The God Only Looks at the Heart Fallacy

Every effective deception is seasoned with a grain of truth. However, fallacies are particularly challenging because they are constructed on unstable yet persuasive logic. A ‘fallacy’ is a mistaken belief, especially one based on unsound arguments, faulty reasoning that renders an argument invalid, or a misleading argument. Fallacies mimic sound reasoning, making them deceptively convincing. Various philosophers have compiled lists of logical fallacies that are pretty fascinating. Studying logical fallacies can undoubtedly aid in swiftly identifying problematic arguments. Some individuals appear to have an innate ability to detect logical fallacies. The Holy Ghost can supernaturally assist us in identifying logical and spiritual fallacies. I believe that’s one practical aspect of the gift of discernment (1 Corinthians 12:4-11). In this series of articles, my aim is to rectify several common theological fallacies that Christians mistakenly consider valid.

The God Only Looks at the Heart Fallacy

This excruciatingly common Christian error exemplifies a False Exclusionary Disjunct Fallacy. This fallacy uses something true to affirm a disjunct. A typical example: Charlie is a mammal or Charlie is a cat. Charlie is a mammal, so Charlie is not a cat. Assuming that Charlie can only be a mammal or a cat results in logical unsoundness. Yet, two things can be true at the same time. Because all cats are mammals, Charlie might be a cat. We would need more information to know the answer for sure. The God Only Looks at the Heart Fallacy goes like this: God doesn’t judge outward appearance like humans do. God sees the inward man. Therefore, God cares nothing about our outward appearance. The first two statements are correct. However, we need more information to know whether God cares about some aspects of our outward appearance. Thankfully, we have an entire Bible as our guide.

Maybe the Most Misunderstood Verse

Okay. So, 1 Samuel 16:7 might not be the most misused verse in the entire Bible, but I’d put it somewhere in the top ten. I’ve heard more people use this Scripture to justify outward worldliness than I can count. Let’s look at the verse in question:

But the Lord said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart (1 Samuel 16:7).

Understanding the context is crucial, as it always is in biblical interpretation. The Lord dispatched the prophet Samuel to anoint the next king of Israel after rejecting King Saul. God instructed Samuel to go to Bethlehem and identify a man named Jesse, “…for I have chosen one of his sons to be king (1 Samuel 16:1).” Jesse had seven sons in addition to David. To fully comprehend 1 Samuel 16:7, reading the preceding verse is essential. In essence, Samuel encountered Eliab, and something about his appearance led him to think, “Surely this is the Lord’s anointed (1 Samuel 16:6).” The text doesn’t mention specifically what it was about Eliab’s outward appearance that so deeply impressed the prophet. The text seems to indicate that he was tall and strong. Ancient peoples admired those qualities in their kings, who were often called upon to lead in battle. Yet God was interested in more than mere physical strength in Israel’s next king.

Had Samuel not been sensitive to the voice of the Lord, he likely would have anointed Eliab or one of his other brothers to be king because David was in the fields tending his father’s sheep and goats. And that’s the point of the entire story. Samuel identified the right man because he listened to God. Secondarily, this passage teaches us the beautiful truth that God doesn’t hand out anointing based on physical qualities like height, strength, rugged good looks, athleticism, or any other things that often impress humans. That’s great news and very encouraging to someone like me. This lesson is especially relevant in our current climate of celebrity worship, social media perfectionism, and physical vanity. God is not impressed by the vast majority of the things humans find praiseworthy. The apostle Paul addressed this issue in his first letter to Timothy: For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life. That now is, and of that which is to come (1 Timothy 4:8). Here, Paul echoes the message from 1 Samuel 16:7. It would be far better to have a heart for God and a weak body than an ungodly heart and a powerful body. However, this passage does not say that God cares nothing about what we do outwardly with our bodies.

What Does the Bible Say About the Outward Appearance

The Bible has a lot to say about our outward appearance. For example, God expressly forbids tattooing our bodies (Leviticus 19:28). A practice that has become popular among Christians in recent decades (for a deeper dive into that topic, read my article Should Christians Get Tattoos? here). God is very serious about modesty in our clothing. Furthermore, God describes nakedness differently than our current culture defines it (for more in-depth writings on the topics of modesty and nakedness, you can read my article The Extraordinary Significance of the Royal Priesthood of Believers here).

In a particularly relevant Scripture, considering our current culture’s obsession with transgendersim, Deuteronomy 22:5 prohibits men from dressing like women and vice versa. 1 Corinthians 11 gives another gender-distinctive command to men and women. Saying, “Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him (1 Corinthians 11:14).” We have an example of this in the Old Testament. The Nazarite vow was an act of consecrating oneself to God. It was symbolized by long, uncut hair. This meant that a Nazarite was willing to bear shame for God’s name. Even at that time, men’s long hair was considered shameful. For a man to have long hair is a mark of effeminacy.[1] Paul contrasts that shame with a woman’s glory, “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering (1 Corinthians 11:15).”[2] Nature gives women longer hair than it does men, a difference which usually has, though not universally, been reflected in hairstyles. Some of the ancient Greeks had long hair, for example, the Spartans and some of the philosophers. But generally speaking, men have reflected the distinctions made in nature by using shorter hairstyles than women. This certainly must have been the case in first-century Corinth and the places known to those who lived there; otherwise, Paul could not have couched his appeal in these terms. By contrast, long hair is a source of glory for a woman. The precise length is not specified, and it is not important. Paul simply says it is longer than the man’s, which is accepted as her glory. Nature is hinting at the need for a woman to have her head covered. Indeed, her hair is given to her as a covering.[3]

We know Paul is referring to hair and not veils or hats because of the previous verses. The Expanded Bible translation of 1 Corinthians 11:3-7 says:

Every man who prays or prophesies ·with his head covered [or with long hair; brings shame to his head, meaning shame to Christ, who is the head of the man]. But every woman who prays or prophesies with ·her head uncovered [or no covering (of hair)] brings shame to her head. She is the same as a woman who has her head shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off. But since it is shameful for a woman to cut off her hair or to shave her head, she should cover her head. But a man should not cover his head because he is the likeness and glory of God. But woman is man’s glory [God’s glory should be unveiled (revealed), while human glory should be veiled].

The same intuitive promptings of nature that make it proper for a man to wear short hair make it appropriate that the woman should suffer hers to grow long.[4] The text refrains from specifying the length of a woman’s hair because it prioritizes the instruction that her hair should be left entirely uncut. Otherwise, Paul warns, it might as well be shaved (1 Corinthians 11:6). Christian men and women should remember that, though God has made them equal human beings, He has made them distinct sexes. That distinction is not to be blurred in their realization that they are mutually dependent (1 Corinthians 11:11)—the man on the woman and the woman on the man. It is also to be observed in their physical appearance (1 Corinthians 11:13-15) so that in worship and in daily life, the woman can be recognized as a woman and the man as a man.[5]

Christians must celebrate and affirm the beautiful God-given distinctions between men and women by maintaining clear, easily recognizable symbols of differentiation between the sexes. That outward obedience expresses the believer’s inward psychology and promotes a healthy worldview of gender distinction. Nearly a century of blurring the lines and ignoring the differences between the sexes in clothing, responsibilities, and mentalities, even within Christian communities, has aided in the massive levels of gender dysphoria plaguing our nation. I would even argue it has played a role in the meteoric rise in our nation’s mental health crisis. Depression among men who can’t find their place in a world that has perverted and downplayed their God-given masculinity. Also, women who are hyper-sexualized, masculinized, and contorted to the twisted standards of a confused culture find themselves increasingly unfulfilled and bursting with angst.

I usually begin discussions about biblical commands concerning outward consecration by examining the tattoo and hair issues, as I’ve done here. I do that because, despite the laissez-faire liberal doctrines espoused by most of Western Christianity, these guidelines are clearly defined in Scripture. To say otherwise is intentionally disingenuous, willfully blind, woefully ignorant, or dreadfully deceived. These are watershed doctrines. Therefore, if a person is unwilling to acknowledge these understandable, counter-cultural commands, they will veer away from nearly every other doctrinal principle concerning our bodies. They certainly won’t want to consider what the Bible has to say about dying hair (you can read more about that in my article Should Christians Dye Their Hair? here), make-up (you can listen to the podcast with Timothy Hadden called The Artificial Face—Cosmetics, Make-Up-Body Modification & the Great Cover-Up here), or jewelry (1 Timothy 2:9, 1 Peter 3:3-4, Ezekiel 23:36-44, Jeremiah 4:30).

Finding Common Ground

Maybe you’re reading this and feeling overwhelmed because you’ve never considered or been taught what the Bible actually says about outward appearance. Don’t be discouraged. You’re not alone. Facing counter-cultural biblical truths for the first time can be daunting. Study them, pray over them, and, if possible, find honest Christians who won’t just casually dismiss what the Bible says about these things. Keep your heart tender to the leading of the Spirit. And even if you struggle at first to accept what’s been presented in this article, hopefully, we can at least find some common ground in recognizing that God looks at the heart. Still, He sees the outward manifestation of our heart, too.  


  • [1] Wesley, John. Wesley’s Notes on the Bible. OakTree Software, 1997.
  • [2] McGee, J. Vernon. 1 Corinthians—Revelation. Thomas Nelson, 1983.
  • [3] Morris, Leon. 1 Corinthians: An Introduction and Commentary. InterVarsity Press, 1985.
  • [4] Barnes, Albert. Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament. OakTree Software, 2006.
  • [5] Mare, W. Harold. 1 Corinthians. Zondervan, 1977.

The Pharisee Fallacy

Every good deception is seasoned with a bit of truth. However, fallacies are especially difficult because they are built on unstable, albeit convincing, logic. A “fallacy” is “a mistaken belief, especially one based on unsound arguments, faulty reasoning which renders an argument invalid, or a misleading argument.”[i] Fallacies resemble sound reasoning, which makes them dangerously misleading. Various philosophers have constructed lists of logical fallacies that are pretty interesting. Studying logical fallacies certainly helps people to spot problematic arguments quickly. Some people seem to have a built-in sensor for logical fallacies. The Holy Ghost can supernaturally help us spot logical and spiritual fallacies as well. I believe that’s one practical aspect of the gift of discernment (1 Corinthians 12:4-11).
 
Logical Fallacies
 
Mark Twain is noted for saying, “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled.” That’s often true because it’s hard to admit we’ve wholeheartedly believed a falsehood. Our pride refuses to acknowledge it until the lie consumes us or we become desperate for the truth. I’ll give you a silly example from my life. As a kid, we ate lots of tuna. My mother typically bought the Chicken of the Sea brand of tuna. So, naturally, I assumed tuna came from chickens raised by the sea. I have a humiliating memory of passionately arguing that point with my friends. You can imagine my horror when I realized my error. I had fallen prey to the Hasty Generalization Fallacy, a mistake that we usually call jumping to conclusions without having all the facts.
 
People do this all the time in one way or another. For example, a man once told me his father smoked five packs of cigarettes a day and lived to be 95. In his mind, therefore, smoking couldn’t be that bad for you. But unfortunately, he used one exceptional case to draw an invalid conclusion. Another prevalent fallacy is the Bandwagon Fallacy. A typical example of the Bandwagon Fallacy is that McDonald’s has sold more hamburgers than any other establishment worldwide. Therefore, McDonald’s must make the best hamburgers in the world. In other words, the Bandwagon Fallacy assumes that majorities are probably right. Or that popularity is the best criterion for assessing worth. However, wise minds know that majorities have been terribly wrong with disastrous results countless times throughout history. That’s why going with the flow and mindlessly accepting common beliefs without testing them is a horrible life policy.
 
Everyone’s A Theologian
 
In his book Everyone’s a Theologian: An Introduction to Systematic Theology, the late R.C. Sproul lamented, “Many people react negatively to the word theology, believing that it involves dry, fruitless arguments about minute points of doctrine.” But Sproul argued, “Everyone is a theologian because any time we think about a teaching of the Bible and strive to understand it, we are engaging in theology.”[ii] He was absolutely right. Even those who say the Bible is not true are engaging in theology. Furthermore, our theology, that is, what we believe to be accurate or not accurate regarding the Bible, has consequences. The effects can be catastrophic if our theology is sloppy, careless, poorly studied, or woefully ignorant. Yet, many Christians casually accept fallacious theologies with little to no thought. In this series of articles, I’ll strive to correct several common theological fallacies Christians believe are valid.
 
The Pharisee Fallacy
 
If you’re a sincere Christian with any firmly held biblical convictions, you’ve likely been called a Pharisee. Or perhaps you’ve been labeled a “holier than thou.” Maybe you’ve been haughtily referred to as legalistic. And if it hasn’t been said to your face, it’s undoubtedly been whispered behind your back. Of course, the Pharisees famously opposed Jesus’ ministry and eventually helped arrange His death. So, to be compared to Jesus’ chief antagonists is, to say the least, very insulting for a committed Christian. However, to be clear, there are “so-called” Christians who share common traits with the Pharisees of old. But the Phariseeism charge gets tossed around cavalierly without understanding what it means.
 
Without going into a tedious and lengthy study of the historical context of the Pharisees, it should be acknowledged that much of what they did for Jewish people was good and noble. The pharisaical order began with the best of intentions. Unfortunately, as time passed, they elevated oral teaching to the same level of importance as the law of Moses. But even worse, and what Jesus harshly criticized, was their shameful hypocrisy. The Pharisees faked virtue to gain trust so they could manipulate their followers. And they paraded it when they had genuine virtue to increase their reputations. They were, by and large, insincere, power-hungry virtue signalers. Yet, their purity was only skin deep. As Jesus said:
 
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. Even so, you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness (Matthew 23:27-28).”
 
Jesus did not denounce the Pharisees for their outward righteousness, attention to religious details, or strict obedience to the law. The problem was that their hidden motives, secret ambitions, and false fronts discredited their outward religiosity. They weaponized the law against others while placing themselves above it in their private lives. Despite all that, Jesus made some often-overlooked comments about the Pharisees:
 
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so; he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:17:20).”
 
Wait! Jesus said our righteousness must “…exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees!” In the above passage, Jesus reaffirmed the salvific value of the Old Testament, outward holiness, strict obedience to the Word of God, and careful attention to biblical religious details. However, when contrasting this passage with His harsh criticisms of the Pharisees in other places, it’s clear that our righteousness must be the same inwardly as it is outwardly. There is no outward holiness apart from inward holiness, and no inward holiness without outward holiness. We don’t get to forsake one and cling to the other as the Pharisees did.
 
The Flipped Fallacy
 
Disturbingly, most self-proclaiming Christians today have flipped the Pharisee’s hypocrisy upside down. They embrace almost no outward holiness and separation unto the Lord, claiming that righteousness is an entirely inward condition. They are highly resistant to and critical of any visible manifestations of holiness. This is why we’ve seen an overwhelming influx of high-profile pastors cursing from the pulpit, showing off tattoos, and growing their hair out longer than the average woman’s. Those examples are outgrowths (pun intended) of a problem that has plagued modern mainstream theology throughout my lifetime and longer. Most of Christianity rejects the biblical teachings that righteousness will produce outward fruit. Any earnest resistance to that anything-goes theology is offhandedly rejected as Phariseeistic legalism.
 
Typically, people who have wholeheartedly embraced the Pharisee Fallacy have convoluted the word love. They might say, “Love is the ultimate outward manifestation of holiness.” This is true. However, they’ve redefined love to mean acceptance, tolerance, and approval. They’re overlooking the simple reality that while love may be the ultimate display of holiness, it is not the only outward expression of holiness that God demands. Tolerance is not always loving. Acceptance isn’t always the best way to love a person. Same with approval. For example, if my child tells a lie, I should correct them with love rather than accepting the lie. Love is often intolerant. Pure love is courageous enough to confront things that are displeasing to God and harmful to self and others.
 
Another way many religious people convolute the word love, whether insidiously or naively, is by equating it almost exclusively with niceness or friendliness. This is tricky territory because love is patient and kind, and we should strive to be as friendly as possible to everyone. Yet, sometimes, love should be impatient. If your friend is about to walk off a cliff knowingly or unknowingly, patience is no longer the loving response. Even kindness has its limits. Otherwise, you’d have to believe that Jesus sinned when He flipped over tables and wielded a whip in the temple. Or that He was being a big meany head when confronting and calling out people’s sins, hypocrisies, and errors.
 
The Danger of Oversimplification
 
Oversimplifying, misconstruing, and redefining sacred concepts like love, holiness, righteousness, and legalism lead to terribly fallacious beliefs with disastrous consequences. Love becomes little more than wishy-washy feelings, naïve acceptance, or surface-level politeness. Kindness at all costs mutates into compromise. Holiness is relegated to a super mystical, philosophical conundrum with no practical, real-life applications. Legalism morphs into a catch-all term for anything that challenges those one-dimensional suppositions. Ironically, often, it’s the very people levying the Pharisee charge who exhibit Pharisaical traits.
 
