"Be Still" in Prayer

A scripture verse that is often quoted in support of contemplative or centering prayer is Psalm 46:10, "Be still, and know that I am God". But, is that passage really about prayer? Should we use it in support of prayer?

My short answer is: "no". That doesn't mean we shouldn't listen for God or the Holy Spirit's leading to answer our prayers, but never in contrast to God's revealed Word in scripture. Let's look at the use of that phrase, "be still", in this scripture passage and others throughout the Bible.

Psalm 46 is a short chapter, you should read the whole chapter to understand the context of that one phrase. It starts with verse 1 to set the overall context, "God is our refuge and strength, an ever-present help in trouble." It talks mostly of the nations in uproar, about wars, the mountains quake, etc... These are all physical things, and the message is that God is our fortress, we should be still (i.e. rest) in the comfort that God is all powerful and will be our help and fortress, we shouldn't worry or try to take things into our own hands.

This phrase, "be still" is found in six other passages throughout the Bible:

• Exodus 14:14, "The LORD will fight for you; you need only to be still."
• Nehemiah 8:11, "The Levites calmed all the people, saying, "Be still, for this is a sacred day. Do not grieve."" (they had been weeping and grieving as they hear the law read, they were told to enjoy food and drink, for the joy of the Lord is their strength)
• Psalm 37:7, "Be still before the LORD and wait patiently for him; do not fret when men succeed in their ways, when they carry out their wicked schemes." (again, don't worry, rest in God, everything is in His hands)
• Jeremiah 47:6, "'Ah, sword of the LORD,' you cry, 'how long till you rest? Return to your scabbard; cease and be still.'" (the first verse sets the context, "This is the word of the LORD that came to Jeremiah the prophet concerning the Philistines before Pharaoh attacked Gaza")
• Zecharaih 2:13, "Be still before the LORD, all mankind, because he has roused himself from his holy dwelling." (prophecy)
• Mark 4:39, "He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, "Quiet! Be still!" Then the wind died down and it was completely calm."

If we use this passage in relation to prayer, or as an example of prayer we are practicing eisigesis (reading our own ideas into the text), rather than exegesis (shaping our ideas based on the text) of scripture. When we read our own ideas into scriptue, we can make it say anything we want, thus it becomes meaningless text and useless to us.

It should be as God tells us in Hebrews 4:12, "For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." If we read our own ideas into it, how can it judge the thoughts and attitudes of the heart?

Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God

I recently read through Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God by JI. Packer. It can be found on Amazon. It is a small book, and worth the quick read, but a little difficult to follow the way it is written at times. The last paragraph in the book sums it up pretty well: [my addition]

"What, then, are we to say about the suggestion that a hearty faith in the absolute sovereignty of God is inimical to evangelism? We are bound to say that anyone who makes this suggestion thereby shows that he has simiply failed to understand what the doctrin of divine sovereignty means. Not only does it undergird evangelism, and uphold the evangelist, by creating a hope of success that could not otherwise be entertained [God ensures His word comes to fruition]; it also teaches us to bind together preaching and prayer; and as it makes us bold and confident before men, so it makes us humble and importunate before God. Isn't this as it should be? We would not wish to say that man cannot evangelize at all without coming to terms with this doctrine; but we venture to think that, other things being equal, he will be able to evangelize better for believing it."

He also talks some about the antinomy (apparent conflict, but equally valid) of God's will and man's free will. It is not a continuum as I initially thought about it, such that the reality lies somewhere on the continuum between God's will on the one end, and man's will on the other. It seems to be more that man has free will, but God's will is stronger. That's not a perfect analogy or comparison, but is as close as I get to simple statement. The antinomy is still part of the mystery of faith, just as the Trinity is a mystery as it is near impossible for us to grasp because we don't have anything in the natural world that represents it perfectly.

God commands us to pray, even though He knows better what we need than we do. Likewise, God commands us to evangelize. I have come to think of it somewhat like the example in 1 Corinthians 3:6, "I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow." God wants us to plant the seed or water it; if He wants to grow a plant, and we don't plant the seed or water it, He will use someone else for those tasks. Don't we all want to be used by God in building His Kingdom in some way?

