Christian Karma

In the modern world, distance from one country to another makes little difference on cultural influences. Karma is one of those things that has permeated our culture from a distant land. Hindu and Buddhist belief systems. We often hear it referenced in our culture even though most of the people who use the term are not actually Hindu or Buddhist. So what does it mean? Do we as Christians believe in karma? Can we, or should we use the term?

Well, first off we should ask ourselves, "What do most people mean when they use the term karma?" Well, to put it in more American lingo, it means that we get what's coming to us. In other words, we get what we deserve, either good or bad. What goes around comes around.

But does the Bible say about this? Well, the concept of karma - evil begetting evil and good begetting good- is quite common in Scripture. We read that a man reaps what he sows. If he digs a trap for others he will fall into it. In Ecclesiastes we have more examples of this type of reasoning.

So in a sense, we as Christians do believe in karma, although we would not usually use that name for it. We instead would call it reaping what we sow. We believe that we pay for our decisions with the consequences that follow.

You may be asking, "What about grace? Where does that play into this?" Well, that is an excellent question. As Christians we do believe that we have consequences for our actions, but we also believe that God can and does forgive those who repent. So does this cancel out the reaping and sowing concept?

Not at all. Although a sin is forgiven, the consequence is not always blotted out. For example, if a murder repents for his deeds the dead do not return to us. In the same manner, the choices we make in our lives that we repent of will often still come back to us in some form and require restitution. We are forgiven, but the consequence may remain. Samson, the man God chose to lead the Israelites with his strength was blinded after he lost his strength. Although his disobedience was forgiven and he regained his strength, he did not regain his eyesight. Even in this situation not all of the consequences were removed.

Conclusion

In the end, we do believe in consequences for our actions. This is a basic belief of all mankind. As Christians we believe that God has given us this innate sense of right and wrong. The fundamental knowledge that we have to own up to our errors is also something we believe that God has given each of us. God does forgive, however that does not mean we have a magic erase button for our consequences. Karma, reaping and sowing, or plain old getting what is coming to us is very Biblical. The name used for it comes and goes, but the truth of the matter stays a constant.

Christian Contentment

Godliness with contentment is a great gain, Paul tells us in First Timothy 6:6. We are to be content with what we have. We have a similar command in the Ten Commandments. We are not to covet what our neighbor has. But what does that really mean? Are we never to want anything new? Are we not to desire anything we don't have? If we actually stopped wanting things, wouldn't the whole economy of our country collapse? How does this make any sense? Where does it apply?

These are good questions. We are to be content, we are told. But content is a word we don't always use correctly. To be content does not mean that we don't work or don't try to earn a living. Indeed, what it means is we are not basing our lives off of the fact of what new item we currently desire.

Coveting things overlaps with lust. We often only attribute lust to the world of sensual pleasure. But we can lust after a new house, car, job, or phone as well. Be can desire things to an unhealthy level and obsess over them. This is unBiblical. It is what we are warned against in these two passages.

Coveting, or lust, is one of the base sins. We usually fall for it before we do something that is a more visible sin. We covet, therefore we justify some other sin. God tells us that even if we don't take it to action, we will be judged by our hearts. This is one reason that coveting is so dangerous.

So what is the difference between wanting a new car or house and coveting? Well, first off we should ask ourselves why? Why do we want a new or additional item? Do we need it? Or do we just want the shiny new thing because it is the shiny new thing? Are we just after it because our neighbor has one now? Did we buy it because it has some use or because it is a sign of how great and wonderful we are? The matter of coveting lies where all sin lies - in the heart.

Conclusion

Coveting, lust, gluttony. These are all words for similar concepts. The desire for items for our own ego. How do we avoid these sins? We need to turn to God and ask Him to help us. We need to remember that we are to be content. The best way to be content is to give thanks. So, instead of coveting; give thanks. That is the best way to turn from coveting to contentment.

