Challenge the High Places

Lately I have been re-reading the records of the kings of Israel and Judah, which make up the majority of the second book of Kings in the Bible.  This makes for some interesting reading, but there is very little in there that I feel is directly applicable to my readers' needs or the message of this blog.

However, there is one detail, frequently repeated, that I have given a lot of thought.  Frequently, the Bible records, "[Fill in a king's name] did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, and walked in all the ways of his father, David," but later the recorder notes, "but the high places were not removed."

Just what was a high place?  An ancient "high place" was a shrine, often with an altar, that was built at the top of a hill or mountain.  There, people gathered to have pagan, riotous festivals and make sacrifices to idols, or to the sun, moon, or stars.  There are still "high places" today in many parts of the world.  See my previous post that goes into greater detail on this subject.

I perceive this editorial note as a complaint, on the part of the one writing it down, and really on God's behalf, that the King in question had failed to fully execute his job as leader.  Each king who had this written about him knew God and had obeyed God.  He had personally gone against the pressure of peers and the "fashionable" practices of idolatry in his time.  However, each of these kings had refused to take a strong stance against idolatry where those outside of his household were concerned.  They had followed God faithfully, but they had never challenged others about what they were doing, and God had a problem with this.

Bringing it Home: Our Own High Places

First, before I explain my point, I have to make it clear that I am not suggesting that Christians today should react violently against the non-Christian religious influences in the society around us.  This is illegal, and the Bible instructs us to "submit [ourselves] to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established" (Romans 13: 1-3 NIV).  I just want to summarily state that I do not want to promote that kind of behavior with this blog.


In fact, this is the key difference between modern Christians and ancient kings.  The kings of Israel and Judah were leaders, and they had both the power and the mandate to set the religious tone of their nations.  We, on the other hand, have not been given that kind of a mandate.  Our mission is the spoken message (Matthew 28: 18-20).  That is our job, and like the kings of old, we ought to do it, so that it does not stand as a mark against us when history is being written.

It is still legal, and is not shameful, to say "I disagree," or "what you say offends me," or even add, "I am not joining you because...."  These few little words are immensely powerful.  They challenge the existence of every "high place" in the world.  In fact, the effects of these words last longer, and have a clearer intent, than any law or action against another religion, because they challenge the "high places" in the heart, and not just on the hill.  As the Bible records, "Through patience a ruler can be persuaded, and a gentle tongue can break a bone" (Proverbs 25: 15 NIV).

 King David, who was the pattern for later kings, wrote, "I do not hide your righteousness in my heart; I speak of your faithfulness and salvation.  I do not conceal your love and your truth from the great assembly"(Psalm 40: 10 NIV).  David thought it was important to share his relationship with God with everyone; he was both a model for them, and a leader of them.  He made a point to tell others about what he thought, and I take this verse as a clear challenge to "the great assembly" to follow his example.  This is something that his descendants did not appear to continue.  I read little proof, even "between the lines," that they spoke out against the prophets of Baal and all the other deities.  There seems to be more proof that they had a tolerant attitude, even a kind of openness, toward everything that was happening.  The spiritual welfare of the nation around them suffered during their reigns.  Could this be a contributing factor?

At this point, I cannot say anything more about the king's silence on the "high places" issue without jumping into pure speculation.  I can, however, say that I take this charge against the righteous kings very personally, and I can see proof outside those passages that God does not approve of the way they looked the other way in their day.

I see the complaint about the "high places" as a challenge to Christians today to speak out against the overly-tolerant attitude we have been taught to have these days.  We know some things are wrong; we know God and we know nonsense.  Now is the time to share what is between our ears with the rest of the world.  God has made us accountable, because we know what is right, and He will take it up with us if we stay silent.

This charge has been written against us, "When I say to the wicked, 'O wicked man, you will surely die,' and you do not speak out to dissuade him from his ways, that wicked man will die for his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood," (Ezekiel 33: 8 NIV).  Therefore, I must speak.  I am bound to speak out.  The "high places," whether on hill tops or in a sinner's heart, are no laughing matter.

