WHAT REALLY COUNTS?

"He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?" (Micah 6:8).

Human nature characteristically inclines to a loss of objectivity. Cause and effect are frequently confused; matters of consequence become lost in pursuits of the peripheral; and the ephemeral often takes on qualities of the substantive and significant.

Jesus repeatedly addressed concerns of this nature by emphasizing that: (1) divine requirements exist for meaningful purposes as opposed to the imposition of rules for mere rule's sake (Mark 2:27); (2) that fundamental principles take precedence over tangential interests (Matt. 23:23); and (3) that differentiation between greater and lesser concerns is essential to faith's interests (Luke 13:15-16).

To many of Christ's day such distinctions had become largely obscured. Convinced that God was vitally interested in their hand and dish washing routines and tithing of mint leaves, their abandonment of "the weightier matters of justice, mercy and good faith" had led to a legalistic self-focused "spirituality" that Jesus compared to "straining out gnats while swallowing camels" (Matt. 23:23-24; Mark 7:4f).

Nor are we immune to predispositions of this nature. While presently not the issue of days past, the following will nonetheless suffice in demonstrating the point. We well recall the time wherein a primary concern of "holiness" emphasis centered on the wearing of jewelry. (Indeed, my own mother would not wear a wedding ring.) Prohibition purportedly existed in I Peter 3:3 despite the fact that such interpretation necessarily proscribed one's wearing of clothes as well - the "putting on of apparel." That the apostle's intent was clearly defined by the verse's context (i.e., beauty in its greater sense derives, not from pretentious show and extravagance, but rather quality of spirit) seemed to little bear upon the matter. (Then, of course, there were those who permitted the wearing of jewelry - of any kind and in any amount - so long as it was not worn on the ear. God only knows where that came from.)

What really counts in the life of faith? Throughout his ministry Jesus emphasized, above all, quality of spirit and relationship in terms of both God and man. Herein, indeed, lay the consistent thrust of his expositions upon the "weightier matters of justice, mercy and good faith."

In terms of source and outworking, the issue finds essential definition in the "fruit of the Spirit," i.e., outliving of the indwelling Christ by agency of the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:22-25) - so serving the interests of an increasing "conformity to the image of [God's] Son" (Rom. 8:29).

Are there prohibitions in "walking humbly with one's God?" Of course. In contrast to the "fruit of the Spirit" ("love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control"), the "works of the flesh" include "immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outburts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envyings, drunkenness, carousings, and things like these" (Gal. 5:19-21).

Again, "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God (I Cor. 6:9-10.)

Simply stated, biblical spirituality involves an inward reality from which then emanates godly demeanor, attitudes, behavior and quality of character - as opposed to an inner state created by external observance. In the reversal of this order, one soon becomes vulnerable to legalism, spiritual pride and self-initiated externalism as substitute for that "true holiness" to which the apostle makes reference in Ephesians 4:24. It was here that the Pharisees failed.

Once understood, the foregoing will clarify many things.

Burl Ratzsch

"RELIGIOUS FLAILING" vs. SPIRITUAL EFFECTIVENESS

Many will recall a not-too-distant past wherein one needed not search far to find those in the pulpit (along with various strident "radio pastors") who seemingly deemed the calling of the Gospel to lie primarily in high volume denunciations of Russia, Communism and "fellow-traveling" sympathizers. (We remember, for example, one preacher with apparently sufficient following to finance his nationwide radio program characterized by ongoing rants and at times shouted admonitions such as, "Folks, don't buy from Zeke's Furniture Barn in Podunk, South Virginia because he's selling wicker chairs made in Communist Slabovia!" I was never too sure where the Gospel of Jesus Christ fit into all this, but anyway...

Did the then present Communist threat represent a compelling danger to personal and political freedoms, religious faith, societal interests and general well being at large? Absolutely. To have failed of such awareness - and there were those, then as now, whose levels of concern seldom rose above the trivial and mundane - amounted to little more than irresponsible naivete.

At the same time, it is quite doubtful that the aforementioned "religious" carryings-on contributed to the ultimate collapse of Soviet Communism. Apart from the role of divine sovereignty (which can, and in such situations often does, find outplaying - even if largely unrecognized - in earthly human conduct and affairs), we would suggest the greater contribution to its downfall as having likely lain in the presence and attendant dynamic of godly men and women.

This finds illustration, for example, in the fact that resolution to the pending judgment of Sodom (Gen. 19) would have found its source, not in Lot's ranting and raving at the degeneracy of the culture, but rather in his having won at least eight others besides himself and his wife (see our recent post on "Lot's wife") to a righteous lifestyle.

One need not press the issue unduly to discern that, should such not be reversed, the ultimate outcome of our world's escalating antithesis to moral rectitude, family structure and, undergirding it all, an exponentially intensifying anti-Christian bias, the future does not bode well for the valid community of faith. As with many others, we share a sense of considerable unease as to where it all may lead, particularly if, as would presently seem possible, our nation is soon caught up in a perceived "political mandate" for the greater promotion of such.

Jesus defined the time wherein his return would occur as replicating the days of both Lot and Noah. That we find ourselves increasingly pointed in such direction would seem to merit little controversy. While in no way discounting the believer's obligation in terms of responsible citizenship, we yet need to recognize the transcendent dynamic of moral and spiritual integrity derivative the Gospel of Jesus Christ. As those of faith, it is here that we shall find our most effective arena of influence in addressing an increasingly dissolute world and its objectives.

Burl Ratzsch