What a Pharisee is Not
 
To be sure, there are legalistic Pharisees of all stripes out there. But you’re not a Pharisee because you take the Bible seriously, hate sin, or strive to walk in holiness. You’re also not a Pharisee because you keep godly traditions established by spiritual leaders. Paul said, “…brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle (2 Thessalonians 2:15).” In the next chapter, Paul says something similar even more urgently, “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us (2 Thessalonians 3:6).”
 
Definition of a Pharisee
 
I’ll close by defining a modern-day Pharisee as a religious individual who flaunts outward displays of righteousness for selfish reasons while remaining secretly unrighteous. Pharisees are hypocritical in that they pretend to be something they are not. They add to or subtract from the Word of God for the sake of power, manipulation, political posturing, or spiritual ignorance. Remarkably, they consider themselves above the law while harshly subjugating everyone else to it. Finally, Pharisees wield religious and political authority. They hold offices and positions of influence and power. If that doesn’t define you, you’re not a modern-day Pharisee.

[i] Porter, Noah, ed. Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.7. Springfield: C. & G. Merriam Co., 1913.
[ii] Sproul, R.C., Everyone’s a Theologian: An Introduction to Systematic Theology. Florida: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2014.
 
 

The Extraordinary Significance of the Royal Priesthood of Believers

The apostle Peter makes a somewhat shocking declaration about the Christian life in the second chapter of his first epistle. Well, actually, he makes several fascinating declarations, but for now, we’ll mainly focus on one. With all its implications, contemporary Christians largely ignore this doctrine. The current religious atmosphere of flagrant biblical illiteracy probably explains why most Christians have barely noticed Peter’s inspired proclamations. Yet, the practical applications of this doctrine touch every area of daily Christian life. That little tirade aside, if you’re reading this, you aren’t the average person. Just knowing that you clicked on an article titled The Extraordinary Significance of the Royal Priesthood of Believers, which is like an anti-click-bait title, tells me that. So, thank you for reading and for caring about the things of God.

A Few Pertinent Introductions

Before plunging in, remember that the book of 1 Peter is a treatise on holiness. The apostle called Christians to “sanctify Christ as Lord” in their hearts so that believers might live and act as Jesus desires during their short time here on earth (1 Peter 3:14-18). Peter lived alongside Jesus for nearly three years, and during that time, he witnessed the perfect standard of holiness that we should aspire to achieve. But understanding the apostle’s inspired epistles takes a little studying, primarily because of his mixing and matching of metaphorical certitudes. Let’s take a closer look at that for a moment.

The Mixing of Metaphorical Certitudes

If I were to say, “You’re fast like a ninja.” That would be a simile. I don’t know any ninjas, and you’re probably not a ninja. I’m just comparing your hypothetical nimble footedness to that of an actual ninja. Technically, an accurate metaphor declares one thing to be another. It might not be literally accurate, but it is accurately literal. For example, you might describe someone as being “tender-hearted.” Their heart, hopefully, isn’t tender, but in a sense, their metaphorical heart is undoubtedly tender. You might think I’m just playing a bunch of word games, but understanding how the inspired authors used metaphors is vital for a serious student of Scripture. The Old and New Testaments are brimming with the mixing of metaphorical certitudes.

So, when the apostle declared Jesus to be the head of the royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:5), He did not mean that Jesus was like a High Priest but instead that He was the High Priest. Although Jesus was not a Levite nor an officer in the sacrificial altars at Jerusalem, He is literally our final High Priest. From Christ’s resurrection until now, there has never been another legitimate High Priest besides Jesus. Of course, many powerful revelations are attached to Jesus because He was simultaneously the sacrifice and the High Priest (1 Peter 1:18-20). How could that be? Well, He sacrificed Himself as the only unblemished human sacrifice that ever was or could be. He was the sacrificer (High Priest) and the sacrificee (unspotted lamb). The Creator became created so He could save us.

A Lot of Mixing & Matching

We’re almost ready to reveal Peter’s shocking revelation about the Christian life with all its various nuances and truths. But first, I’d like to acknowledge the significant metaphorical mixing and matching that Peter weaves throughout 1 Peter 2:4-9. He refers to Jesus as the “head cornerstone,” to us as “living stones,” and together we comprise the spiritual house of God or temple (1 Peter 2:8). If you’re counting those mixed metaphors, Jesus is High Priest, sacrifice, and the head cornerstone of the Church. You, I, and every other true Christian who was and is and is to come are living stones built upon and around Christ. That’s five mixed metaphors right there.

The revelation that Christians are living, breathing temples of the Holy Ghost is not unfamiliar in Apostolic circles. Remember, Peter emphasized holiness. Therefore, the implications of conducting ourselves as sacred temples, living vessels, or walking containers of the Shekinah glory of God are staggering. Historically, Pentecostals have instinctively understood that if we are God’s temples, we must carefully guard against defiling our bodies inwardly and outwardly. How hurtful it must be to God when we use our bodies, sanctified for His holy presence, in sinful ways. When sin overtakes a Spirit-filled believer, it is no less devastating to God than when the Babylonians desecrated the temple in Jerusalem centuries ago. However, Peter further stirred the pot by saying believers are “a holy priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5). Later, in 1 Peter 2:9, he called believers “a royal priesthood.” Therefore, Christians are metaphorically and absolutely a holy royal priesthood of believers.

A Royal Priesthood of Believers

By the way, that was the big shocking revelation! In a metaphorically literal sense, you and I are (assuming we’re saved) priests. If that doesn’t shock you, it’s probably because you don’t understand all the responsibilities of membership in a royal priesthood of believers. Peter was conveying the great privilege of our priestly duties while also suggesting the seriousness it entails. Jesus is the head cornerstone and the High Priest; we are temples and priests. Therefore, Jesus is below us as our foundation, and He is above us as our High Priest. He supports us from below, inspires us from above, and empowers us from within.

Similarities Between Old and New Testament Priests

It should go without saying that Peter was a Jew. Jesus, too, was a Jew. Their lives were immersed in the daily importance of the priesthood. One of the tremendous mental dilemmas facing modern Christianity is our slow divorce from our faith’s Jewish roots. Rather than conforming our understanding to the Jewish context of Scripture, we try to squeeze those Jewish contexts into our cultural comfort zones. Sometimes, this tendency causes only minor problems. But it often results in full-fledged gaping black holes of false doctrine. Or it leaves entire Scripture passages to be swept aside as irrelevant. Of course, there is an opposite error where people become obsessed with reverting to pre-Christ rituals and diluting the power of the cross. For example, and these topics can be explored deeply at another time, people who insist on keeping Old Testament dietary restrictions or demanding the Lord’s Day should be observed on Saturday rather than Sunday fall into that category. I’ve seen firsthand the devastating spiritual spirals resulting from those errors. However, I still maintain that our current Christian climate is in far more danger of completely divorcing itself from vitally important Jewish roots. Most people have almost no concept of what Peter meant when he called New Testament believers a “holy priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5) and a “royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9). We’re going to unpack exactly what that means moving forward. To do so, we will examine several astonishing characteristics shared between the Old Testament and New Testament priesthood. You’ll see that it’s virtually impossible to understand our duties as New Testament priests without an understanding of the Old Testament priesthood. Even though many of these truths might seem strange to our contemporary sensibilities, every early Jewish and Gentile saint understood these inferences instantaneously.

Must Be Born into Priestly Privilege

In the Old Testament, the priesthood had no licensing process. It wasn’t an open position that could be filled by anyone interested. God instituted the priesthood, giving Moses strict instructions that only Aaron and his ancestry could obtain the priestly office (Numbers 3:10). Because Aaron was a Levite, only the Levite lineage could participate in the privileged roles of the priesthood. God was serious about this rule. He said, “Anyone daring to assume priestly duties or privileges who is not of the house of Aaron and called of God who even comes near the holy things must be put to death” (Numbers 3:10). Old Testament priests were born into service. They were birthed into ministry and privilege. Like it or not. Fair or not. That was God’s command.

Likewise, Christians must be born into priestly privileges. There’s no shortcut around that requirement. Members of the royal priesthood of believers, which comprises the Church of God, are born into service. Otherwise, God considers you a stranger, an outsider, unworthy of handling holy things. Fortunately, your physical DNA has nothing to do with the birthing process. There isn’t a single human besides Jesus whose bloodline is pure enough to enter the New Testament priesthood. The new era of priests operates on a spiritual level unavailable to the ancient ones. The royal priesthood of believers requires a bloodline untainted by the fallen blood of Adam. Therefore, it would be humanly impossible for anyone to be accepted into the new order of priestly privilege. Unless, somehow, they could be born again.

That’s precisely what Jesus explained to Nicodemus in John 3:1-31. Interestingly, Nicodemus didn’t specifically ask Jesus about salvation. Instead, he expressed a willingness to believe that Jesus was sent from God (John 3:2). Jesus responded to that openness with a more profound revelation for Nicodemus to consider. Jesus affirmed that He was the “son of man” or the Messiah (John 3:13), and as the Messiah, He alone held the key to inheriting eternal life. The first fifteen verses of John 3 can be viewed as a series of questions and answers. Let me paraphrase the first question: “Are you here to bring in the kingdom?” Jesus’ first answer is, “You will never see the kingdom without being born again.”

Nicodemus serves as a warning to us that religious training without spiritual insight is useless. Jesus wasted no time getting to the heart of the problem. He told the teacher he must be born again or from above (anothen), a word which appears again in John 3:7 and John 3:31.[i] Today, even thoroughly secular people are familiar with the phrase “born again.” Pop icons like Rihanna sing the term born again as a stand-in for the idea of starting over. Sadly, when secular culture adopts, or some might say, hijacks, sacred religious terms, they effectively cheapen their intended meanings. The actual words describe a garment torn from top to bottom. Discussing the kingdom is useless unless God changes our hearts from the inside out. All devout Jews connected the Messiah with the kingdom; Jesus drove to the heart of the matter immediately. But for Nicodemus, born again was an unfamiliar, paradigm-shifting term. To belong to the heavenly kingdom, one must be born into it just as one is born into this earthly kingdom.[ii]

How to Be Born Again

While the people, timing, surroundings, and circumstances of a baby’s birth might be unique, indubitably, the birth process is the same for everyone. Correspondingly (and Jesus drove this point home several times), there’s only one spiritual birth process. Anyone can claim to be born again, but that doesn’t mean they’ve genuinely undergone a supernatural rebirth. In Matthew 7:21-23, Jesus described a category of believers who will not be saved even though they do incredible things in His name. They claim the family name but have not been born into it. And in a gut-wrenching crescendo, Jesus declared: I will profess unto them, I never knew you, depart from me, ye that work iniquity (Matthew 7:23).

So, the overwhelming, all-consuming, life-altering, eternity-defining question every human should obsess over is, “How can I be born again.” Finding the answer to that question is the most impactful thing you and I, or anyone else, will ever do. That’s why my brain can’t compute why so many people invest such small amounts of thought, time, and energy into this question. I mean, you need to be sure. Really, sure. But oddly, some folks spend more time studying Pinterest boards than the Bible. Ok. Alright. I digress.

Jesus was prophetically cryptic and intentionally vague with Nicodemus about the “how” aspect of being born again. He said, “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (John 3:5). In this statement, Jesus echoed the ancient prophecies of Isaiah and Ezekiel (Isaiah 44:3-4, Ezekiel 36:25-27), reinforced the recent prophecy of John the Baptist (Matthew 3:11), and pointed forward to Peter’s seminal sermon on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38). Keep in mind that Nicodemus was a religious leader, well versed in Scripture, and supposedly filled with spiritual insights. The text reads as if Jesus was mildly annoyed at Nicodemus’ lack of spiritual awareness. Because of that, Jesus spoke enigmatically to the doubting Pharisee. However, that doesn’t mean He wasn’t unmistakably clear to us, who benefit from hindsight.  

In John 3:8, Jesus said, “The wind blows where it wants to, and you hear the sound of it, but you don’t know where the wind comes from or where it is going. It’s the same with every person who is born from the Spirit.” The Greek word pneuma means “wind” and “spirit” interchangeably. I’ve read countless weak interpretations of what Jesus meant by that. Unsatisfying explanations that ignore the context of the New Birth. Clearly, Jesus was speaking precisely of the outpouring of the Spirit, which would occur on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2. Not only is this evidenced by the “sound of a mighty rushing wind” (Acts 2:2) but also by the fact that they were all “filled with the Holy Ghost and began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4).

I’ve written several times about how to be saved (here, here, and here). However, I’ve not addressed it meaningfully from the context of the New Birth. There’s a fair bit of bickering over how many “steps” are contained in the New Birth process or the plan of salvation. I usually describe the New Birth as a three-step process for illustration purposes mainly because that is in keeping with the Apostle Peter’s sermon in Acts 2:38: Repentance, water baptism in Jesus’ name, and the infilling of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues. Furthermore, it coincides spiritually with the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. Repentance is the death, baptism is the burial, and the infilling of the Spirit is the resurrection.

While all that is true, sometimes people are troubled that Jesus only mentioned two steps in John 3: Water and Spirit baptism. Let me tackle that briefly. First, the discourse with Nicodemus was intended to be understood after a period of time. The promise was still coming, and Jesus often used types and shadows in His teachings. Secondly, considering the New Birth in terms of steps is optional as long as the requirements are completed. For example, when Jesus spoke of water and Spirit baptism, He lumped repentance and water baptism into one category (water baptism). Technically speaking, you can’t have one of those things without the other. Just as the process of a physical birth might be categorized academically in a few different ways (labor, delivery, recovery, etc.), as long as the requirements are fulfilled and a baby is born, all is well.

Must Be Ordained into the Priesthood

Another fascinating shared characteristic between the Old Testament and our new priesthood is the role of ordination. God set apart the ancient priests and consecrated them for sacred service (Exodus 19:6, Exodus 28:1). In John 15:16, Jesus said, “I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go forth and bring forth fruit.” I suspect most folks are a little hazy when defining what it means to be ordained. We know that preachers can be “ordained.” But even at that, most aren’t sure exactly what that means. Most modern Bibles translate the word ordained as “appointed.” Which is almost just as confusing. What does it mean that God ordains us?

To gain understanding, we have to dig into the origins and framework of the word ordained. The word translated “ordained” in John 15:16 is the Greek word tithēmi. Depending on the context, it has a wide range of possible meanings and applications. In its broadest application, tithēmi means literally and figuratively to place in a passive or horizontal posture, and thus different from others.[iii] That’s how we get various uses of tithēmi: Set apart, consecrated, appointed, established, fixed, ordained, or placed. Therefore, these gradients of the word ordained begin connecting the Old Testament idea of priestly appointment with our new believer-priesthood paradigm. Ordination is God setting us apart to be a holy people and sanctifying us so that we can be used in His service. God is making us holy and calling us to walk in that holiness. That was the hallmark of the Old Testament priesthood. It is ours today as well (Exodus 19:6, Exodus 28:38, Exodus 30:28-30, Leviticus 11:45, Leviticus 20:7, Leviticus 20:26, Romans 12:1, Romans 15:16, 1 Corinthians 9:13, Ephesians 5:27, 1 Peter 1:15-16, 1 Peter 2:5-9, 2 Peter 3:11). There’s a significant symbolism in the idea that by being laid prostrate before God we gain God’s approval. But it’s deeper than the physical act of lying prostrate before God. Although that is good and right, our complete inward submission to God’s will and authority over us pleases the Lord.

There is one more layer to the idea of being ordained by God. An ordained individual is someone sent forth as an authorized representative accountable to the sender. Therefore, New Testament believers are appointed and sent forth by Christ on a specified mission and with His authority.[iv] Similarly, the ancient priesthood was an authorized representative of God and was held strictly accountable to God. It should be intensely humbling to realize we represent the work of God to the surrounding world. Apostolic believers are authorized representatives of Jesus in this present world. With that extraordinary privilege comes the breathtaking reality that we are accountable to God and are specifically ordained to bring forth lasting fruit (John 15:16).

Must Be Anointed for the Priesthood

Old Testament priests were externally anointed for service with blood and oil (Leviticus 8:12-30). New Testament priest-believers are internally anointed with the blood of Jesus and the oil of the Holy Ghost (1 John 2:27). While the anointing was upon ancient priests, it dwells within the new priesthood. While ordination provides authorization, anointing provides empowerment that accompanies that God-given authority. To use an imperfect analogy, ordination is the badge, and anointing is the gun. To give authority without the power to use it would be silly and cruel. That’s why God has enabled and equipped His priests with Apostolic authority to operate in the realm of the Spirit. The oil of anointing covers our frailties, strengthens our weaknesses, enhances our abilities, and breaks yokes (Luke 4:18). Operating without anointing is like going to war without weapons, flying without wings, or singing without sound. It’s dangerous and ridiculous.