Weekly Trivia Files: Confession and Repentance

Lately I've been getting a little off-topic on this blog, and that's something I wanted to change today.  So I asked myself last night, "Christians in the world today need to know __________."  This post is the result of that thought.

I have noticed a problem lately with the confusion of two common concepts in the Christian doctrine: confession and repentance.  Have you ever noticed this?  The problem is that they describe two separate activities, and they aren't interchangeable.

Confession

-- Defined as, "openly to acknowledge the truth in anything...to concede or allow" according to the 1987 edition of The New International Dictionary of the Bible.  There are two key aspects of confession: openness and accountability, and the truth that risks something.

1. On the first point, if you confess only in your heart, you have really taken no action whatsoever.  It isn't confession unless someone else hears what you have said/believed/known in your own mind.
2. On the second point, it isn't confession unless you are telling the real, unvarnished truth.  This is the hard part about confession.  You have to stick your neck out and tell the truth, even though not everyone will appreciate the gesture.  Some might even hate you for it.  In effect, because confession is about telling the truth and not "softening" that truth to make it more palatable to yourself or others, confession makes you lose something.  At the least, confession makes you risk something.  It is not true confession if it is not risky or costly to tell the truth about something.

Repentance

--The New International Dictionary of the Bible defines it as, "the process of changing one's mind...human repentance is a change for the better and is a conscious turning from evil or disobedience or sin or idolatry to the living God."  There are two aspects to this concept, as well: an attitude change, and the positive nature and aim of that change.

1. On the first point, repentance is a change in attitude.  If there is no real change in a person, that person has not repented, according to the definition of the word.  Repentance is an action, a turning away from something, and it requires a commitment to maintain this new attitude.
2. On the second point, it isn't repentance if it isn't a positive change toward seeking out good (that is, the living God and His nature and approval), and a conscious rejection of evil.  If someone changes, but it is away from what is good, that is rebellion and disobedience.  Furthermore, if someone changes (turns away from) their lifestyle of blatant disobedience and rebellion toward a more subtle disobedience, that is not repentance, either.  A change from really bad to less-bad is not a conscious rejection of evil; it's actually a conscious attempt to perpetuate evil by veiling it under the evil of a lie.

When we really break it down, we see that confession only goes so far as to acknowledge a fact and risk a little bit of disapproval or rejection from others.  Once something is publicly acknowledged, the entire act of confession is over.  In the case of repentance, however, something has to be done about what has been acknowledged; a change, requiring a long-term commitment, has to take place.  It does more than cause a little discomfort for a little while; it requires permanent disruption of a pattern or routine. 

We cannot have repentance without confession, because how can a person change from one attitude toward another if no one knows about it (no accountability)?  Further, how can a repentant attitude be permanent if there is nothing risked or lost, or any other reason to turn away from a path?

On the other hand, true confession cannot exist without repentance.  It makes no sense to acknowledge that something is wrong and yet have no desire to make it right again.  If a person confesses something and yet holds onto it anyway, it becomes obvious that the confessor is justifying an indefensible point.  This situation cannot exist indefinitely; ultimately, confession results in a second action, that is, a decision to repent or to rebel.

Carpe Diem vs. Redeeming the Time

Be very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise, making the most of every opportunity, because the days are evil. Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord's will is.--Ephesians 5: 15-17 NIV

The Passage of Time

Too often we read the above passage as basically a "Christianized" alternative phrasing for the Epicurean phrase, "seize the day," but are we just skimming over the differences between carpe diem and "redeeming the time" (KJV)?  Today I felt God directing me to delve into it and I thought I'd share my thoughts here.

God's Will vs. My Will

The ancient Epicureans, including Horace, who first penned the phrase carpe diem (seize the day), rejected supernatural or prophetic beliefs and opted to pursue "the simple life," a life lived only in the present.  They didn't look toward the future, but rather focused on creating virtue and peace within themselves, and avoiding pain.

