From Milk to Meat

Upon my daily routine of reading angry Youtuber comments, I came upon an argument that is used quite frequently in the Atheist/skeptic circles. The idea is that Religion is a man made concept used as a coping mechanism to help navigate this road we call life.

Invariably, Christians are then scoffed and ridiculed for believing in such fairy tales. It’s interesting because it’s really politically incorrect to make fun of lame people who use crutches for mobility. Not because they want to, but because they have to.

The question is not whether we’re leaning on something, like Jesus as a crutch, but whether we as humans are disabled, or injured in a way that causes us to need something to hold us upright.

If there is something wrong with human beings (and there is), then we need something to lean on. The question is whether or not your crutch can hold you because everybody leans on something for support, be it sex, drugs, popularity, wealth, security, etc.

So the big question then becomes, what are you leaning on? If what you’re leaning on is transitory, here one day and gone the next, then you’re leaning on something that you cannot depend upon.

Do Christians lean on Jesus? Yes. Is Jesus a crutch? Yes.

Crippled people need crutches.  

You know, a lot of people think that faith and reason are diametrically opposed to one another. That reason is used to gain knowledge, and the things you don’t have good reasons for, well, that’s the kind of stuff that requires that leap of faith. And we Christians, we’re all about faith. We’re all about leaping into the dark blindly, and believing ridiculous nonsense. Religious wishful thinking, if you may.

But reason? No, we reject that kind of thinking, because that’s the stuff that God doesn’t ask of us. Now when I put it in this kind of light, many people will cry foul, however, this is exactly what some people believe.

You see this a lot with the new Atheists, and even some Christians too. They think, if we have all this evidence for something, then what reason is there for faith?

Lets put the bible aside for a moment, and just rely on the council of our own moral intuition. The impulse of our society is to believe that Christians can’t think rationally about something.  We can’t just ask ourselves, “does that make sense” because we’re a people who believe in things that don’t make sense, but we believe them anyway, because we’re fools for Christ.

I’d like to argue against the divorcing between reason and faith, and rather try to marry the two.

One of the biggest oppositions against Christianity is that we believe things blindly. That we have a blindfold over our heads, and we’re walking towards a destination we’re unsure of. Invariably, the Atheist, naturalist, or empiricist are then branded as the reasonable ones, because they reject blind faith. The funny thing is, is that nowhere in the bible does it mention believing in something blindly.

I’d like to make note, that in these types of conversations, there is no mention of the definition between “reason” and “faith” given, usually. We’re simply made to assume that the opponent is devoid of faith in their worldview.

Faith has three components. The first is an object. In order to have faith, you have to have faith in someone or something. Secondly, there is content. The question we ask ourselves here is, what does it mean to put your faith into the object. And thirdly comes the act of trust or commitment. Now when you think about the definition of rationality, where is there a conflict between the two?

Reason assesses, and Faith trusts.

When I look at a chair (object), I assess that it can hold my weight (reason), and then put my faith in the chair my planting myself in it (trust), in light of the reasons. Not blind faith, but a reasonable step of trust.

As of last week, I’ve been unemployed. It sounds so depressing when its said like that.

Did you know that the Tibetan language doesn’t have a word for “unemployment”. That is a concept reserved for our western culture where jobs are ubiquitous and integrally woven into the fabric of our society. In traditional Tibetan society, people were mostly farmers, animal herders, or merchants. There was no concept of set hours of work, or having a job. Their work was often seasonal and during harvest season, they would work very hard. Then during the off-season, they and the land would rest.

In our culture, that pattern of natural work and rest has been replaced with a 24/7 accessibility to work. We text message in church, emails arrive demanding a response, and faxes peel off pages of urgent business in family kitchens. We have created an artificial environments with artificial work expectations.

I love the convenience of modern technology, but as with all advancements, it brings the responsibility for maintaining personal life balance.

The hard lesson I’m learning right now is to recognize the times of being “between opportunities”. I’ve been altered in thinking my worth is defined purely by the status of my employment. Rather than pressing the panic button of unemployment, perhaps we should see those times as times of restoration, rejuvenation, and grasping a new perspective on life. Seeing it as such would certainly require a new word. Any ideas?

We have all seen the “Coexist” bumper stickers on the hippie Volks Wagon beetles. Sorry, I’m stereotyping here, but you get my point. Not a bad concept though, right? What do you think the creator of this sticker is implying here?

Many people will argue, “How many wars have been fought over religion?” “How many people have died simply by disagreeing with another human being?”

All valid points, but that’s a completely different subject. I wanted to research this a bit further, as the message itself is a bit vague. The original “Coexist” design was from Polish designer Piotr Mlodozeniec who illustrated it thusly: ☾oe✡is† .  Originally, it only referenced only the three major religions: Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

Well the “Coexist” sticker took on a life of its own, in the face of specific opposition from Mlodozeniec who holds the copyright (apparently even the users of the “Coexist” sticker can’t coexist), and morphed into something even more inclusive.  

The “O” soon became the peace symbol or a pagan or Wiccan pentacle (two concepts of the pentacle that may not be able to coexist with each other depending on if you listen to a Wiccan or some pagans).  The “E” became either a mixture of the male and female symbols in some impossibly hermaphroditic form of coexistence or followed by the scientific equation Einstein made famous. The tittle (dot) on the letter “I” became either a pagan/Wiccan symbol or a Buddhist one.   The “S” most often became a Daoist yin/yang symbol, although sometimes the “O” was chosen.

