainer to show him the foolishness of self-trust and the necessity for God-trust:

•       We do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about the troubles we experienced in the province of Asia. We were under great pressure, far beyond our ability to endure, so that we despaired of life itself.  Indeed, we felt we had received the sentence of death. But this happened that we might not rely on ourselves but on God, who raises the dead. (2 Cor. 1:8-9).

Self-trust is our natural default position. Only the fires of suffering can consume it and the arrogance that self-reliance breeds.

Surgery can be painful, but it is also necessary. It can be a blessing. God’s mysterious surgery is also a blessing. To regard it as a curse is to misunderstand both God and His ways. It’s also to make the suffering far worse.

Invented Moralities: Their Inevitable Fate

The way we believe determines the way we will eventually live. If we believe that morality is merely something we invent, we will invent or delete convictions as we are confronted by new desires and pressures. Francis Collins, former head of the Human Genome Project, asked this critical question of the famous evolutionist, Richard Dawkins, in a Times Magazine debate (11/13/06, p. 55.):

·        “Do humans have a different moral significance than cows in general.”

To this, Dawkins responded, “Humans have more moral responsibility perhaps, because they are capable of reasoning.” However, prior to this, Dawkins claimed, “I don’t believe that there is hanging out there, anywhere, something called good and something called evil.”

But how then can any human be held responsible, even if we do have more intelligence than cows? It’s like reasoning about the relative merits of the good-tooth-fairy vs. the indomitable-snowman. If they don’t exist, there’s nothing to reason about. If “good” and “evil” are not “hanging out there,” then “moral responsibility” can be no more than a passing fad or an electro-chemical impulse.

It’s like indicting someone for breaking a law that doesn’t exist! If there isn’t an objective and unchanging moral principle to break, then it is not objectively possible to hold anyone to account, no matter how aware or intelligent she might be.

However, society will not survive for long in such a moral vacuum. I remember reading that the existentialist Albert Camus concluded that “a man without morals is a beast.” And he will also act like a beast if that’s all he thinks he is. Therefore, if morals don’t ontologically exist, then we have to invent them.

Therefore, in The Selfish Gene, Dawkims becomes the inventor:

• Let us try to teach generosity and altruism, because we are born selfish.

But will moral invention sustain society without an adequate rational basis? Truly society needs generosity and altruism so it doesn’t unravel, but ultimately, if it’s all about human selfishness without moral absolutes, why shouldn’t it unravel? Why “teach generosity and altruism?” If we’re selfish to the core, then why not be true to that core and live it out?

Ultimately, secularism cannot answer these questions. What makes us any more valuable than the bovine? Why should our admittedly selfish concerns trump their concern for their own skins? And what if we’re more intelligent than cows? Does a higher IQ make us more valuable? If there is no God who created us in His image, then “value” is nothing more than a transient feeling, a social construct or a chauvinistic bias.  

Why not instead live according to the “survival of the fittest,” as past evolutionists candidly proclaimed? Historian Richard Weikart cites German pathologist Hugo Ribbert as a representative spokesman for the evolutionists of his day - the beginning of the 20^th century:

• The care for individuals who from birth onwards are useless both mentally and physically, who for themselves and their fellow creatures are a burden merely, persons of negative value, is a function altogether useless to humanity, and indeed positively injurious. 

According to this construct, some humans are winners, while some are losers, and your neighbors and your friendly family physician will ultimately decide this for you. There is nothing that can rule out eugenics in a world that deems some as “useless.” What happens to those who fail the IQ or popularity test? What reasoning can be brought against Ribbert’s assertion that those who society deems “useless” are not entitled to care? None!

What then of our cherished “Bill of Rights?” Why should it pertain equally to everyone, whether useful or useless? If we follow the logic of Dawkins and Hibbert, it shouldn’t! What then will be the fate of the vulnerable members of our society? Should we even care?

There can be little doubt about the answer to these questions. National Socialism and Atheistic Communism have given us compelling testimony to this fact - that whenever our God is replaced by an “ism,” humanity, stripped naked of His protective, value-imparting image (Genesis 1:26), becomes an object to be manipulated or even exterminated by the overriding interests of the “ism.”

When moral absolutes are eliminated, we eventually become mere objects to serve the corporate “good.”  Colson and Pearcey, How Shall We Now Live?, write about the demise of the Christian worldview:

• Denial of sin may appear to be a benign and comforting doctrine, but in the end, it is demeaning and destructive, for it denies the significance of our choices and actions. It reduces us to a pawn in the grip of larger forces…Social planners and controllers then feel perfectly justified in trying to control those forces, to remake human nature and rebuild society according to their own blueprints—and to apply any force required toward that end. (pg. 183)

Dawkins has another problem. If he denies everything he can’t touch and smell, then he should also deny that reason and logic are “hanging out there.” Admittedly, reason and logic produce results, but the lack of moral absolutes also produces results – cynicism and contempt for any moralizing, anything that slows us in the pursuit of our lusts.