Must Be Cleansed for the Priesthood

There’s a reason the priestly anointing ceremony required oil and blood. As mentioned, the oil represented God’s empowering presence, but the blood represented the ceremonial cleansing of the priest’s sins. A bullock was sacrificed, its blood placed upon the altar’s horns and poured into the bottom of the altar for reconciliation between the priests and God (Leviticus 8:14-15). This should serve as a reminder that the closer a person gets to the presence of God, the more they are required to be cleansed of offending impurities. God did the cleansing. However, the priest was then required to walk worthy of that cleansing.

Contrary to most pop theology today, the New Testament requires the same cleansing and commitment from believer-priests. The blood of Jesus doesn’t give anyone a license to sin. You might say, “Well, grace covers my sin.” But consider what the Scripture says, “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men” (Titus 2:11). So, in that sense, we are saved by grace because it was the grace of God that made salvation possible in the first place. But the passage doesn’t end there. It describes the role of grace in a believer’s life: Grace teaches us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world (Titus 2:12). Now it becomes apparent that the role of grace is that of a teacher or an instructor. It leads and guides us into righteousness and proper conduct before our savior. Titus 2:13 continues, “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our savior Jesus Christ.” We should maintain a posture of anticipation as we wait for Jesus to return for His Church. Finally, Titus 2:14 brings all these thoughts together: Who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. Do you see? God does the initial cleansing, the preliminary purification, pulling us out of this world and making us a peculiar priesthood, and we then must walk in that glorious privilege.

Must be Appropriately Clothed for the Priesthood

God’s ancient priests were given a very distinctive dress code (Exodus 28:1-43). They were carefully clothed for service. God commanded Moses to make “holy garments” for the priests (Exodus 28:2). Their unique clothing set them apart, made them easily distinguishable from non-priests, and had practical applications. It also kept them appropriately modest, contained typological spiritual meanings, and served as a physical reminder to the priesthood of the sacredness of their duties. God called those garments “glorious” and “beautiful” (Exodus 28:2). Unquestionably, the symbolic aspects of the priestly garments are no longer necessary now that Christ has fulfilled prophesy. However, a timeless moral part of their attire remains in effect today: Modesty.

Modesty matters to God, and therefore, it should matter to us. We see God’s emphasis on modesty due to sin way back in Edan (Genesis 3:21). Modesty permeates the Old Testament, deeply embedded itself into Israelite culture, and was inculcated into the priesthood. Contrary to popular opinion, the moral principles of modesty didn’t die out in the New Testament. Peter understood that perfectly when he, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, referred to believers as a “priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5-9). The nuances and implications of priestly modesty weren’t lost on the apostle. Consider this command to the priesthood in Exodus 28:42: And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach. For the priest, however, it was essential that his “nakedness” not be exposed, particularly when ministering before the people. Carelessness about how priests presented themselves to God would be tantamount to blasphemy.[v] For this reason, God insisted that priestly garments include “breeches” made of linen and covering the thighs for reasons of modesty.[vi]

God Defines Nakedness

To understand this better, let’s consider the biblical meaning of the word “nakedness.” In modern contexts, naked means to be completely undressed, totally exposed, and without any covering. Unlike contemporary English usage, nakedness in the Bible can refer to a range of undress from total nudity to being inadequately clothed (Job 22:6, Ezekiel 18:7, Matthew 25:36, 2 Corinthians 11:27). Even the more literal uses of the Hebrew and Greek terms for nakedness are loaded with figurative and symbolic meanings and allusions.[vii] The biblical images evoked by the word naked are many and varied. They include, among other things, original innocence, defenselessness and vulnerability, exposure and helplessness, humiliation and shame, guilt and judgment, and sexual impropriety and exploitation. Each of these nuances needs to be carefully identified in each scriptural context, although there may be some degrees of overlap.[viii]

So, for thousands of years, the Jews and most civilized Christian cultures, until recent decades, defined nudity as anything above the knee. Why? Mainly because that’s precisely how God explained it in Exodus 28:42. This modesty commandment was so vital that God threatened death as punishment if it were to be ignored (Exodus 28:43). Three more words from Exodus 28:42 need expounding on to understand God’s definition of modesty. First is the word “breeches,” from which the English word “britches” is derived. They were garments extending from the waist to or just below the knee or ankle, covering each leg separately. In many ways, they resembled modern trousers or pants.[ix] The word breeches itself contains a root word that means to “hide” or “cover-up.” [x] Second is the word “loins,” which would have already been covered by the priestly robe and tunic. It’s the Hebrew word moṯnayim, meaning waist or lower back.[xi] It refers to the area where you would comfortably wear a belt. And finally, the word “thighs” is crucial in this context. This is the specific area God commands to be covered or hidden from public view. It’s the Hebrew word yarekh, which refers to the portion of the leg from the knee to the hip.[xii]

The text makes the Hebraic assumption that the reader already realizes the necessity of keeping the hips covered for the sake of modesty. Therefore, the relevant lesson for the priesthood and us is that God considers showing anything above the knee to be nakedness and unholy. Furthermore, it should be noted that this standard of modesty was already understood and practiced in Israelite culture. God was dealing with exigent circumstances where nakedness might unintentionally or accidentally be displayed while performing a task, which adds even more gravitas to this standard of modesty because if God cares that much about accidental immodesty, imagine how He must feel about intentional immodesty. Of course, Exodus 28:42 isn’t the only place God defines the exposed thigh as shameful nakedness. God compared Babylon’s downfall to a woman’s shame in having her nakedness exposed when she bares her leg and uncovers her thigh (Isaiah 47:1–3).[xiii] The bottom line is that God gets to define what nakedness (or nudity) is and what it is not. Culture, especially sinful culture, has no authority to determine what is or isn’t modest for called-out believers.

The Morality and Righteousness of Modesty

Tucked away among the Songs of Ascent is Psalm 132:9: Let thy priests be clothed with righteousness; and let thy saints shout for joy. The priests who served in the presence of the Lord were His instruments for dispensing righteousness. Righteousness here signifies more than a relationship with God or some abstract figurative illusion of inward purity. It’s synonymous with salvation (2 Chronicles 6:41). The blessedness of God’s presence was represented by the priests “clothed” in their priestly garments, which resulted in great joy for the saints.[xiv] The outward garments of the priests were a visual representation of God’s moral character, royalty, and righteousness.[xv] To summarize, Old Testament priests were clothed for service in modesty and righteousness, with dignity and distinction, purpose and precision, and they were never to approach their sacred lifestyles casually. We, too, have a responsibility to represent righteousness in our clothing. Modesty is a moral imperative for the believer-priests.

Carnal Garments

Let’s approach this subject from another angle. Look at Jude 1:23: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. First, notice that we are to “hate even the garment spotted (or stained) by the flesh.” That’s interesting, and we certainly need to know what that means. Jude 1 deals with false teachers and doctrines that “crept in unawares” (Jude 1:4). These ungodly men turned the grace of God into “lasciviousness” (Jude 1:4). Somehow, they made the grace of God sensual or lustful.[xvi] Jude 1:7 mentions the hedonistic sexual sins of Sodom and Gomorrah. In the next verse, Jude called these false teachers filthy dreamers who defile their bodies with debauchery and wicked imaginations (Jude 1:8). Two more times, Jude mentioned their ungodly lusts and sensuality (Jude 1:18-19). He gave various ways to deal with these backslidden evil teachers (Jude 1:20-23). While closing, he gave the admonition to “hate even the garment (of these teachers) spotted by the flesh (or carnality).” Loath as I am to quote John Calvin, he defines “garment spotted by the flesh” (Jude 1:23) as “anything that in any way savors of sin or temptation.” [xvii] The flesh-stained garments in Jude 1:23 are both literal and figurative. Carnal, immodest, flesh-displaying garments are defiling, and Christians should hate those garments.

Fascinatingly, much of the language in Jude 1:23 is direct quotations from Zechariah 3:2-4.[xviii] In that instance, a High Priest was snatched from the fire, and an angel of the Lord exchanged his filthy clothes for a change of clean clothes.[xix] Once again, the imagery evoked in both passages is figurative and literal. When people are saved, they will change how they dress, not because of legalism but because motives, agendas, and behaviors change when the heart and mind are purified. When God changes us, it is a comprehensive inward and outward transformation. It’s worth noting, although I’ve yet to find a commentary that makes the correlation, the imagery of outer clothing being changed by God in Jude 1:23 and Zechariah 3:2-4 also connects hermeneutically back to Genesis 3:21, where God clothed Adam and Eve.

Defiled Garments

In the middle of admonishing the church in Sardis, Jesus mentioned a remnant of believers that had not “defiled their garments” (Revelation 3:4). He said, “And they shall walk with me in white for they are worthy” (Revelation 3:4). The city of Sardis was famous for its textile industry yet most of the church had defiled garments.[xx] This is significant in John’s vision. In the Roman world, persons were identified by their clothing. Only the emperor and the patrician class could wear togas with purple. The equestrian class could wear red, and so on. A person’s clothing manifested the person’s nature to the world, and in many ways, it still does. John seems to play upon this feature of his world. A Christian’s “garment” was the outward witness of their faithful discipleship.[xxi] In the pagan religions, it was forbidden to approach the gods in garments that were soiled or stained. Soiling seems to be a symbol for mingling with pagan life.[xxii] The few people in Sardis who had not soiled their clothes were those who had resisted the temptation to accommodate their lives to the heathen customs of their neighbors, which most certainly included the way they dressed.[xxiii] Of course, inwardly, that remnant of believers in Sardis remained undefiled, but the obvious reference to clothing isn’t purely symbolic. Godly people wear clothing that differentiates them from surrounding worldly, carnal, defiled, pagan cultures.

Keep Your Clothes On

It’s overly simplistic, but I like how the Easy-to-Read-Version (ERV) renders Revelation 16:15:

Listen! Like a thief, I will come at a time you don’t expect. Great blessings belong to those who stay awake and keep their clothes with them. They will not have to go without clothes and be ashamed for people to see them.

The King James says, “Blessed is he that watcheth and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame” (Revelation 16:15). Obviously, the primary notion here is that we are to always be ready for the Lord’s return. However, the subtext is that godly people must make modesty a priority.

Fundamentally, there are at least four essential elements of proper clothing for today’s priesthood of believers. One is modesty, as discussed above (1 Timothy 2:9). However, the remaining three are previously unmentioned concepts that deserve far more attention. Still, for now, they will receive only brief honorable mentions. The second essential element of godly clothing is the clear distinction of genders (Deuteronomy 22:5, Genesis 1:27). Men should dress like men and women like women. Thirdly, believers should avoid displays of vanity or pride in their adornment (1 Peter 3:3-5, 2 Kings 9:30). And fourthly, holiness demands a humility that rejects the wearing of gold and silver ornamentation, jewelry, piercings, and tattoos (1 Peter 33-5, Proverbs 7:10, Proverbs 33, 1 Timothy 2:9, Leviticus 19:28). These moral principles carry over from the Old Testament, find affirmation in the New Testament, and solidify the standard of holy attire for the new priesthood.

Priesthood is Held to Strict Standards of Obedience

Ancient priests were held to rigorous standards of obedience to God and the man of God (Moses, Joshua, etc.). They lived under the threat of death if they disobeyed the law intentionally or unintentionally (Leviticus 10:7). Of course, this was also true for people outside the priesthood. As the prophet Samuel rhetorically asked King Saul, “What is more pleasing to the Lord: Your burnt offerings and sacrifices or your obedience to His voice” (1 Samuel 15:22)? Without waiting for an answer, Samuel said, “Obedience is better than sacrifice, and submission is better than offering the fat of rams” (1 Samuel 15:22). New Testament priests are called to that same strict standard of obedience. Jesus affirmed this by saying, “If you continue in my word, then you are truly disciples of mine” (John 8:31). All the spiritual sacrifices in the world will never be an acceptable substitute for simple obedience to God’s Word.

Messengers Calling the Lost to Repentance

Yet another shared characteristic of Old Testament and New Testament believer-priests is their mandate to be righteous messengers calling the lost to repentance. Malachi 2:5-7, New Living Translation, describes the ancient priesthood’s mandate:

The purpose of my covenant with the Levites was to bring life and peace, and that is what I gave them. This required reverence from them, and they greatly revered me and stood in awe of my name. They passed on to the people the truth of the instructions they received from me. They did not lie or cheat; they walked with me, living good and righteous lives, and they turned many from lives of sin. The words of a priest’s lips should preserve the knowledge of God, and people should go to him for instruction, for the priest is the messenger of the Lord of Heaven’s Armies.

When you read that alongside the Great Commission, the similarities become striking: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you… (Matthew 28:19-20). I think many Christians have a default tendency to assume the Great Commission is mainly for pastors, missionaries, or evangelists. While it is undoubtedly for them, it is for all believers. Every member of the new priesthood of believers is mandated to be a messenger of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We’re called to minister to faltering believers while keeping ourselves free from sin (Galatians 6:1). Teaching, sharing, and studying the Word of God with believers and unbelievers should be an intricate part of our identity and daily lives. Helping new disciples learn, understand, and obey the commands of Jesus is our great privilege and responsibility. Absconding from this obligation is a betrayal of God’s sacred trust.

Access to God Through the Offering of Sacrifices

The ancient Israelite priests are best remembered for their sacrificial duties. Every day, they sacrificed animals that could not take away sins (Hebrews 11:1). It was a repetitive, exhausting, bloody job. Thankfully, Jesus was the final sacrificial offering for sin (Hebrews 10:10). Therefore, we no longer must bring animal sacrifices to God. However, that doesn’t mean God doesn’t require spiritual sacrifices from His new royal priesthood of believers. This brings us back full circle to our original text, where Peter referred to us as a “holy priesthood” that should “offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:5).

Spiritual sacrifices are acts of worship necessary for those who live in the Spirit—these spiritual sacrifices, as opposed to ritualistic sacrifices of old, transpose worship to a higher key. Whereas the Jewish sacrificial system required the worshiper to offer an animal or produce at the temple, life in the Spirit requires the worshiper to offer themselves. For those who bring something to an altar, the act of worship ends when the offering is consumed; for those who present themselves, the sacrificial act is just the beginning. The Christian is a “living sacrifice,” meaning worship is transferred out of the temple and into the streets. In short, the degree of personal responsibility is heightened for the one who walks in the Spirit instead of according to the law.[xxiv] Therefore, contrary to hyper-grace teachings, New Testament believers, in a certain sense, have more significant holiness requirements than the ancient priesthood.

The Body as a Spiritual Sacrifice

Romans 12:1 makes this distinctive command, “present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.” The words “present” and “sacrifice” the Apostle Paul used here are purposefully reminiscent of Old Testament language. Before a priest in Israel could minister on behalf of others, he was obliged to present himself in a consecrated condition, and the sacrifices he offered were to be without blemish (Malachi 1:8-13).[xxv] The sacrificial language of Romans 12:1 also reinforces an earlier contrast made in Romans 6:13 between those who serve God and those who serve sin. The appeal to “offer your bodies” reminds the reader of the earlier injunction in Romans 6:13: “Do not offer the parts of your body to sin… but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life.” The heightened responsibility of the Christian not only involves a life of worship that extends beyond particular times and places of sacrifice but also entails a personal commitment to determine how such a life is to be lived. In contrast to Judaism, where the law prescribes righteous conduct, Christianity requires a greater degree of personal discernment.[xxvi]

God doesn’t compel and coerce a believer into presenting his body. He doesn’t corral him and bridle him like a horse and force him to obey. He implores him. He wants an unbridled sacrifice.[xxvii] Presenting our bodies as a living sacrifice represents a complete lifestyle change, involving both a negative and a positive aspect. Paul commanded, “Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world” (Romans 12:2). Living according to the lifestyle of “the present evil Age” (Galatians 1:4, Ephesians 1:21) must now be put aside. Then Paul commanded, “But be transformed (literally, keep on being transformed) by the renewing of your mind” (Romans 12:2). The Greek verb translated “transformed” (μεταμορφοῦσθε) is seen in the English word “metamorphosis,” a total change from inside out (2 Corinthians 3:18). The key to this change is the “mind” (νοός), the control center of one’s attitudes, thoughts, feelings, and actions (Ephesians 4:22-23). As one’s mind keeps being made new by the spiritual input of God’s Word, prayer, preaching, and Christian fellowship, one’s lifestyle keeps transforming.[xxviii]

Alexander Maclaren astutely observed that Romans 12:1-2 provides “an all-inclusive directory for the outward life.” [xxix] The ancient sacrifices gave a sweet-smelling odor, which, by a strong metaphor, was declared fragrant in God’s nostrils. In like manner, the Christian sacrifice is “acceptable unto God” (Romans 12:1). The keyword for the life of a Christian is sacrifice. That includes two things—self-surrender and surrender to God. Just like a priest needed to be consecrated before he could offer sacrifices, we, too, must be inwardly consecrated before offering outward sacrifices to God. The Apostle Paul didn’t make the mistake of substituting external for internal surrender, but he presupposes that the latter has preceded. He described the sequence more understandably in Romans 6:13: Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. So, first of all, we must be priests by our inward consecration, and then, since a priest must have something to offer, we must bring the outward life and lay it upon His altar.[xxx]

Christian obedience means imitating God in holiness (1 Peter 1:15).[xxxi] Our holiness is made possible through Christ, who made us holy through His blood (Hebrews 13:12). The Holy Spirit sanctified us by separating us from evil and dedicating us to God when He gave us new life and placed us into the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 6:11). But that is only one aspect of our sanctification. Paul prayed that God would sanctify us “through and through” or “completely” (1 Thessalonians 5:23). There’s also a continuing aspect of sanctification in which we must cooperate. We must, as we’ve been discussing, present ourselves to God (Romans 12:1-2), and by the Spirit, pursue that holiness (dedication, consecration in right relationships to God and man) because, without holiness, no one will see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14). This is a holiness like the Lord’s, which the Holy Spirit helps us to achieve (1 Peter 1:15, 16).[xxxii] By the Spirit, we must keep putting to death the old life’s impulses and winning victories as we live for Jesus (Romans 8:1-14, Galatians 2:20, Philippians 2:12-13).

