Jesus wept..

In general, I try to keep these posts from being too personal. While every person borrows from experience in any endeavor they undertake (myself included), I try to avoid issues pertaining directly to myself as it encourages partiality. That being said, I can no longer keep silent on the issue of Christian clichés and the serious harm that they do to Christianity.


Personal tragedy affects all of us at some point. In short, all Christians face war. In the words of Matt Chandler, "Sometimes we are faithful and do exactly what God wants us to do and we get mauled by lions and overrun by armies." Your personal war could be a number of things: death of a relative or close friend, estrangement, divorce, miscarriage, rape, abandonment, drug or alcohol addiction of a relative or close friend, infertility, job loss, etc. An incredibly painful and unnecessary thing that occurs during these storms in our lives are Christian clichés. “All things work together for good.” “Count it all joy.” “Just trust, His ways are higher than our ways.” “He has a perfect plan.” Are all of these true? You bet. Should you say them to someone in mourning? Not a chance and here’s why:

Jesus doesn’t comfort with clichés.

John 11 opens up explaining that Lazarus is sick. His sisters, Martha and Mary, sent word to Christ telling Him that His dear friend was ill. When Christ receives their message, He says, “This illness does not lead to death. It is for the glory of God, so that the Son of God may be glorified through it." Needless to say, no one understood what He was talking about. In fact, He then purposefully chose to stay away from Lazarus. It was not until two full days later that Jesus announced that Lazarus had already died and it was time to go to Judea.


The first thing Martha did when she heard that Jesus was coming, was to go to meet Him (John 11:20). Does this ring any bells? What is the first thing that any of us do when tragedy meets our lives? Run to Jesus. Martha was doing what any Christian (and many non-Christians) would do, running to the only possible solution she could think of: Christ.

Second, Martha said (paraphrased of course), “Hey Jesus, why didn’t you show up? Lazarus wouldn’t have died if you had been here. You are the only one that could’ve stopped this and You didn’t because You didn’t show up. But Lord, I know You can still do whatever You want.” Again, sound a bit too familiar? What do we say when someone dies or gets hurt or the unthinkable happens? My first words are always, “Hey Jesus, what’s going on? You could have done something, You could have stopped this. Don’t You know what You just allowed to happen? Remember me? Love me? I know You can still fix this, please fix this.”

Jesus tells Martha that Lazarus would rise again, something she didn’t comprehend because she believed He was speaking regarding the resurrection on the final day. Jesus then has Martha call for Mary who comes to Him saying the same thing Martha had moments beforehand, “Jesus, why?”

 When Jesus saw Mary weeping, “...He was deeply moved in His Spirit and greatly troubled.” And when He had come to the grave, He did something that we so often fail to do with those who are hurting: Jesus wept. Think of all the things Christ could have said to Martha, Mary, and the mourners, He could have nonchalantly said “Count it all joy when you face trials!” He could have offered to sit down with them for some coffee and stated, “All things work together for good!” He would have been being completely honest with these comments. He also would have been unfeeling, that's why He didn’t say those things. He didn’t offer any trite clichés, He wept. He shared in the pain of His friends. Christ knew how to mourn with those who mourn, do you? Romans 12:15

God's Grace and Demand for Righteousness (Part 1)

Some focus so primarily on the justice and righteousness of God that they neglect any mention of His love. Likewise, many focus on grace and forgiveness solely and never mention the need to live a righteous life. Let's look a little at both.

Colossians 1:15 “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” This verse notes that though God the Father and God the Son are difference in subsistence, Christ was the perfect image of God the Father in His ministry here on earth. Therefore, the mercy (love) demonstrated in His ministry (to lepers, the adulterous, the murderers, Lazarus and countless others) is a picture of the love of the Father to His creation (that sick, adulterous, dead creation).

“So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love...” -1 John 4:16

Life. “Grace: Favor extended where wrath is deserved.” Humans are given incalculable amounts of grace. Life itself is a testament to the grace of God. The fact that He (in all of His holiness) allows anyone to exist in a world that He created for His glory staggers the imagination. Humans are brought forth in sin and iniquity and remain that way even after justification, and yet His love is evidenced in the fact that He breathed air into the nostrils of Adam and knits each individual together without mistake. Flawed? Yes. Diseased? Yes. Without mistake? Yes. Your life is evidence of His love for you.

Salvation. “...but God shows His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” -Romans 5:8. Without argument, the greatest gift of love from God is salvation. The sending of the Son, the sacrifice of the Son and the separation from the Son present the greatest love story ever told. While the giving of the Son demonstrates the love of God the Father, the Self-sacrifice of the Son demonstrates Christ's love. Will all be graced with salvation? No. But it is without doubt an overwhelmingly compelling case against those who preach only upon God's attributes dealing with justice.

Aside from life, aside from salvation, most of us are graced all the more. Marriage is (or should be) an inexplicable example of grace. Children are a blessing from the Lord and should be recognized as such. Even if one isn't blessed with a family, most have material items that God is allowing them to temporarily have. Whether a house, car, bed, Mac, TV, warm shower, or a multitude of other items that mean nothing in eternity; they are a demonstration of His love in the present.