The Epicureans guided their lives with their own perception of what was wisdom, that is, they saw the wise choice as the one that allowed them to avoid pain and instability in their individual lives.  This seemed right, based on the idea that it is better for our health and happiness if we stay out of every kind of trouble.  Isn't that what most people are looking for, today--a life without pain or too much drama, but rather full of peace, stability, and comfort?  It certainly sounds good, but is this the life the Bible instructs us to pursue?

Paul certainly emphasized the fact that we need wisdom to guide our lives and help us to "be very careful how [we] live."  Is this the self-oriented wisdom of the Epicureans?  The Bible says, "There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death" (Proverbs 14: 12 NIV).  Biblical wisdom is not based on what "seems right."  It begins with an awe and reverence of God (Psalm 111: 10). If we truly fear the Lord, we want to know what He thinks is right so that we can do that.  And when we come to know God, we see that it is wisdom to take His advice and discipline (Proverbs 1:7).

If we seek to avoid anything that makes us uncomfortable, we will never get that kind of wisdom.  I would be lying if I told you that discipline doesn't hurt, or that learning to obey God and not yourself does not cause distress. However, there is a deeper reward. When we submit our plans to God for approval, and when we accept His direction and correction, we will never have to worry that we "did the wrong thing" or "somehow missed a turn back there somewhere."  As Solomon put it, "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him and he will make your paths straight" (Proverbs 3: 5, 6 NIV).   Beyond just making the path ahead clear, God's judgment calls help us avoid deadly traps that our own judgment cannot see in our futures (Proverbs 6: 23 NIV).

When we read Ephesians 5: 15-17 again, we see that when Paul cautions us to "be careful...how [we] live," he doesn't mean that we should make judgments of what is right, based solely upon what looks safe to us.  Paul was saying that we should be careful to know and follow God's will, even if it means following God through great trouble.

Redeem the Time

In Ephesians chapter five, verse fourteen, we are instructed to "redeem the time" (KJV), that is, to "[make] the most of every opportunity" (NIV) in regards to our lives and the way we live.  This often translates into Carpe diem, that is, seize the day and use it completely; fill it up and enjoy yourself before you run out of time.

Remember that the Epicureans did not believe in a future or an afterlife; they lived in today, and gave no thought to what their decisions today could do to their life tomorrow.

On the Road of Life

When Paul wrote about time and our lives, he did not share their perspective.  If life were only about having fun and avoiding pain, why would Jesus warn us that if we follow Him, we will have trouble (John 16: 33), and men would hate us (Matthew 10: 22) because we know Him?  From his Christian viewpoint, all of our actions have eternal consequences; therefore, life is not about pursuing peace and happiness for ourselves, but rather it is about pleasing and obeying God.

Here, the concept of redemption really comes into play.  In a biblical sense, redemption means to pay the price for something or someone to bring it back from death, loss, or destruction, often by offering a blood sacrifice.  So if we are "redeeming the time" as the King James Version translated it, we are not just being opportunists or filling up our time with things that seem worthy.  In essence, we are translating our days from time spent on things that will perish, to time spent on things that will last.  Paul explains this concept metaphorically in 1 Corinthians 3: 10-15:

By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should be careful how he builds.  For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.  If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work.  If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward.  If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames. (NIV)

It is important to note that if we have the correct foundation in our lives, that is, Jesus Christ, we can still escape destruction, even if all of our deeds were considered worthless in the end.  However, it is much better not to barely scrape by.

Am I saying that God insists that we only go through life doing "holy" and "serious" things, i. e. never get to have any fun?  I don't see proof of that in the Bible.  However, I think its clear from all of this analysis of Ephesians 5: 15-17 that we are not here on earth just to advance our own purposes, i.e. carpe diem.  We have important work to do, glorifying God in our own lives and teaching others about Him.

Despite what the Epicureans believed, we have a responsibility for the future, too.  At that time we will have to account for how we spent our time, especially since time is running out on this world, "because the days are evil" (Ephesians 5: 14).  The question is not, "have we enjoyed our lives," because we know that our future is filled with joy, so that there is no need to look back longingly. Instead, the question we should ask is, "Have we heeded the message, which is life?"