FEAR AND ANXIETY SERVE A PURPOSE

We tend to be anxious about so many things - jobs, money, health, success, family, and the list goes on. Then we make matters worse by thinking, “Look how anxious I am. Being so anxious, I’m evidently not trusting God and shouldn’t expect to receive anything from Him.”

This certainly isn’t so. If our anxieties meant we weren’t trusting God, Joshua would have been left bereft of the Lord’s protection. However, experiencing anxiety and fear had not been the issue, but rather being led by anxieties rather than by the Lord. Therefore, the Lord instructed Joshua how to lean upon Him while struggling against his anxious temptations to run:

·       This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success. Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be frightened, and do not be dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go. (Joshua 1:8-9)

Being courageous was not a matter of Joshua ridding himself of fear, but of standing his ground in the Word and in God’s promises. Notice that the Lord didn’t instruct Joshua to not experience the feelings of anxiety. Instead, He instructed Joshua what to do in the midst of his fears.

The Children of Israel feared as they heard the Egyptian chariots approaching as they stood at the edge of the Red Sea. The Lord didn’t instruct them not to feel that way but instead simply to wait and observe the Lord’s salvation:

·       And Moses said to the people, "Fear not, stand firm, and see the salvation of the Lord, which he will work for you today. For the Egyptians whom you see today, you shall never see again. The Lord will fight for you, and you have only to be silent." (Exodus 14:13-14)

Despite the fears of the people, the Lord proved faithful and divided the sea so that the terrified Israelites could pass to the other side. Sometimes, we are so powerless that all we can do is to watch and wait. Amazingly, even in the midst of their rebellion and fear, the Lord even commended their faith:

·       By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as on dry land, but the Egyptians, when they attempted to do the same, were drowned. (Hebrews 11:29)

The Israelites are remembered as exemplars of faith. Clearly, having faith doesn’t mean that we aren’t also filled with dread. Years ago, my wife bribed me to get on a roller coaster with her. Even though I trusted in the Lord, I screamed in terror until we rolled into the station at the end of the ride. Afterwards, I vowed never to do it again.

After a year of traveling, Joshua sent out 12 spies into the Promised Land. What they saw filled them with anxiety. However, 10 of them succumbed to their fears and reported back that the Canaanites were too powerful for them, and they created a rebellion. They had placed their fears above the promises of God. Joshua and Caleb might have also felt the same way, but they were willing to trust in the Word of the Lord. It was a matter of deciding for the Lord. The two – Joshua and Caleb – warned:

·       Only do not rebel against the Lord. And do not fear the people of the land, for they are bread for us. Their protection is removed from them, and the Lord is with us; do not fear them. (Numbers 14:9)

It didn’t matter what they felt, but whether or not they would simply decide to trust in the Word of the Lord.

Jesus understood how anxiety can take our focus away from the Lord, and He provided the remedy:

·       Therefore do not be anxious, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you. (Matthew 6:31-33)

Jesus didn’t instruct them how not to experience anxiety, but instead what to do while in the midst of it. We have to proactively and resolutely put the Lord first in our lives, and He will deal with the source of our anxiety and provide for our needs.

In fact, anxiety can be a good thing. It can direct us towards our only Source of hope. Therefore, the Psalmist, wrote, “When I fear, I will trust in the Lord” (Psalm 56:3).

THE RELIGION OF FALSE UNITY

During the time of the Prophet Malachi, Israel had been returning to their old ways. Their God had been grieved by their ungodly attitudes and words. They had conveniently denied that God was righteous. Instead, it was more comfortable for them to believe that He loved the righteous and the unrighteous without distinction:

·       You have wearied the LORD with your words. “How have we wearied him?” you ask. You have wearied him by saying that all who do evil are good in the LORD’s sight, and he is pleased with them.” (Malachi 2:17 (NLT2)

Israel had once again lapsed into spiritual blindness and had forgotten the lessons of the Babylonian exile – how their sins had caused the destruction of Israel. They had also forgotten the lessons of the preaching of Hagai, Zechariah, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Instead, they had concluded that there would be no consequences for living in opposition to the Word of God. They had revived an ancient heresy that God loved His creation and humanity too much to punish them.

Today, this heresy takes many popular forms:

·       Universalism: All will be saved.

·       God makes no distinctions between people. Instead, we are all one, and we need one world religion to insure our peace and brotherhood.

·       We mustn’t judge the behavior of others. We must just affirm them.