The German poet Heinrich Heine was able to see the approach of Hitler’s National Socialism from afar:

• "It is to the great credit of Christianity that it has somewhat attenuated the brutal German lust for battle...And should ever that taming talisman break--the Cross--then will come roaring back the wild madness of the ancient warriors...For thought goes before deed as lightening before thunder. There will be played in Germany a play compared to which the French revolution was but an innocent idyll." (cir. 1830) 

If thought goes before deed, then our modern secular moral relativists are paving the way for another great horror – perhaps even a series of them.

The Bible is not Fundamentally the Word of Man but of God

The Bible is an un-natural and un-human book. This is because it doesn’t reflect the types of things that we humans would write. The Bible also makes a seemingly outlandish claim about itself - It cannot be properly understood without the assistance of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 2:10-16)! Let me try to illustrate this fact. An atheistic website provided a good example of this failure to understand the Bible:

·        From Genesis to Revelation prominent individuals abound. But are they really worthy of respect and admiration? Was their behavior such that you would want to awaken your children on Sunday morning to read about their exploits?

In many respects, not! The article confidently proceeds to line up all the misdeeds about these “prominent individuals” to prove that the Bible lacks virtuous role models and therefore its morality is seriously deficient and unworthy as a moral guide, let alone a divine revelation. For instance, the atheist writes that Abraham:

·        Told his wife to lie, debauched Hagar, his maidservant, sent his maidservant and her child into the wilderness, lied, and married his half-sister.

Although this is all true, it fails to prove that the Bible is unworthy of serious consideration. This atheistic interpretation confuses description with prescription – the description of Abraham’s life with a moral prescription for us. It fails to understand that Abraham’s life and the lives of the other Patriarchs were never intended to be models for moral behavior. Admittedly, they had done dastardly things.

The atheistic author even misses the real dirt about Abraham — that he pimped his wife Sarah on several occasions! However, this author misses far more — the grace of God for sinners like us! The article concludes, “Anyone approaching the Bible for goodness, decency, role models, and morality, enters at his own peril.” This, of course, is true! However, humankind fails to grasp that Christ is the actual role model and not the wretches He stoops to save.

Even the life of Israel’s greatest king, David, is also blemished by serious moral failures – polygamy, adultery, murder, and cover-up. However, even orthodox Jews will not face what is so clearly spelled out in Scripture. When I was explaining the mercy of God to King David, an orthodox Jew cut me off:

·        You don’t understand! The Talmud explains that David was entirely righteous in killing the evil husband Uriah and marrying his wife Bathsheba.

However, this Talmudic interpretation is totally at odds with the biblical account. It reveals that God was angry with David over these sins. Although He forgave David, He also punished Him severely for them:

·        Then David said to Nathan [the prophet who confronted David about his sins], "I have sinned against the Lord." Nathan replied, "The Lord has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. But because by doing this you have made the enemies of the Lord show utter contempt, the son born to you will die." (2 Samuel 12:13-14)

This isn’t an honest interpretive mistake. The Talmud, and orthodox Judaism, consistently rationalizes the very apparent sins of the their Patriarchs and heroes. Why? They are unwilling to see what is plainly written! Why? We humans want a religion – a belief system – that we can humanly understand. We cannot understand a religion where the founders of our faith acted in an embarrassing, undignified way. We want to feel that we are on the winning team characterized by elite and honorable people, not liars and pimps.

Throughout, in the Bible, the warts of God’s people are clearly evidenced. None of Israel’s kings get a clean bill of health. They were all seriously blemished. It makes us wonder how the writers of the Bible were able to get away with these disclosures with their lives. It also makes us wonder what had impelled them to write so honestly about their kings and also about the failures of Israel. Even more surprisingly, we have to wonder what had impelled Israel to canonize such derogatory writings.

Even more startling, are the denunciations of Israel by the Prophets of Israel! Often, they didn’t get away with these denunciations with their lives. However, despite the fact that they were hated – the light is always painful – their writings were nevertheless accepted as the Word of God. Why? I think that there is only one way to understand this phenomenon – It was undeniable that these Prophets spoke the Word of God, however offensive that it might have been!