'Hidden' Holiness

We have all sorts of friends in our lives. There are those who are great fun to talk to, those we play games with, those we enjoy hanging out with in a crowd, and those close friends that we can discuss our innermost thoughts with. I don't know about most folks, but I greatly enjoy various types of fellowship when the time is right for it.

But what about our Christian faith in the midst of our friends? I find that with some people I can easily delve into spiritual matters and with others not so much. Some times its because they aren't inclined to the spiritual walk we as Christians have with God, others it is because they are shallow, and some others it seems we just don't feel close enough to in order to discuss these things. Is this wrong?

Let's take a closer look at this. First off, what about those friends who aren't professing Christians, or perhaps are not living a Christian life? How should we deal with that? Most important in this situation is prayer. Not with them in the moment so much as for them, before and after we interact. With these people, the straying or lost, we must spend time in prayer for them and do as the Lord leads us. No two examples are the same, however I can assure you that without proper prayer the whole situation will come crashing down around our ears.

The second type of interaction that we don't spend much time in spiritual matters is often with those who are shallow in their faith. This doesn't mean that they are ignorant of Scripture or other knowledge.  Indeed, those from this group that trouble the church most are quite learned. So what do I mean by this? By shallow Christians I mean the ones Paul referred to in the first letter to the Corinthian Church - the carnal Christian. These are those who do not take their Christian walk to heart, and that can take many forms. Some are those who are obsessed with the liberty to do whatever they want, some are legalists who try to get everyone to do as they do, and yet others try their best to ignore all the problems and just smooth them away without dealing with them.

So why do we not discuss spiritual matters with these people? To answer this let me quote Charles Spurgeon. 'Holy things are for holy men.' Now this does not mean that we are condemning these people, far from it. What we mean is that we do not discuss these things with them because they cannot understand them. It would be just as pointless to discuss the slope intercepts with the 3rd grade class. Its far above them. Instead, I teach slope intercepts in 8th Grade Math and let the 3rd grade class struggle with their new concept of division for now. One day, I do expect to be able to teach them algebraic graphing, but that will be once they are in 8th grade. They must reach the level of the material, the material cannot be reduced to their level.

In the same way we must allow some people to first develop their basic faith' as Paul also tells us in the same epistle' before we can introduce some more complex concepts to them. Instead of trying to teach them spiritual truths as we see them, we should instead try to help them where they are in their current state. In this case, we must be patient and prayerful while the person matures in Christ.

So where do we draw the line between the mature and the immature? The danger in this question is the fact that most of the time when we ask it we are still on the side of the immature. So often in life, we assume that the only reason other people don't agree with our side of the issue is because they are the immature one. We need to take a different approach. Instead of assuming all the world is incompetent, we should assume that people have good reasons for their beliefs and that we may also be in error. In answer to the question however, we must be cautious about assuming people are less spiritual or knowledgable than we are. Ironically, usually if we must ask if a person is less mature than we are, the answer is no.

Conclusion

In the end, we need to be ready to give an account of what we believe at all times. (II TIM. 4:2) Our faith should not have an off button, or a mute button, but a volume control. Not because we are ashamed of what we believe, but because we are to handle holy things carefully. (MATT. 7:16) However, we are not to force ideas and theology on those who are not ready or not dedicated enough to handle them. In order to accurately do so we must do as Paul told Timothy. (II TIM. 2:14)

Flying Faith

For thousands of years, man has dreamed of flying. Only in the last 110 years has that become reality. The first manned aircraft to fly did so 110 years ago in 1903. But in seventy years time, we were not only flying but we planned missions to fly to the Moon. What changed? How could we do more in 70 years than in over 4,000?

Let's take a look. Early on, men saw birds fly. It looked like it was pretty fun. So they looked at birds and found what they had that we didn't: wings and feathers. So in the 'we got this' arrogant attitude that mankind has always had, they slapped wings and feathers on some guy and threw him off the cliff. Didn't work out so hot. So, in that same omnipotent arrogant attitude, they did it again... and again... and again. After much pain and feather gathering, they finally quit.

