Let us Love in Deed and Truth

“Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth.”

~ 1 John 3:18

There is nothing wrong with kind words. Telling somebody you love them, or giving someone an honest compliment, can be a wonderful thing. Cheer and warmth are contagious, and most people can use a little reassurance.

But the best love comes not from words but from action, and it is almost always something of a burden, in human terms. The love of a mother for her child is possibly the most extreme form of natural love, and it doesn't have much to do with talking. It is changing diapers and wiping off throw-up, getting up exhausted at 3 a.m., feeding, bathing, and going to the doctor.

Christian love, though, is not natural; Jesus told us to love our enemies, to love those who do us ill, which is about the most unnatural thing we could ever do. Because the world does not reward us for doing it; we are not fulfilling a natural instinct, but obeying the will of God, when we love other people towards whom we do not feel natural affection.

Our reward, though, is even greater. For it is part of our cross that we pick up when we follow Jesus. God smiles on us when we help other people, and if we talk to Him in our prayers, and listen carefully, He will reward us even while we are still on earth.

Prayer: Lord God, please move me to love others as Christ loved us, despite our imperfection and sin.

The Canon of Scripture

 

All Scripture is breathed out by God . . . .

~ 2 Timothy 3:16

We usually think of the Bible as one large book. In reality, it is a small library of sixty-six individual books. Together these books comprise what we call the canon of sacred Scripture. The term canon is derived from a Greek word that means “measuring rod,” “standard,” or “norm.” Historically, the Bible has been the authoritative rule for faith and practice in the church.

With respect to the books included in the New Testament, there is complete agreement between Roman Catholics and Protestants. However, there is strong disagreement between the two groups concerning what should be included in the Old Testament. Roman Catholics consider the books of the Apocrypha as canonical, whereas historic Protestantism does not. (The books of the Apocrypha were written after the Old Testament was completed and before the New Testament was begun.) The debate concerning the Apocrypha focuses on the broader issue of what was considered canonical by the Jewish community.

Some critics of the Bible argue that the church didn't have a Bible as such until almost the beginning of the fifth century. But this is a distortion of the whole process of canonical development. The church met in council on several occasions in the early centuries to settle disputes about which books properly belong in the Canon. The first formal canon of the New Testament was created by the heretic Marcion who produced his own expurgated version of the Bible. To combat this heretic, the church found it necessary to declare the exact content of the New Testament.

Although the vast majority of books that are now included in the New Testament clearly functioned with canonical authority from the time they were written, there were a few books whose inclusion in the New Testament canon was disputed. These included Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation.

There were also several books vying for canonical status that were not included. The overwhelming majority of these were spurious works written by second-century Gnostic heretics. These books were never given serious consideration. (This point is missed by critics who allege that over two thousand contenders yielded a list of twenty-seven. Then they ask, “What are the odds that the correct twenty-seven were selected?”) In fact, only two or three books that were not included ever had real consideration. These were 1 Clement, The Shepherd of Hermas, and The Didache. These books were not included in the canon of Scripture because they were not written by apostles, and the writers themselves acknowledged that their authority was subordinate to the apostles.

Some Christians are bothered by the fact that there was a historical selection process at all. They are nagged by the question, how do we know that the New Testament canon includes the proper books? Traditional Roman Catholic theology answers this question by appealing to the infallibility of the church. The church is then viewed as “creating” the Canon, thereby having authority equal to Scripture itself. Classical Protestantism denies both that the church is infallible and that the church “created” the Canon. The difference between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism may be summarized as follows:

Roman Catholic view: The Canon is an infallible collection of infallible books.

Classical Protestant view: The Canon is a fallible collection of infallible books.

Liberal Critical view: The Canon is a fallible collection of fallible books.

Though Protestants believe that God gave special providential care to insure that the proper books be included, He did not thereby render the church itself infallible. Protestants also remind Roman Catholics that the church did not “create” the Canon. The church recognized, acknowledged, received, and submitted to the canon of Scripture. The term the church used in Council was recipimus, “We receive.”

By what criteria were books evaluated? The so-called marks of canonicity included the following: 1) They must have apostolic authorship or endorsement. 2) They must be received as authoritative by the early church. 3) They must be in harmony with the books about which there is no doubt.

Though at one stage in his life Martin Luther questioned the canonicity of James, he later changed his mind. There is no serious reason to be the least bit doubtful that the books presently included in the New Testament canon are the proper ones.

Lord, let me always approach your holy Word with reverence. Amen.

God Will Use Evil for Good

 

As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive.

~ Genesis 50:20

Joseph:

Son of Jacob

Graduate with honors from the University of Hard Knocks

Director of Global Effort to Save Humanity Succeeded

How? How did he flourish in the midst of tragedy? We don't have to speculate. Some twenty years later the roles were reversed, Joseph as the strong one and his brothers the weak ones. They came to him in dread. They feared he would settle the score and throw them into a pit of his own making. But Joseph didn't. And in his explanation, we find his inspiration.

In God's hands, intended evil becomes eventual good.

Joseph tied himself to the pillar of this promise and held on for dear life. Nothing in his story glosses over the presence of evil. Quite the contrary. Bloodstains and tearstains are everywhere. Joseph's heart was rubbed raw against the rocks of disloyalty and miscarried justice. Yet time and time again God redeemed the pain. The torn robe became a royal one. The pit became a palace. The broken family grew old together. The very acts intended to destroy God's servant turned out to strengthen him.

“You meant evil against me,” Joseph told his brothers, using a Hebrew verb that traces its meaning to “weave” or “plait.”

“You wove evil,” he was saying, “but God rewove it together for good.”

God, Master Weaver. He stretches the yarn and intertwines the colors, the ragged twine with the velvet strings, the pains with the pleasures. Nothing escapes His reach. Every king, despot, weather pattern, and molecule are at His command. He passes the shuttle back and forth across the generations, and as He does, a design emerges. Satan weaves; God reweaves.

Lord, let me always see how good might be brought out of evil. Amen.