There are so many counter-human aspects of Scripture. While the Koran assures the Muslim that he is the greatest, the Bible assures Israel that they are the least:

·        Do not say to yourself, "The Lord has brought me here to take possession of this land because of my righteousness." No, it is on account of the wickedness of these nations that the Lord is going to drive them out before you. It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going in to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations, the Lord your God will drive them out before you, to accomplish what he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. 6Understand, then, that it is not because of your righteousness that the Lord your God is giving you this good land to possess, for you are a stiff-necked people. Remember this and never forget how you provoked the Lord your God to anger in the desert. From the day you left Egypt until you arrived here, you have been rebellious against the Lord. (Deut. 9:4-7)

Moses never stroked Israel’s self-esteem, as anyone trying to gain a following would do. Instead, he repeatedly told Israel that they would fail to follow their God and that they would be consumed (Deut. 32:5-33). Despite these despairing messages, Israel received these insults as the Word of God. Why? They must have been convinced that these were God’s words!

This pattern – it’s all about God and His mercy and not about our worthiness - is maintained throughout the entire Bible. Jesus’ disciples were never complemented by their Master. Instead, the only two whose faith was praised were both of the detested Gentiles. Meanwhile, the disciples portrayed themselves as bumbling idiots. Why? If they wanted to influence others in favor of their Christ-centered faith, why would they portray themselves in such a negative way? Who would want to follow such ignoramuses! Evidently, for them, there was something more important than looking good – the truth of God!

We humans like to exalt our forefathers and, by doing so, we exalt ourselves. The Talmud and the religions of the world are all too human in this regard. As a new Christian, this too was my tendency. I was deeply disturbed to read about the blemishes of Abraham and David. These seemed to detract from my new-found religion. However, as God continued to reveal to me my own unworthiness along with His forgiveness, I learned to delight in the incredible love and patience He demonstrated to His Old Testament “saints.” But my eyes had to first be opened!

This is perhaps one of the great ironies — the more the skeptic battles against the Faith, the more he inevitably demonstrates its veracity. Scripture can only be truly understood through the inner working of the Spirit!

How the Gospel Frees Us from Psychological Oppression

Christianity is often pejoratively referred to as “dirty rotten sinner” religion. Our detractors will often say something like this:

• “Christians tend to be so guilt-ridden. They feel that they have to go through life degrading themselves in order to win God’s approval. I find that very depressing. Instead, I want a spirituality that’s positive, freeing and one that will make me feel good about myself.”

This type of reaction is very understandable. We all want to be happy, and it might seem that the Gospel is a one-way street into a medieval village where the Inquisition is diabolically entrenched, seeking to wipe away every smile. While it’s a hard sell to merely claim that the Gospel will set us free from so many of life’s torments, a story might prove helpful.

For the first few years that I was teaching Bible and Theology at the New York School of the Bible, I was assailed by such intense feelings of unworthiness, shame and self-contempt that they co-opted my thought-life. Driven by such powerful feelings, my self-doubts seemed to speak with unassailable authority: “You teach? What type of Christian are you anyway? You think you really have faith? Look how selfish and self-absorbed you are. How are you going to help anyone? What a charlatan, posing in the front of the class as some type of authority! What do you think their reaction would be if they really knew you?”

Devastated by these indictments, I wanted to disappear and to have the buildings of NYC implode over my head and swallow me up without a sign. Many times, I thought of calling my school to say, “Find yourselves someone else. I’m not your man.” But gradually, the Gospel began to take root.

In my longstanding pre-Christian struggle to attain some sense of significance and value, I’d ward off the shame and self-contempt through positive affirmations: “I’m a good person; no, I’m a vastly superior person. I’m _____, _____, _____, and more. I’m a once-in-a-lifetime person!” There was no end to the superlatives. In fact, I was always inventing new ones—whatever I needed to tell myself to keep the shame at bay. However, these never sufficed, and so I always needed to up the superlatives in order to overcome the ubiquitous feelings of shame.

However, as a Christian, I learned that it was wrong to engage in this form of masturbation. But I had to do something about the poisonous arrows of my own demons. I needed to prove myself, and now I had a new vehicle with which to do it. I would excel at spirituality! I would prove, at least to myself, that I was worthy of God’s grace.

I reassured myself that I was more deserving of salvation than others. I was more spiritual; I had chosen God because I wasn’t as carnal as 90% of the human race. I had the keenness of mind to recognize the surpassing value of the things of God, and I had a great destiny, not just in heaven, like all the other Christians, but I would also lead the way here.