So what was wrong? Birds don't fly just because they have wings and feathers. They fly because they are designed to, from top to bottom. Every part of the bird is made to be light, aerodynamic, and functional. Nothing about a bird that soars beautifully is just slapped on to a different design. Its all created with that purpose: the purpose of flight.

In this way, we as churches often wonder why our evangelism doesn't fly. We tack on some ministries, add a Saturday once in a while to go and preach on street corners or maybe hand out tracts, but it does't ever take off? What are we doing wrong?

Let's take a look into history and see how our forefathers handled these things. In the first century church (the Church that the followers of Jesus ministered in after His death and resurrection) the entire church was evangelizing. They converted hundreds a day, thousands followed Christ at that time. Similarly we find that the Anabaptists often started entire churches overnight while fleeing those who would kill them for their beliefs. Why could they and not we? 90% or more of our churches have new member growth only from our children joining the Church. As wonderful as that is, there should be more; much more. So what can we do to change this?

First of all, let me point out that I am not saying that I have mastered this myself. These are thoughts that I feel I need to share; not my instructions with a 110% guarantee. But back to the subject on hand. What can we do?

1. We see that the first church and most growing churches are mission minded. They are there for the express purpose of creating new disciples (not just one time converts). They majored in the area of ministry, it wasn't just a hobby. Ministry truly defined those churches. Outreach and sacrifice were what those churches were all about.

2. Prayer was a driving factor in these churches. They got together to pray often. They thrived off of it. They worked together and they prayed together. I'm talking about true prayer, not just memorized lines (though they can also be useful), or long sermons with our eyes closed. (I've heard these, too) True prayer is fellowship with God Himself. This fellowship with God is the single most important thing that will produce a strong ministry minded church.

3. Fellowship is another item that these churches had. There were not many rogue preachers, even those that started solo joined the church when they could. There was unity, fellowship, and accountability.

4. Knowledge can be very useful, but it is not the top of the list. In our modern world of self glorifying knowledge, we often put this far too high on our list of requirements. Knowledge can indeed be useful, but if it is not applied correctly, it makes us more like devils than saints. Bible study is a total requirement for ministry, however, I would be more inclined to put that under prayer than under knowledge.

These are all important tools for ministry. But another important thing to remember is the fact that the Holy Spirit, not we, is the driving force behind conviction. We are only to be faithful servants, not the commander. In all of this, we simply follow the commands of our Leader.

Costly Christianity

So many teachers and pastors today talk about grace and salvation like they are  a gift that we receive and ignore. We put it on our shelf for that day when we will need it, like a useless gift given to us that we feel like we cannot toss but have no use for. We keep it for that day when we might need it, but until then, we forget that it even exists. Is that the grace Jesus taught? (Matt. 19:21, Matt. 13:46, Luke 9:23)

No. It is not. Jesus taught that we have to follow, we must give up our flesh and its evil. (Romans 6) If we want God's forgiveness but do not wish to actually follow God, it is of no use to us. It is like starting to make a meal and quitting. Thawing chicken, peeling potatoes, and heating the oven may be half of making a meal, but, in ending there is less useful than not starting at all. If we only do those steps we end up with putrid chicken, hard potatoes, and an oven that is heating for no reason at all. We must continue, we must finish the job. A half finished meal like this does not feed half the people the completed meal would, nor is it only half as filling, it is altogether useless. It smells and is worse than not starting with the preparations at all.

So what then? Am I saying that people who  accept His forgiveness but deny His leadership are not His disciples? Actually, that is exactly what I'm saying. Jesus bluntly told us that this is how it is. (Luke 14:27) We cannot tell people that God will forgive you if you ask and that He requires nothing in return. For that is untrue, God requires everything in your being in return. We must give God everything, we must realize that nothing that we have is ours; not our time, money, intelligence, or even our family. We must give it all back to Him. He allows us to use it. We are to recognize His absolute reign in our lives.

Conclusion

So is this task easy? No. Is it something we conquer quickly? Not at all. Even the Apostle Paul said this about his life.

Not that I have already obtained it or have already become perfect, but I press on so that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus. (Phil. 3:12)


May we also do the same.