These beliefs are not only a direct departure from the Scriptures, they are also in opposition from what we know in our conscience. Our feelings of guilt, shame, and the sense that we deserve punishment tell us otherwise (Romans 2:14-16). However, as Israel had done, we too are able to silence, or at least suppress these voices, even though this represents a rejection of God’s truths (Romans 1:18-21, 32).

Nevertheless, even though Israel did not deserve God’s mercy, He continued to cry out to His people to return to Him:

·       “Ever since the days of your ancestors, you have scorned my decrees and failed to obey them. Now return to me, and I will return to you,” says the LORD of Heaven’s Armies. “But you ask, ‘How can we return when we have never gone away?’” (Malachi 3:7)

Unfortunately, they had convinced themselves that they had been faithful and didn’t need to be reconciled to their God. This is similar to what we often hear today: “God knows that I am a good person and that I deserve His love,” as if we have a human right to receive God’s love.

However, there were several in Israel who knew that they had to repent of their sins and to return to God:

·       Then those who feared the LORD spoke with each other, and the LORD listened to what they said. In his presence, a scroll of remembrance was written to record the names of those who feared him and always thought about the honor of his name. “They will be my people,” says the LORD of Heaven’s Armies. “On the day when I act in judgment, they will be my own special treasure. I will spare them as a father spares an obedient child. Then you will again see the difference between the righteous and the wicked, between those who serve God and those who do not.” (Malachi 3:16-18)

There is a world of “difference between the righteous and the wicked,” those who trust in Him according to His Word, and the wicked, those who reject Him (2 Corinthians 14-16). We even find this distinction throughout the entirety of the Bible – those who love the Light and those who prefer darkness (John 3:19-20). Therefore, Christianity stands upon this distinction and is hated for it. Why? Our faith warns this world about its ultimate doom.

Well, why doesn’t the world simply laugh at what they regard as an absurd idea? Perhaps they sense that it is true, and the prospect of judgment terrifies them! Meanwhile, they are comfortable with talk that merely says:

·       This works for me.

·       Everyone has to find out what works for him.

·       Everyone has his own way.

·       Whatever feels right to you.

·       You just do the best you can.

This kind of religious talk is even acceptable at fashionable cocktail parties, as long as you don’t say, “This is the truth.” This will promote an angry or dismissive reaction. One gentleman fired back at me, “You have no right to tell me what is true for me. You can only say what is true for you.” I had merely told him, “We humans need to feel loved and accepted.”

However, this too was unacceptable, but he understood where I was coming from. Previously, I had stated that, “We were created to have a relationship with our Creator.” However, had I said instead, “Everyone has to find what feels right for them,” we’d probably still be friends.

However, what feels right is usually a matter of self-validation rather than criticism. Some might call such a self-serving preference “juvenile.” However, it is far more. It is a refusal to consider the question of truth and to open our eyes to God’s creation and His Word (Psalm 19). Instead, it is the stubborn resolve to simply believe what we want to believe in the face of all the counter-evidence. And then to have the hubris to say that such evidence does not even exist! No wonder that God is angry.

Instead, why don’t they just give God a try (Psalm 34:8; John 7:17) to see if He will forgive, cleanse, and free us from our internal struggle (1 John 1:9)? Isn’t this the most rational thing to do? When a friend advises us, “Try this cup of coffee; it’s the greatest,” if we like coffee, we try it.” Perhaps, then, we do not like God (Romans 5:8-10).

MY “RACIAL RECONCILIATION” GROUP

          

Many years ago, while teaching a course on Christian Ethics, I asked my students if there was a particular issue that needed to be addressed that my course hadn’t already addressed. Two black women answered, “racial reconciliation.”

I was thrilled with their suggestion. My wife and I decided to host a group to discuss this very important issue at our NYC apartment. This had always been a subject close to my heart. Unity among the brethren had been a major focus of Jesus’ prayer (John 17:20-23). Therefore, it became central to my prayers.

Consequently, I pursued this meeting with high expectations and determined to do whatever was necessary to make these brethren feel comfortable and loved. I was also sure that other friends would like to be part of this group. Instead, friends of all colors warned me away from this endeavor, saying, “You don’t know what you are getting yourself into.” They were right, but I assured them that I knew these women, and we had already established a trusting relationship. Nevertheless, all of my friends declined my invitation.

Despite my best efforts, only three black women came. With me, my wife, and a friend who had been visiting, we were only six people. Nevertheless, the conversation never lagged. Instead, it was impassioned.