However, God loves us too much to allow us to continue in our delusions. He closed my hand to all my dreams of spiritual accomplishment. Even more difficult to endure, I began to see my own poverty of spirit, my utter unworthiness. My levies were overwhelmed, and the demons of shame and self-contempt came roaring back. I feverishly sought to rebuild the levies with good works--anything that would tell me, “You’re OK!” In my torment, I began to read the Bible with new tear-filled eyes, hoping to find a God tucked within its pages who would be far more merciful than I ever dared to hope for.

Jesus told a parable about two men who entered the temple to pray one was a self-assured Pharisee, the other a broken sinner who lacked the confidence to even look up to heaven (Luke 18:9-14). I had become that broken sinner, now defenseless against the internal raging. I had been stripped of confidence and any sense that there was something about me that would merit even a glance from a holy God.

Paradoxically, this was the beginning of psychological freedom. I had been stripped bare of all my defenses, and for the first time in my life, gradually found that I didn’t need them. I could finally let go of my miserable fig leaves, because I was beginning to know a God who wanted to clothe me with His forgiveness, His righteousness, and His sanctification (1 Cor. 1:29-30). I was beginning to learn that I was complete in Him (Col. 2:9-10), not because of who I am, but because of who He is.

It took me a while to learn these lessons. The Bible was my thought-life foundation, but it seemed to say such contradictory things. On the one hand, it assured me that salvation, along with everything else I needed, was absolutely free. But then I observed that other verses seemed to say that God’s “gifts” also required some labor on my part. These “contradictions” first needed to be resolved before I could decisively confront my demons.

However slowly, that day did come. Now, when my demons accuse me of my failures and worthiness, I’m ready for them: “Satan, you’re right! I am totally unworthy to serve God, let alone to teach. I don’t deserve the slightest thing from Him. But I have an incredible God who is everything to me—my righteousness, my sanctification, and whatever else I need. He loves me with an undying love and will never leave me. It is He who has given me the privilege to serve Him by teaching. Besides, I’m so glad that I’ve been reminded of my unworthiness, because this just prompts me to be grateful, and makes me just want to sing His praises.”

Understanding the truths of Scripture becomes a wellspring of peace (Col. 2:1-4). I’m now rid of some baggage that had been too heavy to bear. As Jesus said, "If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:31-32). The truth has set me free—free from the need to defend myself, free from struggling to prove myself, free from shame and self-contempt, and free from the fear of failure. Well, not absolutely free, but free enough.

However, this freedom would never have come without seeing the depths of my unworthiness. Had I not come to this crushing point, I would never have discovered true grace, and without receiving this incredible grace, I never would have found the confidence to lay aside all the inner struggles and to finally accept the fact that I’m an utter sinner saved by grace.

Not everyone’s experience is as intense as mine was, but we all have a conscience that tells us things we don’t want to hear, and we all attempt to beat it down one way or another (Romans 1:18-21). We all yearn to prove ourselves and resort to self-deception to accomplish this.

This isn’t merely a Biblical point of view; this is the prevailing view of psychology. Shelley Taylor writes,

As we have seen, people are positively biased in their assessments of themselves and of their ability to control what goes on around them, as well as in their views of the future. The widespread existence of these biases and the ease with which they can be documented suggests that they are normal.[1] 46

They might be “normal,” but dependency on self-delusions, the product of self-righteousness, ultimately produces a loss of mental flexibility, not freedom and joy. As paradoxical as it might seem, the road to freedom compels us on a humbling journey through “valley of the shadow of death” (Psalm 23), where our old armor and defenses are stripped away so that we can be re-clothed in splendor. No wonder Jesus tells us, “For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted" (Luke 18:14).

How then do we come to this place of assurance of God’s grace in the face of our spiritual brokenness? It’s not possible on our own. Jesus had taught emphatically against the idea of self-salvation (Mat. 19:26; John 3:3; John 6:44). However, He made it equally clear that spiritual growth is also impossible without His involvement (John 15:4-5). Knowing this, we have to trust Him to perform for us the humanly-impossible and to cry out for His intervention.

Spiritual desperation is a lens that brings grace into fine-focus. It’s this mourning that sharpens our eyes to the reality of grace (Mat. 5:3-4; Psalm 25:8-9; 14-15). But what if we don’t see our neediness? We have to embrace the prayer of David:

Search me, O God, and know my heart; test me and know my anxious thoughts. See if there is any offensive way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting (Psalm 139:23-24).

Trust Him in this. He has promised to reveal to us our spiritual deficiencies as He also did for the churches of the Book of Revelation:

I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus. All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained (Philip. 3:14-16).

---

[1] Shelley E. Taylor, Positive Illusions (New York: Basic Books, Inc, 1989) 46.