Ludicrous Logic

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.
-Galileo Galilei

These words were uttered by a Godly scientist who was ahead of his time. God Himself is a God of order and reason. He created things in a logical order. Creation itself was an organized process. Heaven is organized, as are the Laws of God. If we are to follow God, we must do it according to the understanding He gives us both in His Word and our reason (as far as it is in accord with His). Christianity is not a religion that is for those who want to stop reasoning. In fact, God is the author of reason. He created it. We cannot make choices without reason. In fact, that is what separates us from animals. It is our ability to reason. This is an important part of being made in the image of God.

Using reasoning properly is where we seem to fail. We no longer teach reason in most schools. We teach memorization. We memorize multiplication, division, rules, and quotes. We are not taught to think logically anymore. Therefore we fall for many logical errors. Examine these examples.

All living humans need air.

I am alive.

Therefore, I need air.

All cows eat grass.
My dog eats grass.
Therefore, my dog is a cow.

These are examples of deductive/inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning can only be used if at least one point is absolutely true. The first example shown is always true of living people. The second example shows that even though all cows eat grass, not all things that eat grass are cows. Instead we could/should have said.

All cows eat grass.
Betsy is a cow.
Therefore, Betsy eats grass.

We can only apply this form of reasoning when proving the absolute (the all). In other words, we must have an absolute that applies, then work from there. This form of reason is called deductive reasoning. It is the most accepted form of reason. All though things can go both ways at times, (e.g. All cows eat grass. Betsy eats grass. Therefore Betsy is a cow) they cannot go the other way at all times. That is called inductive reasoning, and it is much more complex to prove. Even though Betsy ate grass, that fact does not prove her to be a cow. Too often, we see these types of reasonings used in Theology as well. Here is a prime example.

All Reformed Doctrine uses the word elect.
Paul used the word elect.
Therefore, Paul is a Reformed Theologian.

See the flaw? Although all Reformers use the word elect, not all who use the word elect are Reformed Theologians. The point of reasoning is not always reversible. (in fact it is often not.) We cannot use a single point that has variable values to prove a constant for an entire group. It cannot work. Here's a more whimsical example.

All Amish grow beards.
Mr. T has a beard.
Therefore, Mr. T is Amish.

Makes sense right?

Here is another example of interesting logic.

Now we know that we should always check to make sure our reasoning is accurate. We always check multiplication with addition. So here is how to check the problem.

Tada! The checking gave us the same answer as the multiplication. So its the correct answer, right?

Not even close. The flaw in the first problem is not in any one step but in the entire method. The checking is also complete hogwash, but it comes out to the same number. What's the point? Never check your own solution with your own idea. If you were wrong the first time, likely you will be wrong when you check it as well.

Now, with math its easy to check this out. We whip out a calculator (if you don't trust your mental math) and punch the buttons. Whoops! Turns out 14x5=70. Who knew? Math has absolute correct answers that cannot be argued with or changed. Many of our moral and Theological problems are also the same thing. They do have absolute right answers. Just like 14x5 doesn't ever really equal 25, stealing is never really justified either. Just because I can do it on paper and "check" it to be correct does not make it so.

In the end, this type of 'math' only works on those who don't practice Math in daily use. If they did, they would see the error instantly. In the same way, heresy can be found out by checking the Bible, not the heresy. Often the heretic can "check his work" as well as I can check the answer of 14x5=25. Trust the Bible, not the problem.

Conclusion

How do we check our Theology? We whip out our Bible. Does Jesus say anything about it? Do we have exact commands? Does the Bible mean what it says? Was there an underlying point to this? Are we obeying it? Are we taking things and twisting them to make them 'make sense' (dogs and cows)?
Let us make sure we are follow the commands of God, not the doctrines of man.

Debating Doctrine

One of the things that I have heard more than once is this, "If you just stopped debating these things, we would have less conflict in the Brotherhood." Indeed, some things we should not debate. However, we need to also realize that there are also things we need to know and stand firm upon. There are those things that we cannot debate without destroying Christianity, but there are those points that we as Christians can disagree upon without changing our core belief systems.