Recently, I read a quote from my friend, Reverend Coley Reese, “Learn to be a living sacrifice rather than an occasional offering.” [xxxiii] Doing that takes more than good intentions. It requires a complete lifestyle makeover. It’s often been quipped, “The problem with living sacrifices is that they keep crawling off the altar.” [xxxiv] That’s why holiness is a daily endeavor, a constant struggle, and incredibly vital. In his influential work What the Bible Says about the Holy Spirit, Stanley M. Horton makes this remarkable statement:

The whole work of sanctification is the work of the Spirit, which receives by far the greatest attention in the New Testament. It takes precedence over witnessing, evangelism, giving, and every other form of Christian service. God wants us to be something, not just to do something. For only as we become like Jesus can what we do be effective and bring glory to Him.[xxxv]

As I’ve read and pondered dozens of books and commentaries on the command to “present our bodies as living sacrifices, holy, acceptable unto God,” I’ve been struck by a collective inclination to gloss over the obvious meanings in the text (Romans 12:1). For example, it goes without saying that presenting one’s body to God includes the whole person, inward and outward. The body consists of the thoughts, intellect, soul, desires, etc. However, while presenting the body includes those somewhat intangible things, it does not exclude the outer elements of the body itself. The commentary by John Phillips, which I often find helpful, is typical of the omission I’m referring to. He mentions how when believers present their bodies as living sacrifices, they are changed morally, mentally, and motivationally.[xxxvi] Yet not once does Phillips mention a practical way the outward man is presented as holy to God. Sadly, Phillips is not unique in his handling of external sanctification.

Considering everything we’ve already examined concerning the priesthood of believers, hopefully, it’s becoming more evident that internal sanctification will produce outward fruits. We aren’t to be conformed to this world like playdough in the hands of a demonic creature (Romans 12:2). We are forbidden to allow ourselves to be fashioned (or patterned) by the fads, opinions, fashions, philosophies, and spiritual darkness of this world. A Spirit-filled believer’s life will not be molded from without but from within. That inward pressure from the Holy Spirit will change our outward fashions, expressions, conversations, operations, actions, inactions, and more. There will be a comprehensive external transformation in the life of a believer-priest. In other words, a consecrated holy lifestyle involves how a believer dresses, what they do and don’t ingest into the body, how they speak, what they watch and listen to, and where they do and don’t go. To suggest otherwise is a gross misrepresentation or misinterpretation of Scripture.

The Sacrifice of Praise

Hebrews 13:15 tells us to “continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God.” The writer goes on to identify the sacrifice of praise as the verbal praise of God’s name.[xxxvii] Hebrews 13:16 continues this theme of sacrifice, reminding us not to neglect giving, doing good, and sharing with others, for with “such sacrifices God is well pleased.” Included in this topic of sacrifice is the command to “Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you” (Hebrews 13:17). The reference here is to religious teachers and not civil rulers.[xxxviii] So, Hebrews 13:15-17 lists three generalized areas of spiritual sacrifice for believer-priests: The uttered exaltation of Jesus’ name, the good work of giving, and obedience to spiritual authority. And while the three areas of spiritual sacrifice mentioned in this passage aren’t intended to be comprehensive, they are expounded on throughout the totality of Scripture.

The Selfless Sacrifice of Love

Ephesians 5:1 encourages us to work to be like Christ. Then we are told one of the ways to imitate Christ in Ephesians 5:2: Walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savor. We should imitate His sacrifice of love in our lives. The Apostle Paul pivoted from the self-sacrifice of Christ to the very opposite, the self-indulgence of the sinner (Ephesians 5:3–4), from agape love to its perversion, lust; he mentioned three manifestations of self-indulgence and love’s perversion. “Sexual immorality” and “impurity” comprehensively cover every kind of heterosexual (premarital and extramarital) and homosexual sin possible, all of which defile the conscience and destroy love. “Greed” describes the heart’s inner desire for one that is not rightfully theirs. It can also refer to sin in the sexual realm, such as coveting another man’s wife or someone else’s body for selfish gratification (Exodus 20:17, 1 Thessalonians 4:6). These three sins are not even to be mentioned or talked about among “God’s holy people,” so completely are they to be banished from the Christian community.[xxxix] The Bible is clear: Sexual immorality is contradictory to the selfless love of Christ-like people. Therefore, love encompasses more than what we do but also what we don’t do.

The Sacrifice of Evangelism

Evangelizing the lost is a spiritual sacrifice. The apostle Paul referred to his ministry to unbelieving Gentiles as a “priestly ministry” and “offering” (Romans 15:15-16). I believe that every action we take on behalf of evangelizing the lost is a pleasing sacrifice to the Lord. Everything, no matter how seemingly small, matters, whether it be giving for the sake of evangelism, inviting a stranger to church, teaching an impromptu Bible study, giving your testimony, tarrying with sinners in an altar service, or any number of other practical ways we participate in the sacrificial work of evangelism. For believer-priests, evangelism is a lifestyle and not just a liability.

The Sacrifice of Prayer

Acts 10:1 tells the story of a Roman army officer named Cornelius, a devout God-fearing man. He gave generously to the poor and prayed to God regularly. Acts 10:3-4, New International Version, details how an angel appeared to Cornelius, saying, “Your prayers and gifts to the poor have come up as a memorial offering before God.” In Revelation 8:3-4 an angel of the Lord is said to be “standing at the altar, holding a golden censor, that he might add incense to the prayers of the saints.” Using language reminiscent of Old Testament ceremonial, priestly duties, the New International Version says, “And the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, went up before God out of the angel’s hand” (Revelation 8:4). That fascinating terminology likens the prayers of believers to incense or memorial offerings that waft like a sweet-smelling aroma to the Lord. What beautiful timeless imagery of prayer that evokes in our minds. This helps us to remember that prayer is not only effective but also sacrificial.

The Perversion of the Priesthood & Invention of the Trinity

Time and attention spans don’t allow for a detailed dive into the historical perversion of the priesthood. However, it would be neglectful to cover the topic of believer-priests without addressing the elephant in the room – the Roman Catholic Church and its spinoffs. Arguably, one of the most tragic things that ever happened to Christianity was the supposed conversion of the Roman Emperor Constantine (306 A.D. – 337 A.D.). While we can be thankful the avid physical persecution of Christians ended under Constantine, the politically motivated doctrinal perversions he ushered in still plague us today. Christianity became the Roman Empire’s official religion during Constantine’s reign and continued with Theodosius (379 A.D. – 395 A.D.). As imperial largesse transformed Christianity in Rome, Constantinople, and Jerusalem, the view of the priesthood drew on Roman ideas of civic and pagan priesthoods and the pompous ceremonial aspects of the imperial court.[xl] Among the many foul doctrines concocted in the bowels of the ancient Roman Catholic Church, which remains firmly ensconced, is its insistence that an earthly priesthood of men is required to act as a mediator between God and humanity.

How could something so outrageous become so dominant? Simply put, the pressure of big government corrupted the official theologies of the Church through the usual suspects of compromise, power plays, intimidation, murder, and political marginalization. Once that powerful engine gained momentum, it just kept expanding until it reached a bloody culmination with the Crusades, governmental coups, serfdom, and religious persecution. Satan turned the so-called “Church” into the murderous regime it had endured in the Catacombs and Coliseums of Rome in the first two and a half centuries after Christ. A reformation was necessary and inevitable. But, the Protestant Reformation didn’t occur until the 16th century.[xli] The Protestant Reformation admirably emphasized and rallied around the biblical teachings of the “priesthood of believers.” Yet, while Lutherans would disagree, reforming all the perverted doctrines, traditions, and influences of the Catholic Church and its ilk took roughly another three centuries. It wasn’t until the emergence of Pentecostalism at the beginning of the 20th century that an authentic reformation began to take shape.

Another of many notable perversions that sprang like a poisonous tree from the soil of Roman Christianity is the doctrine of the Trinity. The dogma developed slowly over 200 years and continued to be refined in how it was explained for hundreds of years. Its development began with an attempt to understand the nature of God in terms of Greek philosophical concepts while rooted in Roman political soil.[xlii] As the lightening rod Presbyterian minister Robert Elliott Speer wrote at the turn of the 19th century: It is an unquestionable historical fact that the doctrine of the Trinity is a false doctrine foisted into the Church during the third and fourth centuries, which finally triumphed by the aid of persecuting emperors.[xliii] A tragic truism is that the same power brokers who conceived and mainstreamed Trinitarianism would have burned most modern Trinitarians at the stake for various perceived heresies. It’s sad to hear and read Trinitarians naively quote theologians (they reverentially refer to them as church fathers) who lived centuries after Christ as if they were just as inspired and inerrant as the Apostles and prophets. Trinitarians cannot legitimately be considered Apostolic, for the Apostles knew not of the nonsensical Trinitarian distinction of persons. Furthermore, the Apostles baptized exclusively in the name of Jesus and not with titles (Acts 2:38, Acts 4:12, Matthew 28:19).

Incredibly Amazing Priestly Privilege

People often ask what distinguishes Apostolic Pentecostals from other flavors of Christianity. And, of course, there’s no short answer to that question. However, an excellent explanation to begin with is the reality that the Apostolic Church is the result of continued Church Reformation. We genuinely believe in sola scriptura (Scripture alone). We’re unmoved by post-biblical historical doctrines or their bygone champions. Apostolics emphatically and passionately believe that all truth necessary for our salvation and spiritual life is taught explicitly or implicitly in the Bible. It’s been a hard fight, but the Apostolic Church miraculously reemerged from the ash heap of Church history while effectively, although often imperfectly, struggling to return to the Apostolic doctrines of the first Church founded by Jesus. Furthermore, Apostolic Pentecostals fully embrace their priestly privileges while acknowledging Christ as their final High Priest. With its Levitical priests and continual and inadequate offerings, the Mosaic Law was a shadow of Christ’s coming and once-for-all offering (Hebrews 10:1-4).[xliv]

Remember the thick temple veil that separated the most holy place (or holy of holies) from the holy place (2 Chronicles 3:14)? Only the High Priest was allowed to pass through that veil, and then only on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16:2). At Jesus’ death, the temple veil was ripped from top to bottom, illustrating that Jesus had obliterated the barrier separating humanity from the presence of God (Matthew 27:51, Mark 15:38, Luke 23:45).[xlv] A Levitical caste can no longer mediate between the sinner and his Judge. We may come boldly with loving confidence, not slavish fear, directly through Christ, the only mediating Priest. Of course, Jesus is a superior High Priest, or as Zechariah 6:13 prophesied, “a priestly King.” [xlvi] Because Jesus is superior in every way, believer-priests have incredible, unprecedented privileges. We can do something even the ancient High Priests only did once a year and even then, with great trepidation: Boldly enter into the holy of holies any time, day or night Hebrews 10:19-20). We have constant access, communion, and relationship to and with the presence of God. The blood of Jesus made these new priestly privileges possible once and for all.

In Conclusion

I’ve thoroughly enjoyed writing about the holy priesthood of believers. The beautifully intricate ways the Old and New Testaments complement and complete one another always astonish me. It’s so elegantly simple yet intensely profound. The perfection of it irrefutably proves the infallibility of the Bible. Each book, prophecy, revelation, precept, and illumination fit together like a hand into a custom-fitted glove. Of course, I know there is a danger of seeing correlations in Scripture where there are none. Still, we must fully integrate correlations into our daily Christian lives whenever they are well-defined. And the Bible is abundantly clear that believers today enter a holy royal priesthood via the New Birth. This new priesthood of believers gives us the ultimate privilege possible: The ability to step into the presence of God and have a personal relationship with Him. However, like all privileges, that privilege comes with significant expectations and responsibilities. Believer-priests must live holy lives separated from the defilements of this fallen world. They must reach, love, preach, and teach the lost. They must do the same for the saved. It’s a lifestyle of relationship with God, separation from the world, and daily spiritual sacrifice. It’s wild and exhilarating, all-consuming, transformative, and extraordinarily significant.


[i] Gangel, Kenneth O. John. B & H Publishing Group, 2000

[ii] Gangel, Kenneth O. John. B & H Publishing Group, 2000.

[iii] Strong, James. Strong’s Greek Dictionary of the New Testament. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.9. Altamonte Springs: OakTree Software, 1999.

[iv] NAS Topical Index. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.1. La Habra: The Lockman Foundation, 2000.

[v] Garrett, Duane A. A Commentary on Exodus. KEL. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.0. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2014.

[vi] Butler, Trent C., Chad Brand, Charles Draper, and Archie England, eds. Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.0. Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2003.

[vii] Cargal, Timothy B. Freedman, David Noel, Allen C. Myers, and Astrid B. Beck, eds. Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Accordance electronic edition, version 3.8. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.

[viii] Ryken, Leland, Jim Wilhoit, and Tremper Longman, eds. Dictionary of Biblical Imagery. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.2. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1998.

[ix] Wolf, H. J. Orr, James, ed. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.5. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1915.

[x] Wolf, H. J. Orr, James, ed. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.5. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1915.

[xi] Kohlenberger III, John R. and William D. Mounce. Kohlenberger/Mounce Concise Hebrew-Aramaic Dictionary of the Old Testament. Accordance electronic edition, version 3.4. Altamonte Springs: OakTree Software, 2012.

[xii] Easton, Burton Scott. Orr, James, ed. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.5. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1915.

[xiii] Bernard, David K. Practical Holiness. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.2. Hazelwood, Missouri: Word Aflame Press, 1985.

[xiv] VanGemeren, Willem A. Psalms. EBC 5. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.9. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991.

[xv] NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.2. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2015.

[xvi] Zodhiates, Spiros, ed. The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament. Revised, Accordance electronic edition, version 1.3. Chattanooga: AMG Publishers, 1993.

[xvii] Macalister, Alex. Orr, James, ed. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.5. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1915.

[xviii] Keener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. 2d; Accordance electronic edition, version 1.0. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2014.

[xix] Walton, John H. and Craig S. Keener, eds., NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.1. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2016.

[xx] NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.2. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2015.

[xxi] Mulholland Jr., M. Robert. “Revelation.” Pages 399-606 in James 1–2 Peter Jude Revelation. Vol. 18 of Cornerstone Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.1. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, 2011.

[xxii] Johnson, Alan F. Revelation. EBC 12. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.9. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981.

[xxiii] Beasley-Murray, George R. Revelation. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Edited by D. A Carson, R. T France, J. A. Motyer, and Gordon J. Wenham. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.5. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1994.

[xxiv] Johnson, Van. Romans. Life in the Spirit New Testament Commentary. Edited by French L. Arrington and Roger Stronstad. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.5. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999.

[xxv] Harrison, Everett F. Romans. EBC 10. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.9. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1977.

[xxvi] Johnson, Van. Romans. Life in the Spirit New Testament Commentary. Edited by French L. Arrington and Roger Stronstad. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.5. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999.

[xxvii] Phillips, John. Exploring Romans. John Phillips Commentary Series. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.6. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1969.

[xxviii] Witmer, John A. Romans. The Bible Knowledge Commentary. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.7. 2 vols. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1983.

[xxix] Maclaren, Alexander. Expositions of Holy Scripture. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.3. Altamonte Springs: OakTree Software, 2006.

[xxx] Maclaren, Alexander. Expositions of Holy Scripture. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.3. Altamonte Springs: OakTree Software, 2006.

[xxxi] Packer, J.I. Wood, D. R. W., ed. New Bible Dictionary. 3d, Accordance electronic edition, version 2.5. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996.

[xxxii] Horton, Stanley M. What the Bible Says about the Holy Spirit. Revised; Accordance electronic edition, version 1.2. Springfield: Gospel Publishing House, 2005.

[xxxiii] Reese, Coley (2023, November 6). This is a quotation of the entire post [Facebook status update]. Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/coley.reese/posts/pfbid02SUknCVgY5KA3KU2349S1wSCXp8uFEU7QtUhUCVm4xGLByUdyRJwyQ4X3w5f9kLaTl

[xxxiv] Harris, W. Hall, ed., The NET Bible Notes. 2nd edition, version 5.8. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2019.