It was slowly becoming obvious to me that we all were approaching this meeting with different expectations of what “racial reconciliation” entailed. I had naively expected that if I listened to understand what their experiences as black women were like, this would build trust and unity. However, the most militant of the women quickly set me straight. For her “racial reconciliation” wasn’t about building friendship across color barriers, since she already had “enough white friends.” Nor was it about achieving a unity, even Biblical one, without adopting shared goals for social change.

Then what was it about? Merely listening and understanding were not what it was about, at least for two of the three women. Only later did it become plain to me that the militants want more than verbal affirmation. Instead, a “true” friend had to become an “ally” in their quest for “social justice.” But even becoming an “ally” was not enough. The initiate had to prove their “allegiance” through action.

But what is social justice without an actual injustice, which had to be corrected?

Weren’t all the laws against minorities already eliminated? Instead, minorities had been granted preferences in university admission and in employment. I was beginning to feel uncomfortable. I was glad to listen in order to understand each of these sisters. However, I was beginning to feel pressure to see the world as they did, but this was something I could not do, not honestly. I wondered. “Can we still be brethren and love one another despite our political disagreements?” Why not? Could I be free to express myself honestly, or did the militants demand compliance as the price of friendship?

During this past year, I saw a placard, which captured what I had been experiencing: “White Silence is White Violence,” and I began to understand.  Any unwillingness to join their “social justice” quest would be regarded as “violence.” This meant that my unwillingness would be interpreted as “violence” against the black cause, and support, even if only passive, for the racist system. I realized that I was guilty, at least in the eyes of my militant “friend.” I was even a “racist.”

After this first gathering, I was beginning to develop a growing sense of our irreconcilable differences, even though I wasn’t able to put them into words as I now am. It was our first and last meeting. After it, I received a lengthy letter from the militant, whom I had once regarded as my friend. In it, she denounced me as a “racist.”

I found that every Biblical term was redefined to support a militant victimization and “white privilege” narratives. However, this required the redefinition of “sin,” “friendship, and “unity” in entirely unbiblical ways. In view of this redefinition, only a white person could be guilty of sin and needed to bend the knee. Speaking truth in love could only go in one direction, and this meant that the white person had to continually bend a knee in hope of being granted absolution.

I insisted that we needed to privately get together to discuss our differences. I was hoping to be able to work through these differences, but I found her even more entrenched, and perhaps she saw me in the same way. She confidently explained to me that all whites were racist, whether they realized it or not. In response, I pointed out her own blatantly racist statements.  However, she retorted that it was “not possible for blacks to be racist because they had little control over the repressive system of ‘systemic racism.’”

In her eyes, I remained guilty of enjoying my “white privilege” at the expense of her black brethren. What could I do? As far as I could see, I hadn’t been guilty of any sin against the black people or against any black person. Therefore, no apology was possible, and no reconciliation was in view. Nothing that I said made any difference to her, not even the Scriptures. As Daniel had confessed the sins of Israel to the Lord, I was also willing to confess the sins of the Church, but this wouldn’t be a confession of my own sins for which I would need to make reparations. Therefore, in her eyes, I would still be guilty as charged. I would still have to pay reparations though compliance with their fight. “White Silence is White Violence!”

******

I had told some of my classes that I had experienced a lot of anti-Semitism growing up. I was filled with so much rage that I actually experienced white people as having a repulsive odor. (I grew up only among whites.) However, I was certain that sharing this  with her would do little to thaw the ice. She had already become too entrenched in a life-controlling theology of race.

Why have I written about this after many years? Actually, I believe that prayer is the only answer. The walls are humanly impregnable. However, I recall that Jesus had been able to multiply our feeble offering of a few loaves of bread and fish to feed the masses. This essay is my one slice of bread topped with a fish spread. May our Lord multiply it to feed others!

TIM KELLER AND WHITE CORPORATE GUILT

Are all white Americans guilty of the sin of slavery? The highly gifted and popular pastor emeritus, Tim Keller, argues that, according to the Bible, sin has a corporate and systemic dimension. Therefore, all white Americans are guilty of America’s sins. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhJJcTKTVGo&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1vNY9xFO1v07hQsSQ337Lua-bPtCDaeYH2NJvuzy6bPFjdblxsyirKIcQ

In order to support his case for the ongoing guilt of our corporate sins, he cites three sets of verses – Joshua 7, Daniel 9, and Romans 5. Let’s start with Joshua 7. God had instructed Moses and Israel that they must not take any of the riches from Jericho after God had destroyed the city. However, one man disobeyed and took some of the riches that he had found in the vanquished city and buried them in his tent.