So where do we draw the line? Well, part of that is answered with where we stand in our fellowship with God and the local Church. Those who are in authority in the Church will indeed have to take a more firm stand on some doctrines than the lay members. I know great Christians that never have even heard of Soteriology or Eschatology, yet are warriors for God. There are those who do not know of John Edwards, TULIP, Martin Luther, Jan Hus, or the Moravian Church are often the strongest Christians one will meet. Do we all need to have this knowledge? No. (see this post for more details on this subject) So who does? Those who are leaders do indeed need to have a knowledgable understanding of Theology in order to lead.

So where does that leave us with debate? Is it ever right? I do believe so, under the correct circumstances, with the correct people, and doctrines that can be used to build up the Church. So what are the parameters for debate? Lets start with those whom it is not advisable to debate with or in front of.

I. The Non-Christian We should not debate complex doctrine in front of a non-Christian. To do so shows division in Christ's body. We need to be unified in our ministry to the world. This does not mean we cannot reason with a non-Christian. Even God reasons with us as people (Is. 1:18)

II. The Carnal Christian We should not debate doctrine with a carnal brother. To do so is usually just a way to justify whatever state they are currently living in. They do not want to understand God better; they want to live in wanton sin. We need to be firm on the concept of being sanctified with such a person and not debate other topics with them.

III. The New Converts If a person is new to the Christian faith we do not need to burden them with Theology that will trouble or confuse them. We need to let them grow into it first. Let them start on milk. But no one should stay at the milk stage, either. They need to grow.

IV. The Weak Christian There are those in the faith who are not as strong as others, sometimes through no fault of their own. They are troubled by every new thought and theory and struggle with every new idea. Such a person should not be troubled with debate. Jesus himself says that to those who are given more, more will be required. If a person is given less, than we are commanded not to trouble them. (I Cor. 8:11)

So, debate is limited to mature Christians that are not new converts. They need to be strong in their faith as well. These things are important if we are to be leaders and not just factioning, bickering, backbiters.

So when is it right -indeed, sometimes necessary- to debate doctrine? And what doctrines are up for debate?

There are some things that are not up for discussion. Man's need for salvation, our lack of goodness without God, our desire to serve ourselves instead of God, God's Holiness, Jesus as God's Son and our Saviour, God's lack of sin, man's complete inability to save himself, and the requirement of God's grace that alone can save us are all non debatable parts of the Gospel. But some more complex doctrines, than do not always have a defining point in Salvation itself do bear studying and debating. What is the difference between the teaching of Joel Osteen and John Bunyan? Aren't they both Christians? Do we need to argue between the two? Do we not agree with both because they are both in the Religion section of the local book store?

Some say no, live and let live. Others say yes, this is a defining point of Christianity. Indeed, I too would say we do need to know where we stand with these doctrines. If we do not understand who Christ is and what He has done for us, we cannot understand the differences between these different teachings. We are commanded to test the spirits. (I John 4:1) We are to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. (Matthew 10:16)We are not to be tossed by every wave of doctrine. (Eph. 4:14)

So in order to do these things we must indeed debate some issues. Taking a stance is important in many of these places. However, we must balance out this with the other side of the metaphorical coin. We are not to teach these doctrines as the commands of God. (Matt. 15:19) We are also to avoid foolish rambling as well. (II Tim. 2:14-17) In the same breath, we are also told to accurately handle the word of truth. So to do so we need to know what that is. Some doctrines that we may hold are not essential to our Theology, others are. We need to know which are truly nonnegotiable and which are based in human reason. This is yet another reason that we are not to debate with immature or weak Christians, seeing as some of our Theology is indeed core- yet other portions are not.

Conclusion

In the end, yes, debate is important for mature Christians. But there are many limitations and guidelines to follow. I don't have them all; indeed, I don't know them all. But these are some of them.

Don't debate without prayer. Don't leave the Author out of the Book discussion.