[xxxv] Horton, Stanley M. What the Bible Says about the Holy Spirit. Revised; Accordance electronic edition, version 1.2. Springfield: Gospel Publishing House, 2005.

[xxxvi] Phillips, John. Exploring Romans. John Phillips Commentary Series. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.6. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1969.

[xxxvii] Dennis, Lane T. and Wayne Grudem, eds., The ESV Study Bible. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.0. Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, 2008.

[xxxviii] Barnes, Albert. Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.2. Altamonte Springs: OakTree Software, 2006.

[xxxix] Adams, Wesley and Donald Stamps. Ephesians. Life in the Spirit New Testament Commentary. Edited by French L. Arrington and Roger Stronstad. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.5. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999.

[xl] “Priesthood: Christian Priesthood.” Encyclopedia of Religion. Retrieved October 18, 2023, from Encyclopedia.com: https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/priesthood-christian-priesthood

[xli] Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopedia (2023, October 29). priest. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/priest-Christianity

[xlii] Berkhof, Louis. The History of Christian Doctrines. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1937

[xliii] Robert Spears, The Unitarian Handbook of Scriptural Illustrations & Expositions. London: British and Foreign Unitarian Association, 1883.

[xliv] Ryrie, Charles Caldwell, ed., The Ryrie Study Bible. Expanded, Accordance electronic edition, version 2.3. Chicago: Moody Press, 1995.

[xlv] Blum, Edwin A. and Jeremy Royal Howard, eds., HCSB Study Bible: Holman Christian Standard Bible. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.2. Nashville: Holman Bible Publishers, 2010.

[xlvi] Jamieson, Robert, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown. A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. 1871, Accordance electronic edition, version 2.6. Altamonte Springs: OakTree Software, 1996.

The Difference Between Sheep & Goats

I gazed across a lush, green, undulating field that stretched as far as my eyes could see. This was somewhere in Wisconsin. I’d been driving for hours when I happened to notice farm signs peppering the little country roads. Growing up in a big city, I’d never seen large herds of… well, anything. So, I made a detour and found a farm. The sheep’s white contrasted sharply with the deep green of the fields. There were so many sheep that my untrained eye couldn’t count them. After a few minutes, a middle-aged farmer in stereotypical overalls and various layers of flannel called out to me with a thick Wisconsin brogue (they never pronounce the “g” at the end of a word). He was friendly and talkative in a quiet, hard-working midwestern way. Eventually, I asked him about raising sheep. “Sheep and goats,” he corrected. I didn’t see goats, so I asked, “Do you keep the goats somewhere else?” “Nah, they’re out there with the sheep,” he said. I squinted into the bright sunlight, still not seeing goats. Then, he added helpfully, “They’re hard to spot from a distance; they just blend in with the sheep.”

They Blend In

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you whom my Father blesses; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world (Matthew 25:31-34).”

A common thread runs through the Old and New Testaments, which likens God to a shepherd and us as His sheep. Surveys show that Psalms 23:1, “the Lord is my Shepherd,” is the most well-known verse in the Bible. Jesus added several layers to this analogy, like ravenous wolves disguised as sheep (Matthew 7:15), people who try to sneak into Heaven without using the sheep’s gate (John 10:1) and introduced the concept of pastoral under-shepherds (John 21:16). All of these are just examples, of course. False prophets aren’t literally wolves, but they are cunning and dangerous like wolves. Nevertheless, the shepherding and animal comparisons Jesus used are remarkably relevant today.

I’ve found that, much like looking over that Wisconsin field and struggling to differentiate the sheep from the goats, from a distance, sheep and goats blend together in our churches too. Eventually, the goats act like goats, or you get close enough to tell, but they can coexist for a long time. Interestingly, Jesus doesn’t have trouble telling the difference, but rather than separating the herd right now, He’s waiting until judgment day. God is content to let the goats play like sheep until the final moment when hearts are revealed at the throne. Until then, our church communities have goats blending in with the sheep. Occasionally, goats paw the ground, show their horns, and reveal their true nature. That can be especially sad if, up to that moment, you believed they were sheep.

You Should Smell Like Sheep

If you can forgive a transparent moment, I want to share a story that dramatically impacted my thinking on this subject. Years ago, an individual began attending services regularly, our church was much smaller, and I was far more naïve. He was shy and troubled. It took a long time to get his background story. He already had the Holy Ghost, but his church background was impossible to follow. He’d just been to so many places of every denomination and creed. It’s no exaggeration to say I spent countless hours on the phone counseling, in-person fellowshipping, or teaching Bible studies with him. But, no matter how much time I gave him, it was never enough.

In the beginning, he was incredibly faithful. But a strange cycle eventually manifested of randomly disappearing for months at a time. He’d attend a random church for a few months and then show back up at our church with a story about how badly that other church had failed him. The first several times this happened, I chased him down (figuratively) to check on him and encourage him to get settled here. I called, texted, and even knocked on his door. I quit doing that, however. You see, I realized if he was going to be faithful, it would take a heart change, not just an encouraging word.

One day he showed back up at church and aggressively confronted me, shouting, “You should smell like sheep!” He said, “Jesus left the church to find the lost sheep, and you should too!” I was stunned and hurt. I let guilt wash all over me. Had I been wrong not to keep chasing and chasing and chasing? I mean, Jesus did talk about leaving the flock to find the one lost sheep. I stammered and told him all the sincere things I could think of to assure him I cared about his soul and did indeed want to be a good pastor. I agreed to meet him for coffee very soon. He never returned my calls, and I didn’t see him again for six months.

The evening after that verbal ambush, I spent a good deal of time in prayer about the situation. As pastors do, I replayed everything in my mind over and over again. Did I do enough? Was I approachable? Am I inadequate? How can I duplicate myself so I can give everyone all the time they need? Lord, help me be a better pastor. Lord, how can I meet the insatiable needs and overwhelming demands? Lord, I don’t want to be responsible for lost sheep. And God let me twist in the wind for a good while before gently saying, “your job is to feed sheep, not chase goats.”

Sheep Wander, Goats Run Away

Put aside the fact that the Parable of the Lost Sheep (Luke 15:1-7) is really a story about winning the lost and not about chasing stray saints. But regardless, good shepherds search for lost sheep and do their best to bring them safely back home. Tragically, sometimes the wolves, the goats, the elements, or all three have already taken their toll when a shepherd locates them. Here’s a little observation the Lord helped me unearth: Lost sheep may wander away and get hurt or lost, but goats run away and resist being brought back to the fold. When lost sheep see their shepherd, they are happy and relieved. Yes, they might be embarrassed or ashamed too. But mostly, they are thankful for the help. Goats, on the other hand, are defiant, angry, and defensive. A goat isn’t going to let you put him on your shoulders and take him home, as Jesus described in the parable.

Grazers & Browsers

Goats have a well-deserved reputation for eating anything in sight. Sometimes they chew it up and spew it out. There’s a classic episode of The Andy Griffith Show where Barney and Andy hilariously deal with a goat that had eaten a crate of dynamite. The last thing they needed was a goat with a belly full of dynamite, headbutting something and going kaboom in the middle of Mayberry. And while that may be ridiculous, it is believable because goats are browsers. They don’t feed on grass or low-growth vegetation like sheep. So, the green pastures mentioned in Psalm 23 aren’t all that exciting to goats. And that is a crucial difference between sheep and goats. Sheep are grazers. They are content with green grass and will follow shepherds who lead them beside “still waters.”

Goats don’t want a shepherd. They’re never full. They leave churches because they “aren’t being fed.” That’s rarely the case. They have an appetite for thorns and thistles. They like faux shepherds who promise something better, something more exciting, more relevant, than godly pastures and still waters. When that gets boring, or they realize how unsatisfying that diet is, they move on to another place. While that’s fine for actual goats, people with a goat nature Jesus described reject living water and the bread of life (yes, I know I’m mixing metaphors). This is partially because goats are discontented by nature. Sheep have learned, as the apostle Paul said:

…I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content. I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: everywhere and in all things, I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need (Philippians 4:11-12).

Interdependent & Independent

I get that being compared to sheep carries a stigma. We’ve all heard derogatory comments about “sheeple,” “herd mentalities,” and “lemmings.” In America, at least for most of its history, personal independence is sought after and celebrated. And Jesus certainly wasn’t suggesting that we’re all alike or that Christ’s followers are supposed to be robots, mindlessly going with the flow. On the contrary, the Gospel is intensely personal and intimate. Everyone must have a close relationship with the Great Shepherd, so much so that they recognize His voice (John 10:27). If anything, remaining with God’s flock in His pasture takes great individual intentionality, sincere thought, and an extraordinary understanding of the greater good. By the “greater good,” I mean that sheep willingly trade their independence for interdependence. Because, let’s face it, complete independence is a total fabrication. Everyone needs someone or something, and sheep have realized they want and need the Great Shepherd.

But here’s the thing, if you want the Great Shepherd, you must accept that you are also getting His undershepherds and His flock. So, gaining the Great Shepherd gives you exclusive access to His pastures but also excludes you from wandering back to old fields. There will be fences, parameters, and requirements. You may not always understand or even like them, but you trust the Great Shepherd sees dangers you cannot see. Sure, the flock might slow you down or cramp your style, and it might be tempting to wander off and do your own thing for a while. You might misconstrue Christian liberty as freedom from the responsibilities of the flock. The apostle Paul addressed this carnal propensity in his letter to the church in Galatia: For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love, serve one another (Galatians 5:13, ESV). The apostle Peter described our obligation to the flock this way: Have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind (1 Peter 3:8, ESV).

Goats are all about “my” and “me.” Sheep are focused on community, the “us” and “we.” Goats are constantly looking for advancement for themselves, while sheep look to enhance everyone. That’s why Jesus emphasized things like, “The last shall be first, and the first last (Matthew 20:16).” It’s counterintuitive, but putting others first is the best thing you can do for yourself. Let me show you something people miss who think they can accept Jesus while rejecting His undershepherds and flock. During Jesus’ most famous teaching, the Sermon on the Mount, He gave an example of how everyone should pray:

Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil… (Matthew 6:9-13).

Did you catch it? Jesus didn’t say to pray, “My Father which art in heaven.” Instead, he said, “Our Father.” And don’t pray, “Give me this day.” Rather pray, “Give us this day.” Read the full prayer. Not once does Jesus use singular pronouns except when addressing the Father. Why? Because even in prayer, we must remember that we are part of a community more significant than ourselves. You can’t accept the Shepherd and reject your role in His flock. Sheep know this to be true.

Faithful & Playful

Even the flakiest, most undependable Christians take great comfort in knowing God is always faithful. I’m the first to raise my hand and say that what I probably love most about the Lord is that He will never leave or forsake me (Deuteronomy 31:8). In other words, God is never going to flake out on me. Yet, people who claim to be like Christ are often more playful than faithful.

It’s true that goats are more playful than sheep. This is because goats are more adventurous by nature. However, that doesn’t mean sheep aren’t playful. They are. They just don’t prioritize playfulness over faithfulness. Sheep know the ultimate goal is to hear the Great Shepherd say, “Well done my good and faithful servant (Matthew 25:23). Faithfulness always sounds boring until you need someone to be faithful to you. Likewise, loyalty seems mundane until you need loyalty.

Goats are not dependable. They’re terrible with follow-through. And they lack loyalty when the chips are down. But, oh, yes, they can be a lot of fun. Sometimes they’re a downright joy to have hanging around the sheep. But that playfulness quickly becomes annoying and occasionally destructive when faithfulness is required. Sheep, like having a good time. They need it and crave it. But they know when to take things seriously. They know how to listen for changes in their Shepherd’s tone. They’ve learned that fun at all costs isn’t worth the price.

Amiable & Onery

But, even with all that fun-loving independence, an orneriness lurks beneath the surface of a goat’s facade. The term “stubborn as a goat” exists for a good reason. Goats are indeed stubborn and hardheaded (literally). Goats are notoriously onery and rebellious. It’s their nature. Of course, some are more so than others. My grandfather would have called them cantankerous. Human goats are like that too. This puts them at odds with sheep, in opposition to undershepherds, and in trouble with the Great Shepherd.

While sheep are far from perfect, they have an amiable nature. They’ve learned to “strive for peace with everyone (Hebrews 12:14).” If it’s possible, and if they can do anything about it, they try to have peaceful relationships with everyone they encounter (Romans 12:18). This isn’t always easy. Still, it’s the will of the Great Shepherd, so they obey. After all, sheep don’t have to fight their own battles. Their Shepherd fights for them.

Shoats & Geeps

My daughter, our in-house animal expert, informed me that there are sheep-goat hybrids, usually referred to as “shoats” or “geeps.” I kid you not. The Bible never mentions these curious creatures. However, it does describe how every person has a war between two competing natures raging on the inside. You might say we’re all born with a goat nature, and the Holy Ghost gives us a new character. But even after receiving the Holy Ghost, we’re still a sheep-goat hybrid. That old goat nature desperately wants to take back control.

The apostle Paul lamented that the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the wishes of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other (Galatians 5:17). The apostle Peter called this inward struggle a war saying, “the passions of the flesh wage war against your soul (1 Peter 2:11).” Paul homed in on geeps that had transformed back into goats when he said: For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot (Romans 8:7, ESV). The transformation from sheep to goat and vice versa is always a possibility. Therefore, sheep must always be on guard, and goats have no choice but to repent or be lost.

6 Dating Standards for Apostolic Singles – Article + Podcast

Singles seem to fall through the cracks in our churches. That’s an observation, not a criticism. It’s one of those hard-to-avoid problems that just naturally occurs. If you’re single and reading this, you’re shaking your head in agreement right now. It’s not that churches don’t care about singles – they do – but being single isn’t a characteristic that necessarily unites people into well-structured little groups. For example, you can be 18 or 88 and be single; 18-year-old singles have a completely different set of needs than, say… a middle-aged single adult.

All the good and bad excuses aside, churches need to talk more about how Apostolic singles should approach dating and relationships. I see singles struggling to navigate dating and serving God faithfully at the same time from all age groups. With that in mind, these six dating standards are directed toward every age group. Some of these standards are solid biblical truths, while others are personal opinions based on years of counseling and observation.

Let me start with a few statements of fact: Being single does not mean that you are less valuable than married people, and it’s far better to be single than married to the wrong person. It’s a natural God-given desire to long for a spouse. You should pursue that desire on God’s terms, which leads me to point number one.

Being single does not mean that you are less valuable than married people, and it’s far better to be single than married to the wrong person.

1. Apostolic singles should never consider dating anyone (and I mean anyone) who is not Apostolic.

There is nothing more important to any relationship than walking in spiritual unity. How can you have anything truly in common with someone who isn’t in full agreement with the most defining aspect of your life (Amos 3:3, 2 Corinthians 6:14-17, 1 Corinthians 15:33, 2 Timothy 3:5)? Spiritual and doctrinal disagreements impact every part of married life. I’ve heard all the arguments and excuses for why “this” person is the one good exception to that rule, and the story almost always ends in heartache or backsliding. I’ve observed countless situations where someone pretended to be serious about God to be in a relationship with an Apostolic guy or girl. In those situations, the entire relationship is built on a lie—hardly a good start to any long-lasting marriage. Dating someone into the Church is a bad idea – the happily ever after success stories are scarce. Beyond that, it’s a question of the heart. Why would you be attracted to someone who isn’t Holy Ghost filled, holy, and zealous about their faith?

Apostolic singles should never consider dating anyone (and I mean anyone) who is not Apostolic. There is nothing more important to any relationship than walking in spiritual unity.

Dating someone into the Church is a bad idea – the happily ever after success stories are scarce. It’s a question of the heart. Why would you be attracted to someone who isn’t Holy Ghost filled, holy, and zealous about their faith?

2. Mr. Right will attract Mrs. Right and vice versa.

Most singles have a mental (and maybe even an actual) checklist of what they want the “right” one to be like. There’s nothing wrong with that necessarily (depending on what’s on the list). However, you should spend more time making sure you’re everything that you should be. You won’t attract the right kind of person if you aren’t working to be the right kind of person. Singlehood is a tremendous opportunity for self-improvement, preparation, spiritual growth, and maturation.

You won’t attract the right kind of person if you aren’t working to be the right kind of person. Singlehood is a tremendous opportunity for self-improvement, preparation, spiritual growth, and maturation.

3. Apostolic singles must trust that God is guiding their footsteps (Romans 8:28, Proverbs 3:5-6, Proverbs 16:9, Psalm 37:23).

Fate is not a biblical concept. God orders our every step if we are faithful to Him. That’s something every Apostolic single should believe wholeheartedly. God will guide the right person into your life at just the right time. You might look around your church on any given Sunday and think, “If these are my only options, I’m gonna die alone.” But remember, we walk by faith, not sight (2 Corinthians 5:7). If you trust God and guard your integrity, God will orchestrate your future in ways that you can’t possibly plan.