Dare I throw in an example of grace that you mightn't have considered before? The grace of suffering. All people (whether willingly or unwillingly) will bring glory to the Son eventually. But if you are suffering through a circumstance that wasn't brought about by sin, you have been given an opportunity to glorify the Son through your response to that suffering. No, it isn't easy (and I wouldn't tell someone recently diagnosed with cancer to relax and be thankful for the opportunity to glorify God) but it is definitely an opportunity that not all men get to take part in. If you will glorify God through your diseases, your tears and heartbreak, doesn't it make the suffering easier to swallow? If you realize that glorifying God is the sole reason for your existence then you can look back on your time of heartache with a Spirit of thanksgiving that God allowed you the privilege of walking through the eye of the storm.

Another beautiful example of the love of God is that of His compassion and understanding on our behalf. Jesus (Who is the image of the invisible God) wept at the death of Lazarus. He wept not because Lazarus was dead (He knew He would raise him), He wept out of compassion for the pain of the people. He felt the pain of Mary, Martha and the rest of those who were mourning. In the Psalms, we are told, “You have kept count of my tossings; put my tears in your bottle. Are they not in your book?” He has given life, salvation, material items and still His heart beats compassion for you.

Next: God's Justice and Demand of Righteousness

Don't quote the Book...

I wasn't planning on writing anything on the 10 Commandments. As someone who believes that Theologically, we are not under all of the laws of the Old Testament code, I tend to stray from this subject quite fiercely. However after reading Christopher Hitchens article in Vanity Fair entitled “The New Commandments” (found here: www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2010/04/hitchens-201004? ). I decided to take a crack at this unbeliever in his attempt to deride the Laws set forth by God a couple thousand years ago. His article is written in complete disrespect but what else could be expected from an unbeliever trying to understand the heart of God?

Rant: One of the biggest problems with non-believers is that they read a verse and do not know the context of what they are reading, yet they want to judge the entire text of Scripture (which they became an expert on through reading one verse and using shifting terminology). They read the Bible blindly and then expect to understand where Christ-followers are coming from. Don't quote the book if you don't know the Author. But if in your arrogance you insist to try to prove Christianity wrong, at least delve into the text in its entirety (and by this, I don't mean reading it in King James and presuming an english version is actually consistently and contextually accurate). Theology must be studied as anything else, googling the phrase “Biblical textual errors” won't make you a Theologian any more then an 8th grade Science project makes you a Scientist.

Initially in the article, Mr Hitchens lists (and then disrespects) each one of the 10 Commandments given to Moses. He tries to be humorous at parts (at which he fails profusely) and gives opinion on all the ways things should've been done. After he lists the Commandments, he goes on to list which Commandments we should keep and what should be done away with. I seriously encourage you to read the article before you proceed or this won't make much sense at all.

Mr. Hitchens claims that the 10 Commandments were “derived from situational ethics. They show every symptom of having been man-made and improvised under pressure.” He also claims that the God of Israel commanded Israel to murder and rape their enemies. Obviously, they were commanded to eliminate the peoples that worshipped other gods but I challenge anyone to provide a verse where God commands rape. You won't find it because rape is abominable in His eyes. The author notes Numbers 31:1–18 as justification for rape. This is the passage where Moses instructs the men to kill all the Midianites except for the virgin women whom they can have for themselves. I suppose any Scriptural novice could misconstrue these verses and claim these men raped the women but that isn't said nor implied. He doesn't say to rape, he says to keep them from death, the young women were given the opportunity to JOIN the chosen nation of Israel, no where is rape mentioned or condoned. The thread that runs from cover to cover in the Bible is to avoid sexual immorality (1st Corinthians 6:18, Job 31:1, Matthew 5:27-28, Romans 13:13-14, Ephesians 5:3-4). Why would God go against His very nature in just this passage? He wouldn't and He didn't.

In relation to the first 3 commandments, Mr Hitchens says this, “Numbers One through Three can simply go, since they have nothing to do with morality and are no more than a long, rasping throat clearing by an admittedly touchy dictator.” Do not be surprised that Hitchens wants to completely negate the Commandments that Jesus says are the most important (Matthew 22:37-40).Why would a secularist want to endorse loving the Lord with all our heart? He doesn't have a personal relationship with God, for if he knew the grace of salvation, he would understand the commandment to dedicate our heart, soul and mind to this Diety.

It is also apparent through the article that the author believes that Israel is our example and that Christians are striving to obey the way they obeyed (or more accurately, disobeyed). If he had studied the Bible at all in preparation for his article, he would know that the Bible speaks repeatedly of God's disappointment in Israel and more than once He leans toward destroying them for their disbelief and sin. The entire book of Hosea was written because God was showing that Israel had repeatedly disappointed Him and made itself a whore to other gods, yet in His forgiveness and grace, He purchased her back. Does the phrase “The people did what was right in their own eyes” ring a bell? It might have if Mr. Hitchens would've actually researched for his piece instead of writing based on  presuppositions.

This little response is just that: little. The aforementioned article is 3 pages long and I do not have the time to respond to the entire article. But even if I did, I don't know how many of you that are reading this would last as I could write for hours on the foolishness of Hitchens' disbelief and disrespect. Any kid fresh out of 1st year at the BI could easily combat Mr. Hitchens' poor attempt at derailing our beliefs and convictions. I invite you to read the article and make your own conclusions.