As a result of disobeying the Lord, all Israel had to suffer the consequences of Achan’s disobedience. God had withdrawn His protection from Israel at the battle at Ai, and Israel fled for their lives. Not only did Israel suffer a corporate defeat because of Achan’s disobedience, but Achan and his entire family were also put to death.

Why his family? It is likely that the family had been complicit. Achan had hidden the sizble contraband in the midst of his families tent. But why Israel's defeat at the hands of Ai? We naturally partake of the consequences of the decisions of others, whether those of our parents, president, or even out churches. This requires us to be vigilant where we can be:

So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin. (James 4:17)

This means that the child may bear the consequences of their parents' choices, but not their guilt. However, Keller fails to make this distinction. Instead, according to him, whites are all guilty for slavery and segregation, even the we all suffer their consequences.

·HHowever, we aren’t to administer justice this way. Instead, it was to be administered according to the guilt of the individual:

·       “Yet you say, ‘Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father?’ When the son has done what is just and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.” (Ezekiel 18:19-20)

This same justice principle is applied throughout the Bible:

·       Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. (Romans 13:2-4)

Justice was to be administered according to the individual’s criminal behavior and not corporately. The guilty party was to be liable to punishment and not his entire family.

This principle of justice also pertains to the corporate destruction and exile of Israel by the Babylonians because of their widespread sins. Even in the midst of this, God had reassured His Prophet Habakkuk 2:4 that the “righteous shall live [or survive] by his faith” (Romans 1:17).

Even in the midst of a battle, God promises that He will take care of those who belong to Him:

·       “Because you have made the LORD your dwelling place— the Most High, who is my refuge— no evil shall be allowed to befall you, no plague come near your tent. For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways.” (Psalm 91:9-11)

God’s protection had been guaranteed to His faithful ones. However, it seems that Keller wants to hold the entire white population guilty for the sins of a limited number, now deceased. However, to apply his logic consistently, then the African blacks who had kidnapped members of neighboring tribes to sell them into slavery should also be held accountable.

I was surprised that Keller had appealed to Romans 5 to make the case in favor of corporate sin and the guilt of Adam’s sin. This interpretation of Adam’s guilt, as passed on to all humanity, is highly controversial. Keller understands our condemnation as a corporate phenomenon and therefore also our salvation and admonishes us to begin to see this corporate aspect of Biblical theology.

However, even if Keller is correct that all of us bear Adam’s guilt, then all humanity is guilty, not just white people. Therefore, his reasoning couldn’t possibly be applied to justify any present white responsibility for what the blacks had suffered during slavery and segregation. Nevertheless, as Christians, we all have a responsibility for our brethren in Christ. However, this is another matter, which doesn’t involve our corporate guilt but our freedom in Christ to willingly serve others.

Then Keller argues that, to varying degrees, all Germans had been guilty of the genocide of the Jewish people. Even those ordinary Germans who had heard stories about the death camps but chose to ignore them, bore guilt. In this case, Keller is correct. Scripture informs us that if we know to do what is right and ignore our responsibility, we have sinned (James 4:17).

However, this reasoning cannot easily be applied to “white guilt” and responsibility for slavery. Not only were black Africans responsible for kidnapping their fellow blacks, but there were also numerous black slave-owners in the Pre-bellum South. Besides, most whites living today hadn’t been alive during either slavery or segregation. Therefore, they couldn’t have possibly intervened.

It is therefore hard to sympathize with Keller’s charge that white Americans are self-righteous because they resist the accusation that they are guilty of black slavery by virtue of his corporate reasoning. He even accuses them of self-righteousness because they deny their guilt. However, this kind of rhetoric just increases the racial divide and decreases the possibility of any meaningful reconciliation.

Keller also mentioned the responsibility of whites to help black youth to exchange their gangster identity for something more positive. However, he never mentioned the Gospel in this regards. However, it was only through the growing assurance that my Savior loves me beyond anything that I could imagine that rescued me (Ephesians 3:16-19). I therefore cannot imagine offering black youth any other hope or identity.

Many black conservatives strenuously argue against the existence of current “systemic racism” and blame “white guilt” for the promotion of this debilitating victimization narrative. Instead, if whites are going to help their black brethren, it has to be freely and gladly and not as attempt to work off their corporate guilt.