Fate is not a biblical concept. God orders our every step if we are faithful to Him. That’s something every Apostolic single should believe wholeheartedly. God will guide the right person into your life at just the right time.

4. Speaking of guarding integrity, Apostolic singles should create and maintain protective boundaries in their relationships.

I’m confident the average Apostolic single doesn’t enter a relationship planning to be promiscuous, indecent, or sexually immoral. Nevertheless, if you don’t have defensive boundaries in place, lines can be crossed very quickly. Carelessness leads to sinfulness in a hurry.

So, let’s talk about dating and relationship boundaries for a minute. Under no circumstances should a man and woman be alone together in a house or bedroom unless they are married to one another. There’s too much opportunity for things to go too far in that setting, and even if nothing happens, it looks wildly inappropriate.

A couple should not be alone together in a house or bedroom unless they are married to one another. There’s too much opportunity for things to go too far in that setting, and even if nothing happens, it looks wildly inappropriate.

  • Dating couples need to spend time with groups of people. It would help if you saw how that person interacts with others and the people who are already a part of your life.
  • Dating couples should always have a plan. Don’t just get together and kill time. Boredom and too much free time are a dangerous combo for two people attracted to one another.
  • Singles of all ages must be open and accountable to spiritual authority. Singles should talk to their pastor, family, and trustworthy spiritual mentors BEFORE becoming too emotionally invested in a relationship. Singles who remove this boundary are dodging godly counsel.
  • When dating, singles should ask lots and lots of questions. Don’t take it for granted that you know what someone believes just because they warm a church pew. There’s always a Judas hanging around Jesus. Talk. Find out what they really think deep down. Talk about hopes, dreams, plans, goals, and aspirations. Find out if they are growing spiritually or dying spiritually.
  • When dating, watch how they respond in church services. If they sit in church like a dead frog, you know something is spiritually off balance. If they’re uninvolved and out of touch with their local assembly… run.
  • Stay modest, even when you’re not together. Texting, social media, video chatting, and tons of other technological advancements have changed the modern dating scene. If it would be immodest for you to show it or wear it in person, you shouldn’t be showing it or wearing it digitally.

5. Don’t date someone who isn’t marriage material.

Never date just to date. I’ve received a lot of pushback on this piece of advice over the years. I stand by it anyway; dating isn’t a game or a way to kill time. Dating shouldn’t be a temporary fix for loneliness. Dating is two people evaluating whether they are compatible and capable of truly loving one another for a lifetime. And by the way, spending all your free time with a member of the opposite sex is dating, whether you call it that or not. If marriage is out of the question, stop dating that person immediately.

6. Know your worth.

You are incredibly valuable. Don’t let anyone or anything convince you otherwise. In a culture of casual sex and careless relationships, Apostolic singles are set apart by God for better things.

Finally, marriage is by far the most life-impacting decision a person will ever make. Be prayerful, be accountable, be faithful, be prepared, and seek wisdom. Know that God cares about your happiness. God is in complete control of your future. Let the Lord lead you.

You are incredibly valuable. Don’t let anyone or anything convince you otherwise. In a culture of casual sex and careless relationships, Apostolic singles are set apart by God for better things.

Marriage is the most life-impacting decision you will ever make. Be prayerful, be accountable, be faithful, be prepared, seek wisdom. God cares about your happiness. God is in complete control of your future. Let the Lord lead you.

Relationslips (Part 2) with Taylor French – Article + Podcast

My wife, Taylor, is the most intelligent and intuitive person I’ve ever known. She can read people almost effortlessly without them realizing she’s doing it. Residing deep inside her is a wellspring of observational ability that enables her to know a person’s soul instinctively. More importantly, she fights for good relationships with the tenacity of a soldier. She’s like a relationship ninja. It’s pretty cool. I honestly envy those qualities. And while I do most of the talking in public formats, she is the better communicator in our relationship. We learn from each other, but I think I have more to learn than her. I’ve certainly gleaned new insights talking through this series with her for the last several weeks. And I’m incredibly grateful we’re on life’s journey together.

Get Caught Up

If you’re just now joining the conversation, you can listen to Part 1 of our Relationslips podcast here. If you scroll down, you’ll see a link you can’t miss for Part 2 of this series. Also, here’s a link to the first blog entry in this series. It’s worth looking at that article and reviewing the list of book recommendations. We’ve enjoyed responding to your questions and comments. Feel free to send more our way, and we will respond sometime soon.

 

Passive Aggressors & Energetic Attackers

One common source of relationship friction that causes “slips” is the ongoing war between passive aggressors and energetic attackers. And, of course, Taylor and I are opposites in this area. My natural, carnal, fallen, faulty response to frustrations, anger, feelings of offense, and disappointment is passive aggression. Allow me to define passive-aggressive behavior for those who might be uncertain. Indirect expressions of hostility, including negative attitudes, characterize it. Here are some specific passive-aggressive behaviors I’ve unfortunately struggled to overcome: 1) Resentment and unspoken opposition to demands from others. 2) Procrastination and intentional mistakes in response to others’ requests. 3) Cynical, sullen, or quiet hostility to others near me. 4) Masking my frustrations in complaints, sarcasm, humor, or hints and doing just about anything to avoid confrontation, argument, or outright hostility.

On the opposite end of the spectrum are people I’ve dubbed energetic attackers. Taylor falls into this category. So rather than running away from confrontation, she runs towards it. Sometimes she enjoys confrontation (although not always), but regardless, she isn’t afraid of it. She approaches relationship problems aggressively. She likes all the feelings out in the open. She likes to have all the cards on the table and all the soldiers on the battlefield. And although she never intends to attack people, she wants to attack the problem, which does cause some personalities to feel attacked at that moment. While passive-aggressive personalities can arguably be too patient, energetic attackers have little patience. They’re quick to speak their mind and openly push back when frustrated.

It’s easy to see how these drastically different personalities can “trip” each other up. But, as unlikely as it seems, passive aggressors and energetic attackers have traits that can bring balance. For example, Taylor has helped me recognize the value of confronting things in a timely fashion, and I’ve helped her learn the importance of finding the right time for confrontation. Timing is everything when it comes to healthy confrontations in all of our relationships. I naturally lean too passive, and she leans too aggressive. This personality dynamic creates tension in countless families, workplaces, churches, friendships, schools, and leadership teams.

Timing is everything when it comes to healthy confrontations in all of our relationships.

Finding Balance & Seeking Reconciliation (Relationslip Tip #4)

21 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. 23 So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there, remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there before the altar and go. First, be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift (Matthew 5:21-24, NIV).

The Bible isn’t silent on this issue. Jesus speaks directly to it during the famed sermon on the mount. He began by mentioning an injustice everyone can agree is terribly wrong, murder. Then He swiveled to the topic of anger without even saying whether or not it was justified. Ultimately, Jesus adroitly led the audience to consider how offenses destroy relationships.

Interestingly, when Jesus gave the protocol for dealing with anger, bitterness, insults, and general relational frustrations, He purposefully left a detail out that most of us would want to know. He never mentioned whether He was talking to the offended or the offender. Look at Matthew 5:23 again, “So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there, remember that your brother has something against you.” If I had been in the crowd, my hand would have shot up so I could ask Jesus, “Wait, does this apply if they have something against me because I did something wrong or because they did something wrong to me?” But Jesus didn’t bother to clarify because it didn’t matter. His instructions in the next verse apply regardless of whether I did wrong, they did wrong, or we both did wrong. Any way you slice it, what Jesus said next applies.

I’m taking a tiny bit of liberty with the text and putting it in today’s context. So, you’re at the altar in church when you remember that (for whatever reason) there’s some bad blood between you and so and so. Instead of pretending everything’s fine, or putting it off another second, find that person while your mind is focused on the Lord and make things right as best you can. You might think, but I’m doing something spiritual right now. I can deal with that later. Not so. Jesus told us that our highest priority should be seeking reconciliation if an offense is “slipping” up a relationship. When we go to that person, our main goal is to mend “whatever” it is that caused the rift.

Jesus told us that our highest priority should be seeking reconciliation if an offense is “slipping” up a relationship. When we go to that person, our main goal is to mend “whatever” it is that caused the rift.

Practical Advice Regarding Reconciliation

You might be a passive aggressor, an energetic attacker, or anything in between. Regardless, seeking reconciliation prioritizes people above being right, winning, getting everything you want, or having the final say. A reconciliatory attitude is stripped of pride, arrogance, and selfishness. If peace is possible, reconciliation achieves it. I’ve found that most people welcome reconciliation once they realize how much I value my relationship with them.

Seeking reconciliation prioritizes people above being right, winning, getting everything you want, or having the final say. A reconciliatory attitude is stripped of pride, arrogance, and selfishness.

With that said, here’s some practical advice for leaving your gift on the altar and having the hard reconciliation talk: 1) Calm down before going to that person. This can be especially hard for energetic attackers, but waiting until your emotions are under control is essential. 2) Think the problem through from your side and try your best to see their point of view too. You don’t have to agree with their views, but just putting yourself in their shoes for a little bit can change your perspective. 3) Pray about the situation. Pray for that person, and specifically ask God to help restore that relationship. Seek the Lord for wisdom, self-control, and guidance. 4) Plan a conversation that will bring about peace. A soft answer turns away wrath (Proverbs 15:1), so prepare your mind to speak with a tone that promotes healing, not anger.

Literalators & Exaggerators

I’m a big-picture guy. Taylor is a detail detective. I’ve learned that when Taylor asks about my day, she doesn’t want an overview; she wants every microscopic detail. I like to ballpark times and numbers. Taylor wants to know the exact milliseconds, pennies, and nanograms. Because I’m a big-picture, ballpark guy, I also tend to exaggerate. Typically, because I genuinely don’t remember the specifics. This can be problematic because if she’s taking everything literally and I’m ballparking, it creates disillusionment and miscommunications.

My father is also an exaggerator, and my mother is a literalator. Dad might say something happened recently that happened a decade ago. He isn’t trying to be dishonest or misleading. He just isn’t super focused on the time aspect of the story. It seems irrelevant to him. My mother can turn a three-minute story into a three-hour treatise on her trip to the grocery store because she feels the need to share every detail, precisely how it happened in real-time. So, you can imagine how literalators and exaggerators might have to work through communication issues and learn to meet in the middle.

Instructing Your Mouth (Relationslip Tip #5)

The heart of the wise instructeth his mouth, and addeth learning to his lips (Proverbs 16:23, ASV).

People with wisdom in their hearts teach their mouths what to say, when, and to whom. I don’t enjoy giving specifics, and I wouldn’t say I like being given too many details. But I love my wife; she likes particulars, so I let wisdom instruct my mouth. She knows I don’t always want to hear the extended version of a story, so she allows wisdom to instruct her mouth. This is called relationship maturity. It’s learning how to communicate with others in a way that is meaningful to them. So, when literalators and exaggerators are together, they have to make concessions for each other in their communications.

Learn how to communicate with others in a way that is meaningful to them.

The Constant Thread

A constant thread of truth runs through these relationslip tips: Intentionality. Good relationships take time, energy, effort, care, selflessness, and intentionality. Great marriages don’t happen by accident. Lifetimes of friendship don’t just happen. Tremendous parents don’t just stumble on it. Happy workplaces don’t magically appear from nothing. Church unity doesn’t fall from Heaven on a few super-blessed congregations. No. Every meaningful relationship is fraught with protentional slipping hazards that must be carefully navigated. It can be exhausting; sometimes, we feel like giving up on certain people. But the benefits far outweigh the burdens.

Good relationships take time, energy, effort, care, selflessness, and intentionality.

Relationslips (Part 1) with Taylor French – Article + Podcast

It’s been so much fun working on this relation “slips” series with my wife, the amazing Taylor. For those who prefer to listen, you can listen to Episode 64 right now. Also, you can read the poem for JJ featured on the episode here. If you’re new to the series, Taylor and I are wading into the murky waters of relationship difficulties because relationship troubles account for most of our daily frustration, strife, and anxiety. It might be between spouses, friends, coworkers, fellow saints, peers, parents, in-laws, children, or siblings. Regardless, slips in those relationships can be really difficult. However, navigating relationships with wisdom goes a long way in producing peace and joy in our daily lives. It also promotes unity (which promotes revival) in our churches.

Navigating relationships with wisdom goes a long way in producing peace and joy in our daily lives. It also promotes unity (which promotes revival) in our churches.

An Occasion to Slip (Romans 14:13)

The Amplified version of Romans 14:13 says this: “…let us no more criticize and blame one another but rather decide and endeavor never to put a stumbling block or an obstacle or a hindrance or an occasion to slip in the way of a brother.” It’s extremely rare for me to criticize the King James Version. However, the KJV translation falls short of the intended meaning in this instance. It renders the beginning of the verse this way: “Let us not, therefore, judge one another anymore…”. Yet, the context of the verse and the intended meaning of the Greek word krinō is more in line with our understanding of the word “criticize” or “disapproval.”

Having a critical spirit rather than a graceful spirit ultimately becomes a slipping hazard to the people around us. Heaping blame and nitpicking endanger the people nearest to us. So, we must make a deliberate effort in all our actions not to create an occasion to slip in the way of others. For a Christian, this should become a daily mindset and priority. This is a crucial aspect of demonstrating the love of Christ.

Get Behind Me, Satan!

But Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block [offense, hindrance, snare, obstacle] to Me; for you are not setting your mind on things of God, but on things of man (Matthew 16:23, Amplified Version).”

The context of Jesus’ forceful rebuke against Peter is simple. Jesus had just revealed to his disciples that he would have to suffer and die – something they remained stubbornly unwilling to comprehend – but Peter wouldn’t accept it as true. He argued and tried to convince Jesus otherwise. Which, by the way, likely appealed to Jesus’ humanity. I mean, who wants to suffer and die? We know Jesus wrestled with this because of his prayers in the garden of Gethsemane (Matthew 26:36-56). Peter’s words were becoming a stumbling block, or we might say creating an occasion to slip in Jesus’ path.

I think it’s important to observe that this wasn’t an explosion of temper on Jesus’ part. It was an intentional rebuke designed as an example for everyone. Jesus realized the conversation was becoming dangerous, so he dealt with it immediately. It’s also worth noting that Peter’s intentions weren’t evil. He wasn’t trying to slip Jesus up like the Pharisees or the Sadducees. Peter loved Jesus and wanted what was best for him. Jesus knew that. But he still needed to demonstrate, for everyone’s sake, that you can’t be casual around slipping hazards. Especially spiritual slipping hazards.

Two Relationship Rules

I hate to use the word “rules” because I know it will rub some folks wrong. But rules they are, and they are simple (at least conceptually) yet vital. Christians must follow two rules regarding every relationship: 1) Make every effort not to be a source of slipping or tripping for others. 2) Make every effort not to let others become a source of slipping or tripping for you. These two rules should inform our actions, reactions, conversations, silences, decisions, and indecisions with others. Again, the Christian life is filled with intentionality and deliberation. But every relationship is fraught with intentional and unintentional relationslips that cause painful falls resulting in countless emotional and spiritual bruises. My wife and I have worked together to offer a few slip-proofing tips that are both biblically sound and practical.

Christians must follow two rules regarding every relationship: 1) Make every effort not to be a source of slipping or tripping for others. 2) Make every effort not to let others become a source of slipping or tripping for you.

Pesternators & Procrastinators – Understanding Personalities (Slip-Proofing Tip #1)

On the outside, at least, Taylor and I are complete opposites, and we are proof positive that opposites do attract. But, to be clear, we aren’t opposites regarding the big things like serving God, dedication to ministry, work ethic, love for our kids, and loyalty. Also, we both share quality time as our primary love language (if you haven’t read The Five Love Languages by Gary Chapman, we highly recommend that you do). However, that’s where our similarities end. Taylor’s a major extrovert, and I’m a lifelong introvert. She enjoys talking all day, and I’m quiet and inward. She loves being on the phone, and I have an ongoing fantasy that my phone is lost forever and no replacements are available. She wakes up happy and smiling, and I wake up with all the charm and energy of a tortoise. I can’t imagine wearing a brown belt with black shoes, and I have a lifelong obsession with making sure colors and patterns match. But on the other hand, Taylor believes that all colors and patterns match, and the more, the merrier.

I love our differences. I’m incredibly thankful we’re not the same. Life would be very dull if we were exactly alike. And, for the most part, our differences balance us out. However, at times, our differences create slipping hazards in our relationship. For example, I’m a lifelong procrastinator, and Taylor is a chronic pesternator. You’re probably familiar with a procrastinator. So let me explain a pesternator (our made-up word) first. Put simply. A pesternator is someone who wants things done immediately. It makes them highly effective and immensely productive people. However, one of their predominant weaknesses is impatience. They’re also highly communicative. They resort to pestering if things aren’t getting done as quickly as they’d like. But, of course, they’d be more likely to call it frequent urgent reminders of great importance.