"The Shack" Attack

The recent NYT bestselling book, The Shack, is an outright attack on Christianity. This book was lent to my wife by a friend, with a good recommendation. She read it and pointed out several things along the way to me. My assessment is that it is an attack on Christianity, a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

This novel repeatedly, and systematically, undermines the God of the Bible, Jesus, the Trinity, and many other core doctrines of the Church. This is not a mere re-interpretation of the Biblical doctrines from scripture in an entertaining way, the statements and claims in the book directly contradict statements in the Bible. Statements about who God is, how we interact with Him, our own Salvation are re-defined into something new and different. It may sound similar, but after you re-define all the terms and relationships, it undermines the Christian worldview. This is not the Jesus of the Bible, the same as Allah is not the God of the Bible.

I have read one book on New Age and listened to a couple CDs; enough to recognize that this is not a Christian book, but a New Age book with the purpose of replacing Christianity in the cultural mainstream. It is a shame that any Christian bookstore or online seller would sell this as a Christian book. It is a shame that any pastor would recommend this book, or even purchase multiple copies for those in his shepherding.

Anyone who reads the Bible on a regular (nearly daily) basis should be able to see right through this story for they are firmly grounded in the Word of God, "thoroughly equipped for every good work". If you are not regularly reading God's Word, you will be more likely to be deceived by the "fine-sounding arguments" and led astray.

Spread the word, this book is as anti-Christian as they come!

Preach the Gospel always, if necessary use words

After talking with someone recently about apologetics, they commented that their philosophy was captured in the words of St Francis of Assisi, "Preach the Gospel always, if necessary use words." This is an often repeated phrase and philosophy among Christians today, but is it Biblical?

I was a bit uncomfortable about this approach, as I dug in further, I became more cetain that it is not Biblical, nor is it effective.

In my many years, I have had several discussions with several people regarding faith, the Bible, Jesus, God, etc... but out of all those, there is only one that I can knowingly attribute to 'preaching the gospel without words'. That doesn't mean we shouldn't preach the gospel without words, but it does mean we shouldn't use that as our sole approach.

What's the problem?
Part of the problem is our fallen nature, we all sin, and thus do not give a perfect reflection of the gospel. We all give examples, at times, that turn others away from the gospel, rather than towards it. This phrase can be used to challenge us as Christians to seek to live a better life, striving to keep ourselves from being corrupted by the world. Yet, none of us will live up to this.

Another problem is the Biblical example. Look through the New Testament for sharing the gospel message, by and large they are all using words. Consider Peter sharing with the message with the Jews where 3000 were added to their number that day. Consider Paul sharing the gospel, using the 'unknown god' to trigger an explanation of the God who created heaven and earth, and many others.

The biggest problem is the direct command to preach the gospel in many different scripture passages. Consider this passage in Romans that speaks pretty directly to this:

Romans 10:13-14, "for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?"

Our Culture
Please don't accept this philosophy, the more we do this, the harder it is to distinguish Christian behavior from that of our culture. (yet one more reason it doesn't work)

Despite this approach not having Biblical support, and not being very effective, this is exactly what our culture wants us to hear. They want us to hear, "don't tell us about your religion". This goes right in line with the other phrases which seek to silence Christians, "we must tolerate others' beliefs", "we all worship the same god, we just follow different paths", "it's not a salvation issue", "I don't want to be prosletized".

These are all designed to keep us quiet, so we don't preach the gospel. It makes them uncomfortable. To those living without the gospel, they should be uncomfortable when faced with their sin. They don't like to be reminded, yet we have the only message of hope for them.

Does everyone know what is evil?

My wife asked me this question a while back. I thought about it a little and decided that they must. Some of the big things like murder are very apparent, but what about the rest?

My answer: Yes, absolutely!

My reason: Adam's original sin

We often talk of Adam's 'original sin' being the sin nature that we all inherit from Adam and Eve. But, shouldn't we also consider what else is inherited? Consider the story in Genesis 2-3. God said,

Genesis 2:15-17, "The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

then later,

Genesis 3:6-7, " When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves."

Also, consider how all this plays into the gospel message of Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 2:21-22, "For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive."

So, because of Adam's sin, we inherit three things, 1) sin, 2) death, it's consequence, and 3) the knowledge of good and evil. But, that can all be reversed through faith in God's son, Jesus Christ.