Procrastinators are not necessarily lazy, although pesternators often mistake their delays for laziness. My fellow procrastinators and I simply don’t feel the inner urgency to complete every big and minor task immediately. Instead, we prioritize tasks based on their perceived importance, and we rarely feel the need to finish something that isn’t due for another six months. Pesternators do feel that urgency (almost impulsively). One trait I’ve noticed in procrastinators like myself, we are also perfectionists. Therefore, we don’t like just getting things done in a hurry just to mark them off the list. We want to do it, take our time, think everything through, and do it right. This can be a huge weakness. We often don’t do things we should be doing because we don’t feel we can do them perfectly (like podcasts and blogs).

Procrastinators and pesternators clash daily in homes, workplaces, churches, and schools. Siblings, parents, coworkers, spouses, extended families, students, and colleagues slip one another up because they are wired differently. For example, in our home, we have two procrastinators and two pesternators. My daughter, Julia, and I are procrastinators. And, as you already know, Taylor is a pesternator. Our son, Talmadge, is with Taylor in the pesternator department. So, as you can imagine, the potential for frustration and conflict lurks in the shadows and on To-Do lists. Thankfully Taylor and I entered marriage with another important similarity that I haven’t mentioned yet. We are both fascinated with the study of personalities. And we believe that fascination has helped to slip-proof our relationship. It’s not full-proof, and we’re not perfect, but we believe understanding and appreciating personalities can dramatically help you.

These days, there’s no shortage of free and paid online personality tests you can take. Some aren’t great, but many are very good (we’ve linked several tests and book recommendations at the end of this article). Take several of them for yourself because the first leg in the journey to understanding others is learning about yourself. Be brave enough to face your weaknesses and wise enough to exploit your strengths. Learn what pushes your buttons and why. Before we can interact wisely with others, we must honestly know ourselves. Once you get a grip on your personality, you can determine what makes other personalities tick.

Be brave enough to face your weaknesses and wise enough to exploit your strengths. Learn what pushes your buttons and why. Before we can interact wisely with others, we must honestly know ourselves.

You might think, that’s great, but how does this help my “fill in the blank” relationship? For one thing, you begin to realize that certain people who do certain things that grate on your nerves aren’t purposefully trying to make you go crazy. And, just as significantly, they probably aren’t trying to disrespect or demean you either. So, it’s just two personalities clashing. So, for example, very early in our marriage, Taylor would ask me to do such and such or so and so, and I would absolutely plan to do it, but according to my rambling time frame. Because I hadn’t fully comprehended her personality, I didn’t realize she had an unspoken expectation that I should fulfill that request within 24 hours. To make matters worse, when I didn’t meet that silent expectation, she felt disrespected and unloved. Neither of us wanted to hurt the other, but a lack of understanding created tension. And that lack of understanding stemmed directly from a lack of communication.

F.A.N.O.S. (Slip-Proofing Tip #2)

That’s just one personal example representative of hundreds of relationslips that happen between people all the time. Thankfully, in our case, we were given a tremendous marriage tip that has drastically improved our relationship. The acronym is F.A.N.O.S., which stands for feelings, acknowledgment, needs, ownership, and struggles. So, here’s how it works, you and your spouse agree to talk through F.A.N.O.S. once a day. Pick a time of day that works best for your schedule and stick to it. Make sure to do it daily. It might take you longer to get through it in the beginning, but as time goes by, it won’t take you as long to finish. Take turns expressing the five topics (without interrupting each other).

Begin with “feelings”; this is a general opportunity to communicate how you are feeling right now, about the past 24 hours, and the future. Move to “acknowledgment”; here, you verbalize that you acknowledge (and hopefully appreciate) everything your spouse has done for you, your family, your friends, etc. Remember to acknowledge everything you can think of, even if you don’t feel particularly grateful. And here’s why, as you recognize those things out loud, your appreciation for everything your spouse does will blossom. Remember to take turns and reflect precisely on the past day’s events.

The third topic is “needs,” I’m pausing here to insert that this part of F.A.N.O.S. became the primary solution for our procrastinator vs. pesternator problems I mentioned earlier. The needs category allows you both to communicate… well, your needs for the upcoming day (or further out, depending on the circumstances). Taylor and I realized that this was the best moment for her to tell me precisely what she wants from me (emotionally, spiritually, and physically). Knowing she will have the chance to do the “needs” category of F.A.N.O.S. every day alleviates her impulse to send reminders and requests to me while I’m working, resting, and… well, you get the idea. But that only works when I do my part, pay attention, and set reminders for myself. Also, part of that communication process is learning to set realistic expectations. If, for example, I can’t do something within her desired 24-hour window, I must express that to her. However, I must force the procrastinator in me to commit to a reasonable timeframe (He’s still working on me).

After “needs,” take “ownership” for any failures, wrongdoings, and bad attitudes you might have had since the last F.A.N.O.S. Be sure to apologize and be careful not to pass the blame or make trite excuses. Finally, close out by verbalizing any “struggles” you might be facing, feeling, or anticipating. Full disclosure: Taylor and I have typically already expressed our struggles in the first four categories. But sometimes, that category is extra essential to talk through. I know that F.A.N.O.S. sounds overwhelming if you’re an introvert like myself. And all the mega communicators reading this think it sounds magnificent. But I promise, it helps, and it works. And it doesn’t take very long once you get the hang of it, especially if you do it daily.

Relationships Besides Marriage (Slip-Proofing Tip #3)

Obviously, you can’t do F.A.N.O.S. with your colleagues, bosses, in-laws, friends, or parents. Although, it might be great to do with your kids (at least occasionally). But the principle of learning to communicate your needs, show appreciation, and set expectations while genuinely understanding another person applies to all your ongoing relationships. It’s a fact that most relationslips result from misunderstandings, poor communication, and perceived disrespect. Before jumping to conclusions and getting offended, take some time to try and figure out if the issue is just two distinctive personalities approaching the same situation with vastly different perceptions. Of course, sometimes conflicts are deeper and drastic interventions are required. But you’d be surprised how simply understanding and learning to respect and work intelligently with other people’s differing personalities will slip-proof relationships.

Most relationslips result from misunderstandings, poor communication, and perceived disrespect.

Nobody Likes Being Misunderstood

Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them… (Matthew 7:12).

Jesus’ infamous challenge to treat others how you want to be treated was then, and for many, still is, a revolutionary concept. This commandment seems pretty uncomplicated. And, mostly, it is. However, what are you supposed to do when treating someone how you would like to be treated isn’t how they want to be treated? Perhaps you’re a hugger. Giving and receiving hugs makes you feel loved and appreciated. But someone in your circle of relationships doesn’t like being hugged or even touched, for that matter. You’re showing love the way you want to be loved, but they’re left feeling awkward and uncomfortable. Maybe they will start avoiding you. Not because they don’t like you but because they don’t want a bear hug.

In that kind of situation, the key to obeying Matthew 7:12 is learning to understand other people’s personalities. Nobody likes being misunderstood. You don’t like it when people don’t try to know your likes and dislikes. We all want others to read our body language, pay attention to our signals, and listen to us. And when we’re misread, misunderstood, or ignored, we feel devalued and unimportant. Learning to do what makes others feel valued is the ultimate version of following Matthew 7:12 because that is precisely what we wish others would do for us. When you learn to live this way, the relationship bonus is that as you adjust for others, they will do the same for you. They may never want that bear hug, but they might grow comfortable with a simple, quick hug.

Learning to do what makes others feel valued is the ultimate version of following Matthew 7:12 because that is precisely what we wish others would do for us.

Book, Blog & Podcast Recommendations

If you’re interested in growing and learning how you and those around you tick, this list is a great resource to get you started. Before you browse over them, please don’t feel overwhelmed. You absolutely don’t have to read or listen to all this information to grow in this area. If you’re like me, you’ll want all the info you can possibly study. But if you’re like Taylor, you’re probably thinking, give me one or two good resources I can dig into. And that’s ok. One book, blog, or podcast can make a huge impact. So don’t let the length of this list overwhelm you. With that said, I’ll start this list with the first personality-type book I read as a teenager. It’s still my favorite.

This short book is a classic.
Another LaHaye classic.
Short and simple read.
Another enneagram personality format book.
Tremendous book if you have a hard time saying no, or if your “no” hurts people.
This one is pretty in-depth and intellectual.
This book approaches personality studies from a self-improvement perspective.
Very fun book and comes with a free online personality assessment.
The test on this book is very helpful.
Listening is a lost art and this book helps bring it back.
Another great book on learning to listen, empathize, understand, and relate to others.

What’s the Difference Between Godly Sorrow & Worldly Sorrow

For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of but the sorrow of the world worketh death (2 Corinthians 7:10).

The Difference Makes the Difference

In his second letter to the church at Corinth, the apostle Paul begins chapter seven by launching into a lengthy discussion about how to “perfect holiness” by “cleansing ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit (2 Corinthians 7:1)”. Inevitably, this dovetailed into a unique perspective on sorrow and repentance. Paul describes (and we’ll look closer at it in a moment) the difference between godly sorrow and worldly sorrow. It’s a vitally important distinction because one leads to spiritual death and the other to salvation. The difference makes the difference. We’ve all got to get this one right.

Called to Stop Sinning

The Bible teaches us that the Church is a called-out assembly. God has called us out of sin, and God has called us into holiness. We are supposed to be holy as He is holy (1 Peter 1:16). That standard is very high because God is supremely holy. You might be thinking that it is impossible to be sinless. And in a way, you’re right. However, the New Testament reminds us repeatedly that we are to be without sin (holiness). In fact, 1 John 2:1 pauses and says, “Stop sinning. Just stop it!”

My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not… (1 John 2:1).

If you take the Bible and boil it down to its essence, the central theme is God’s grand plan to get humanity from sinfulness to sinlessness.

Our Response to Sin is the Key

It’s easy to start sinning, but it’s hard to stop. That’s basically been humanity’s problem from the beginning. For most people, defining what is and isn’t sin is problematic. Sin is so pervasive and normal that we don’t feel horrified by it. And if we don’t feel horrified by sin, we don’t think of it as all that bad. My struggles with sin have taught me that sin’s grip is hard to break. If you’re human, you have your own stories and struggles with sin too. I also know how enticing sin can be from the countless hours I’ve spent trying to help others find deliverance from every sin you can imagine. I’ve noticed through the years that the real issue isn’t that we have sinned (because we have) or if we will sin (because we will).

The question that matters is, what will we do with our sin? How we respond to sin usually helps us stop or causes us to keep on sinning. Godly sorrow over sin produces genuine repentance, which allows the Holy Spirit to step in and empower us. Worldly sorrow leads to lackadaisical repentance, which only perpetuates sin in our lives. Worldly sorrow produces a self-sustaining cycle of sinfulness. Before highlighting the vital differences between godly and worldly sorrow, we must clear up an apparent contradiction in the Bible.

Does God Cleanse Us, or Do We Cleanse Ourselves?

Sin is a stain on our lives. God desires to present to Himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing (Ephesians 5:27). God is deadly serious about His church being holy and without blemish (Ephesians 5:27). That’s why we’re all in such desperate need of the blood of Jesus. Only His blood cleanses all the stains of sin. But do we cleanse ourselves, or does Jesus cleanse us? The passages below might be a little confusing at first glance.

…let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Corinthians 7:1).

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9).

To answer this question, we need to identify the context of these two verses. In the previous chapter, Paul clarifies his target audience, “for ye are the temple of the living God (2 Corinthians 6:16).” Clearly, Paul is talking about repentance to people who have already obeyed the Gospel and are in the Church. He’s referring to the ongoing process of sanctification (holiness), which requires continued repentance. We must skip forward to pinpoint John’s intended audience:

These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God (1 John 5:13).

So, it’s clear that John is writing about the initial salvation experience, when we first take ownership of our sinfulness, leading to repentance and obeying the Gospel. At that moment, God covers us with His blood.

God’s Role & Our Responsibility

At salvation, something compelling happens; when we repent, our sins are forgiven (1 John 1:9); at baptism, our sins are remitted (Acts 2:38); at the infilling of the Holy Ghost, we are empowered (Acts 1:8). God did the cleansing work at Calvary, and we stepped into that cleansing flow via obedience. However, regarding our continued walk with God, 2 Corinthians 7:1 clarifies that we must “cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” In other words, God does the initial work. Then He expects us to put some effort into the process from that moment forward. To be sure, His Spirit comes inside to help lead, guide, comfort, correct, convict, strengthen, and encourage us along the way. But the infilling of the Spirit doesn’t remove our free will. After salvation, God expects us to exercise an often-overlooked fruit of the Spirit – self-control (Galatians 5:23).

Sometimes I hear church folks say, “if only God would give me the power over this ____ sin.” But God has already given us His Spirit. He’s already cleansed us. So now we must cleanse ourselves daily. If we’re not careful, we’ll use God as an excuse for our continued sin. God cleanses us first, and then we are responsible for walking in that cleansing. That’s the process of sanctification or holiness. In answer to the original question: Does God cleanse us, or do we cleanse ourselves? The answer is that God does the major cleanse first, and then we step in and do minor cleansing as we continue our walk with the Lord.

A Simple Illustration

A simple, albeit imperfect illustration, may help clarify this concept. Roughly once a month, I take our family SUV to a full-service carwash. They detail our vehicle inside and out. I do that because they have the equipment, chemicals, and expertise that allow them to do a thorough cleaning that I’m not capable of doing. It’s almost like having a new vehicle when they get done. I didn’t do the cleansing. They did. But if I eat a bagel in the car and crumbs fall everywhere, I must clean that mess myself. Otherwise, I’ve wasted my time and money on that professional cleaning job. They cleaned it first in ways I can’t do alone. But I still have a responsibility to keep it clean. In much the same way, that’s how walking in holiness works.

Problems in the Corinthian Church

In Paul’s first letter to the Corinthian church, he is very forthright with them. The church was super messed up with big-time problems and significant sin issues. For example, a young man was having an affair with his father’s wife (1 Corinthians 5:1). Even more revolting, rather than the church being grieved. They laughed about the situation like it was a joke (1 Corinthians 5:2). Paul was so angry that he demanded that if the guy refused to repent, they should turn him over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh (1 Corinthians 5:5). That leaven of malice and wickedness would destroy the whole church if they didn’t deal with it correctly (1 Corinthians 5:7-8). All this background is essential because we can now understand 2 Corinthians 7:8-11 and answer the question: What’s the difference between godly and worldly sorrow?

I’m Not Sorry That I Made You Repent

8 For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent, though I did repent: for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you sorry, though it were but for a season. 9 Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance… (2 Corinthians 7:8-9).

In the above verses, Paul was trying to let the church know that his first letter (1 Corinthians), with its strong rebuke, was not intended to make them feel sorry but was a call to repentance.

…for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing. 10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of… (2 Corinthians 7:9-10).

In other words, when you have godly sorrow. It leads to godly repentance, and you don’t have to confess the same sin repeatedly.

…but the sorrow of the world worketh death. 11 For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge! In all things, ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter (2 Corinthians 7:10-11).

The Contrast

In his unique way, Paul carefully contrasts these two types of sorrow. They both lead to outward repentance, but only one is genuine. The result of godly sorrow is a change in behavior and attitude. But worldly sorrow brings death. It certainly brings spiritual death, but in the immediate, it might mean the death of a marriage, a friendship, victory, blessings, spiritual power, or family relationships. Tragically, in extreme cases, it could culminate in an untimely physical death because of sin.

For All That Is in the World

Anything derived from the world is compromised, “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world (1 John 2:16).” Worldly sorrow is derived from either the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, or the pride of life. So, for example, a person might feel sorrow for their sin because of the pain it produces. They feel that pain in their flesh, and that pain can be intense. It’s real! Emotional and physical pain caused by sin can become unbearable at times. And many people assume the remorse they feel because of their agony is genuine repentance. But if that remorse is a temporary emotion birthed from pain, it’s not godly sorrow.

A second kind of worldly sorrow results from the lust of the eyes. People can be sorry because they see how sin has impacted their life; lost loved ones, broken relationships, wasted moments, embarrassments, and failures. Their kingdom might be crumbling before their eyes like a slow-motion nightmare. Consequences that used to seem so unlikely and distant come crashing into focus. They might think, “I’m going to lose my wife, kids, or job.” But ultimately, their focus is on their kingdom. Many people feel this kind of worldly sorrow and confuse it for genuine repentance. But true repentance is not self-centered. It’s God-centered.

Thirdly, the pride of life produces another type of worldly sorrow. People may feel sorry because they are embarrassed that people can see their sins. They see their reputation going down the drain, their influence waning, or they feel disliked. Perhaps they want to be viewed in a more positive light. But the critical issue is their name. Again, the sorrow is selfishly motivated. Therefore, the resulting repentance is only skin deep.

Me, Myself & I

Worldly sorrow always brings the focus on me. It’s all about my feelings. My pain. My reputation. My happiness. But godly sorrow focuses on the fact that my sin has grieved God and others. Ephesians 4:30 warns us not to “grieve” the Holy Spirit. Godly sorrow is acutely aware that my sin has grieved the Holy Spirit. Godly sorrow isn’t just sorry because of sin’s consequences on my kingdom. It’s more concerned with God’s Kingdom. Godly sorrow isn’t worried about the reproach that I brought on my name but with the reproach that I brought on God’s name. As the prophet Nathan said to David after his horrific sin with Bathsheba, “You have brought great occasion to the enemies of the lord to blaspheme his name (2 Samuel 12:14).” Nathan was more concerned with how David’s sin would impact the world’s understanding of God than he was with king David’s reputation.

Seven Characteristics of Godly Sorrow

Paul doesn’t leave us with a nebulous definition of godly sorrow. 2 Corinthians 7:11 describes what godly repentance looks like in action. He lists seven things that accompany godly sorrow. Numbers are significant in the Bible, and the number seven represents completion and perfection. Therefore, it could be said that these seven things signify complete and perfect repentance.

1. Carefulness

Carelessness leads to sinfulness. A careful person is full of care, caution, and intentionality. Godly sorrow produces carefulness where casualness once reigned supreme. Decisions are weighed out and made thoughtfully. Every action is measured according to the Word of God. Godly sorrow refuses to blame sin on ignorance, incompetence, recklessness, or inattention to detail.

2. Clearing of Yourself

Godly sorrow doesn’t make excuses. It doesn’t blame other people or circumstances for sin. There’s no hiding, covering, manipulating, shifting, or maneuvering of responsibility. Worldly sorrow keeps things hidden and harbors secret sins and motives behind closed doors. Godly sorrow seeks to clear the air and clean the conscience. It thrives on transparency and always advocates for the truth to be displayed.

3. Indignation

Godly sorrow recoils at the thought of past sins. Old lifestyles aren’t viewed as the “good old days.” It doesn’t laugh at sin or find it entertaining. Carnal things that used to seem euphoric become repulsive. The thought of sin and evil produces anger, indignation, and disgust. Godly sorrow views sin as a vile thing to be detested. It doesn’t despise sinners, but it does hate sin. In much the same way as you would hate cancer while loving a cancer patient.

4. Fear

I’m always nervous when someone repents of a particular sin and says, “I know I’ll never do that again.” I’d much rather someone say, “I’m going to take every precaution possible to make sure I never fall into that sin again because I’m afraid of going back to that terrible thing.” You will take godly precautions when you have a healthy fear of a possibility. Furthermore, a little fear of the Lord is a good thing.

5. Vehement Desire

Godly sorrow is fueled by a fervent desire to serve God and avoid sin. Vehement means to show strong feelings. It’s forceful, passionate, urgent, and intense. It isn’t mellow, mild, or casual. Godly sorrow recognizes the seriousness of sin and its desperate dependence upon the Holy Spirit.

6. Zeal

The Greek word for zeal is spoudē, found twelve times in the New Testament. The primary meaning of zeal is “haste” or “diligence.” Meaning diligence in the sense of “earnest zeal.” It’s always used in the context of living out godly lives.[i] The idea is that godliness takes ongoing work and tenacious effort.  

7. Revenge

When godly sorrow is in play, everything in your being wishes you could return and fix the things sin has taken from you. So, in a certain sense, you are looking for revenge against the enemy of your soul. That’s why brand-new saints often get so on fire for God. They are avenging what the enemy stole from them when they were under the bondage of sin. Godly sorrow never looks longingly back toward Egyptian taskmasters.

Final Thoughts

It’s not hard to receive the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues. But if you’ve been around an Apostolic church for a while, you’ve probably noticed that some people seek the Holy Ghost for weeks or even months without being filled. The apostle Peter didn’t say, “repent and be baptized, and you might receive the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38).” He said, “you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38).” My experience has taught me that many people struggling to receive the Spirit are actually struggling with repentance. They might be sorrowful and going through the motions of repentance, but their sorrow is worldly and does not lead to life. Gently and lovingly, helping them to decipher the difference between godly and worldly sorrow can lead them to the breakthrough they need.


[i] Renn, Stephen D., ed. Expository Dictionary of Bible Words. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2005.

What Will Become of Us All? – A Poem

White picket lines of peaceful persuasion
Cannot undo the cost of invasion
Endless fine lines of baser perversions
Weakened strains of moral conversions
Flawlessly wielding falsified searches
What will become of us all?

Cold, calculating meaningless data
Hiding underneath the smiling strata
Clinging to less fortunate ideas
Laughing, dragging, while dreaming of sions
Intricate veins coursing with curses
What will become of us all?

Meanwhile, one white robed throng preaches the Writ
Tenaciously keeping holy flames lit
Falling valiant, bleeding from vicious slits
Ten thousand swords critically slashing hits
Battered, beleaguered saints climb past ashen fritz
What will become of us all?

One bright light pierces the eastern sky
A triumphant shout falls from mountain highest
One brilliant white horse gracefully flies
The armies of Heaven closely aligned
Every blood-stained voice shouts toward the sight
What will become of us all?

My Opinionated Opinion About Opinions

Your Opinion Matters

We’ve all received an email after visiting a retail or eating establishment titled something along the lines of Your Opinion Matters inviting us to give our feedback. Similar emails and text messages request our all-important answers for special surveys where our opinions are espoused to be desperately needed. I’ve even noticed this phenomenon at the beginning of a simple phone call. They ask right from the beginning if you’d be willing to stick around after the call for a brief survey—again, giving the illusion of an actual dependency on our opinions. In the latter case, I’ve been told by involved sources that those phone surveys don’t particularly care about our specific feedback as they claim. But companies know that if we’ve had a frustrating phone experience, we’re wired to feel better after complaining in a short survey, which means that we’re less likely to express our anger in some public way that might put the company in a bad light. In other words, we’re so prone to giving our opinion that we’ve become predictably naive and manipulatable. That’s one side of the equation.

Opinionated Opinions

On the other hand, I’ve noticed an ongoing social media trope declaring: People need your love more than your opinion. That statement may or may not be correct, depending on the circumstances. There are situations where I’d prefer my doctor to have valid opinions far more than lovingly offered incorrect opinions. Still, there are times I need a correct loving opinion. But who expects nuance in social media wisdom these days? However, let’s not let the irony pass us by that the statement, “People need your love more than your opinion,” is an opinionated opinion about having opinions. Perhaps it would be more correct to say make sure when giving your opinion you do so with love. But that doesn’t fit as easily in Instagram’s square box.

The Opinion that Cried Wolf

There’s a tug of war in our nature that does need reconciling. We do love to give our opinion. Even introverts can’t resist hinting at their firmly held opinions, even if they do so passive-aggressively or in coded language. Sometimes we are so loose with our opinions that we lose influence because people learn to tune us out. Sort of like the little boy who cried wolf when there was no wolf and when a wolf really did show up, no one believed the little boy’s warning. Similarly, many people waste their influence by spouting their opinion over myopic subjects that matter very little in the grand scheme of life. When their opinion really could make a difference, no one is listening.

The Facts Don’t Care About Your Opinion

To complicate things even more, we naturally enjoy giving our opinion much more than hearing the opinions of others. And that includes hearing the opinions of people who know more than we know about the topic at hand. No one likes a know-it-all, and no one wants to appear ignorant. It’s a conundrum that creates all kinds of problems. We like to feel as though we secretly or overtly know more than others. Of course, this is exacerbated by social media and the internet because we all have access to information that may or may not be correct. Let alone helpful. If you need an example, mess around on a medical self-diagnosing website for a few minutes. You’ll be convinced you have some rare condition you previously did not know existed.

Wisdom & Opinion

Because of my ministerial calling, the subject of opinions intrigues me deeply. The word alone is complicated to unpack because the question of how to separate opinion from fact (or truth) becomes paramount to this whole discussion. It’s easier to dismiss something as an “opinion” than to face it as an inconvenient fact we just don’t want to hear. Even the word opinion comes weighted with the “your truth” versus “my truth” connotation. Frequently we dump unwanted truth in the it’s-just-their-opinion basket. While other times, opinion givers package their unnecessary bias as a fact when it would be better to frame that thought as a personal opinion. Or better yet, leave the thought unstated altogether. That’s where wisdom comes into play. Oh, and humility too.

It would be misleading for me to infer I’ve perfected the art of knowing when and how to give my opinion. I’m certainly a work in progress. But I am slowly learning and struggling to grow in wisdom and humility. A case could be made that ministry and all forms of leadership revolve around the perfecting of opinions. Hopefully, those opinions are grounded in timeless biblical truths, Spirit-led wisdom, and intentional humility. Nonetheless, leadership in all its various forms is steeped in the wellspring of opinion. Indeed, preaching is divinely designed to shape, change, and rearrange fleshly views. Much of ministry encompasses the dispensing of opinion or offering wisdom to others.

The Difference Between Sacred & Secular Opinion

Ministry is dramatically unique from almost every secular leadership environment. Every opinion turned policy must be followed in the corporate leadership world, or you lose your job. That’s even more true in military leadership structures. All federal and local government jobs are that way too. There are typically immediate consequences for ignoring leaders’ opinions in secular leadership structures. But although ministers have God-given authority (and we could argue another time about how absolute that authority should be according to Scripture), that authority cannot and should not be imposed forcefully. The Bible is clear; shepherds must not lord over the flock (1 Peter 5:3). In this instance, I prefer the English Standard Version’s translation, “not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock (1 Peter 5:3).”

Influence: The Currency of the Ministry

The harsh reality of ministry is that you spend more time counseling and comforting people after they discarded your opinion (wise counsel) than just about anything else. And after a couple of hundred hours of those sad sessions where you bite your tongue half off to keep from saying I-told-you-so, authoritarianism seems awfully appealing. Or, you might be tempted never to offer a wise opinion and just live and let live. Countless burned-out ministers have expressed that very feeling to me in private. I understand and relate to their emotions. The currency of ministry is influence, and that’s challenging to maintain ethically, especially when staying true to complex yet fundamental principles. Everything in this world is striving to gain influence over the people under a shepherd’s care. Most of those opinionated influences seek to undermine spiritual guidance, and a shepherd can’t use his staff to beat sheep into submission. That sounds like a no-brainer, but it’s less obvious when a shepherd sees one of his sheep following a wolf into the wilderness. So, let me offer my opinionated opinions about dispensing opinions, most of which are things I’ve learned through trial and error.

More Listening and Less Speaking

James 1:19 instructs us to be quick to hear and slow to speak. Ecclesiastes 3:7 reminds us there is a time for silence and a time to speak. And Proverbs 17:27 in the English Standard Version says, “Whoever restrains his words has knowledge, and he who has a cool spirit is a man of understanding.” Again, in the English Standard Version, Proverbs 18:13 declares, “If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.” These, along with many other relevant Scriptures, underscore an important implied lesson about how every Christian should approach offering their opinions. Mainly, we should do less speaking and more listening.

There’s more wisdom in this little principle than we might recognize immediately. First, less speaking gives us more time to gather our thoughts and offer a well-worded opinion. Second, it allows us to hear all the relevant information before jumping to the wrong conclusion or getting ahead of the facts. Third, it enables us to maintain a calm demeanor that projects wisdom and understanding rather than impatience and impetuousness. There is a time to speak our opinion but learning to listen long enough is a discipline many leaders lack. I’ve found that many people will tell things they didn’t intend to reveal if I let them speak long enough, allowing me to understand what I’m really dealing with under the surface. If I’d spoken sooner, my advice would not have been helpful because I lacked awareness.

More Building Up and Less Tearing Down

Colossians 4:6 says, “Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.” Similarly, Ephesians 4:29 in the English Standard Version says, “Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.”

It’s easy to focus on other people’s failures, negatives, and downright stupidity when offering opinions—that mindset results in an offensive, critical, condescending, and prideful demeanor. That doesn’t mean constructive criticism or outright correction is never warranted. Warnings and disapproval must be seasoned with grace and should fit the occasion. Don’t do a disapproval dump of the, and-while-I’m-at-it-let-me-say-this, variety. Most people can only handle so much constructive criticism at one time. If they feel like you’ve been waiting to pounce, it can be crushing to the heartiest of spirits. A good rule of thumb is to temper each negative statement with at least one or two positive comments. Never tear down without building up at the same time. Never lance an infection without applying ointment and bandaging it with care.

More Praying Before Answering

Numbers 9:1-14 recounts a fascinating leadership lesson from the early days of Moses’ ministry. The Israelites had been in the wilderness for one year after leaving Egypt, and God gave specific instructions on what day to celebrate the Passover. Moses dutifully passed the instructions along to the people, and preparations seemed to be going smoothly until a few men approached Moses with a problem. They had come into contact with a dead body rendering them ceremonially unclean which meant they were technically disqualified from celebrating the Passover at the God-ordained time. This might sound silly to our New Testament way of thinking, but this was a big deal with no obvious solution. And the way Moses responded to these men is an example for us all. He said, “Wait here until I have received instructions for you from the Lord (Numbers 9:8).” If we all prayed more before giving opinions, everyone would be in better shape. We’d likely throw our opinions out less often but with better results. Why? Because prayer forces us to make sure our opinion is actually God’s opinion, which makes all the difference.

More Replying and Less Coercing

One day King Zedekiah called for the prophet Jeremiah to come and speak with him. “I want to ask you something,” he said firmly. “And don’t try to hide the truth,” he demanded. Jeremiah’s response contains a lesson for us about when and how to handle knowledge. The prophet’s response is found in Jeremiah 38:15, and I’m using the English Standard Version, “If I tell you the truth, you will kill me. And if I give you advice, you won’t listen to me anyway.” Most people can’t wait to give their opinion, and they would be beside themselves if a king wanted their advice. Yet, Jeremiah knew opinions are a dime a dozen, and wasting advice on people who won’t receive it can produce more damage than good. After some back and forth, Jeremiah eventually did offer his opinion, but only after ensuring the king was sincerely ready to receive it.

Proverbs 1:5 in the English Standard Version declares, “Let the wise hear and increase in learning, and the one who understands obtain guidance.” Again, in the English Standard Version, Proverbs 15:12 asserts, “A scoffer does not like to be reproved; he will not go to the wise.” Here’s the harsh point, if you have to chase people down to give them your opinion (or advice), you’re wasting your time. The moment you find yourself trying to coerce people into enduring your opinion, the struggle for influence has already been lost. That doesn’t mean you can’t regain it, but the timing is off. People ready to receive counsel will come to you. And those who never seek wise opinions would do well to consider Ecclesiastes 4:13 (English Standard Version), “Better was a poor and wise youth than an old and foolish king who no longer knew how to take advice.”

More Love and Less of Everything Else

I know it gets taken out of context quite a bit, but it would be foolish to have this discussion without referencing the admonition of Ephesians 4:15 to speak the truth with love. The old saying is true: People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care. Beyond that, some people will never care how much you care or how much you know. Love them anyway, but save your breath for those willing to listen. But remember, even people willing to listen will reject your opinion if you give it without love. Let’s commit ourselves to the hard work of loving more than spouting off opinions. Cold-hearted leaders harm the truth with their actions despite their correct words—cloak hard facts in the softness of love. If they reject your wisdom and leadership, you can stand before the Lord with a blameless heart.

More Wisdom and Less Foolishness

Let’s switch gears from the subject of giving opinions to the importance of receiving correct views from others. Regardless of status, we all need wise counsel, or we will descend into foolishness. Fyodor Dostoevsky, the legendary author of Crime & Punishment, once said, “The cleverest of all, in my opinion, is the man who calls himself a fool at least once a month.” President John F. Kennedy is noted as saying, “Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” Those two quotes are self-deprecating ways of articulating that even the wisest among us still need the wisdom of those more discerning. Intelligent people know their weaknesses and acknowledge their blind spots. Foolish people insist on trusting their insufficiencies to their detriment.

The psalmist promised, “Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly (Psalm 1:1).” And Proverbs 13:20 warned, “He that walketh with wise men shall be wise: but a companion of fools shall be destroyed (Proverbs 13:20).” The apostle Paul cautioned the church in Colossians 2:8, “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” It’s not enough to know you need the opinions of others. Having the prudence to find good godly counsel is the key that unlocks the door to sagacity. Astute people seek advice from wise people, and silly people glean from the opinions of foolish people.

More Peace and Less Drama

James 3:17-18 is one of my favorite passages of Scripture (I’m quoting from the English Standard Version):

But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere. And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.

If you’re wondering how to decipher the difference between righteous opinions and fleshly opinions, the above passage should be circled and boldly highlighted in your Bible. Pious opinions are always seeking peace. That doesn’t mean they’re weak or watered down. It simply means they’re working hard to be peaceful, merciful, sincere, and impartial. Each one of those four things takes courage, effort, and intentionality. Things like contentiousness, cantankerousness, condescension, and downright divisiveness don’t require much exertion because they’re baked into our sinful nature. Look for leaders who strive to keep peace and attempt to be that kind of leader yourself. And if you do, you will reap a harvest of righteousness.