Again, coexisting isn’t a bad concept by any means, but the way it’s implied on this sticker I would disagree with. The sticker isn’t saying, “Lets coexist as human beings”, its saying that all religions should coexist. That’s why religious symbols are used here. Therefore the makers and propagators of this sticker are using religions that don’t agree with their own premise.

Ethical relativism trivializes the beliefs of these religions if the “Coexist” message is truly believed. Only if the fundamental assertions of truth behind any of these beliefs are rejected can they truly coexist or be tolerant of each other. In fact many of them disagree over what it means to exist, much less coexist.  

The Bible says in John 14:6, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Islam teaches that there is only “one God and Muhammed is his prophet.”

Mormon theology teaches, from the words of Joseph Smith, that “All other creeds are an abomination.”

So you have to ask yourself, does the Muslim agree with the bumper sticker? Does the Mormon, or the Christian?

On a philosophical level, adherents to this “sticker” are so blind to the contradiction that they slit their own throats with the “tolerance” they preach. They contradict themselves because they don’t agree with “exclusivists” who make exclusive claims. They are just as exclusive, narrow-minded, and dogmatic by saying everyone needs to be all inclusive and relative just as they are.

Let’s take a look at what Jesus says in Matthew 12.

 “Then they brought him a demon-possessed man who was blind and mute, and Jesus healed him, so that he could both talk and see.  All the people were astonished and said, “Could this be the Son of David”

 But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons.

 Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand?”

Simply put, no nation can exist half free and half slave for a house divided against itself cannot stand. Truth and falsehood cannot be tolerant of each other unless relativism denies truth and falsehood.  But that is not then truth and falsehood, but rather some perversion of them both:  As it is a perversion of the various religions depicted on the stickers.

I would be willing to bet that most people today would reject the charge of Satan worship because they have a caricature of the devil and his religion ingrained in their minds. Why he’s the horn headed demon in red pajamas. He’s the one who drinks lambs blood and sacrifices innocent babies on an alter.

In reality though, following Satan is far more mundane and universal than most people believe, or would care to admit. 

“Do as though wilt shall be the whole of the law”

-          - Alister Crowley.

Sounds familiar? How many times have you debated or spoke casually about someone’s worldview? How many times have you heard these statements.

“I believe that everyone has their own truth.”

“Whatever people want to believe in is up to them”.

“It’s all relative.”

“I follow what my heart tells me.”

Disguised in these benign, seemingly intellectual statements, is the greatest folly to man. This flake of feel good wisdom, at its clearest conclusion, is basically translated to: “There is no God or authority but myself.”

Let’s look at what the Bible says about this.

Genesis 3:1-4

    Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

 ² The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, ³ but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”

 ⁴ “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. ⁵ “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Let’s also see how this thought has pervaded throughout music industry.

KMFDM “R.U. OK”

“Do what you want as you see fit.”

Alphaville “Red Rose”

“Do what you will shall be our destiny”

Lords of the New Church

“There is no grace, there is no guilt. This is the law, do what though wilt”

Mudvayne “Know Forever”

“Do What you will, make it the whole of your law. Burn down the faith that shadows life”

Marylyn Manson “Misery Machine”

“Do what I will. We’re going to ride to the abbey of Thelema.”

311 “Offbeat Bare A”

“Do what though wilt shall be the whole of the law”

David Bowie “Quicksand”

“I’m closer to the golden dawn immersed in Crowley’s uniform of imagery.

Enigma “Return To Innocence”

“Just look into your heart my friend. That’ll be the return to yourself. Don’t care what people say, just follow your own way”

Live “Operation Spirit”

“Heard a lot of talk about this Jesus, a man of love a man of strength, but what a man was 2000 years ago means nothing at all to me today.”

98 Degree’s “True to your heart”

“Be true to heart, you must be true to your heart”

Are we starting to see a theme here?

Jennifer Lopez says, “My heart of the ruler of all my being. If my heart tells me it’s true, that’s good enough for me.”

Other subscribers to this idea is John Lennon, Sid Vicious, Elvis, Jim Morison, Sting, and even Jimmy Page. 

2 Corinthians 11:14 says,

“And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.”

Just how easy is it to impose rules on yourself? Rules that don’t necessarily come from scripture, but they sound holy and righteous enough to be considered scripture. Hundreds of years before Christ, the Jews not only kept the law, but lived by adhering to tradition. For Jesus to come along and say, “those traditions that you so carefully kept are all fulfilled by me”, is quite a lot to take in.

As a growing follower of Christ, I sometimes take the lives of others and live their lives rather than my own. Objectively, they may have correct theology, but their ideas, view points, and passions are unique to their own person. God may not have that in store for me. It is so easy to follow in the footsteps of great men. Men of charisma and flare. Perhaps one who wields the word with great power and conviction. Like most people who attend Mars Hill, this person has most likely been, Martin Luther, John Calvin, or Mark Driscoll. Truth be told, there are no great men. There are only humble men that God breaks and uses.

Hebrews 13:9
“Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings. It is good for our hearts to be strengthened by grace, not by eating ceremonial foods, which is of no benefit to those who do so. ¹⁰ We have an altar from which those who minister at the tabernacle have no right to eat.”

Keep in mind that this is a Jewish audience and there were more Jewish dietary laws than there are hairs on your head. Some foods were clean, some were unclean. There was a great emphasis to observe these laws and many of their convictions were remnants from their past. Similar to how the Pharisee’s tithed a tenth of their spices, (which the law never taught), they were bringing the work’s based religion into the religion of Christ.

So what constitutes as “adding to the word of God”?

You can take something unbiblical and make it biblical, and you can take a biblical non-essential and making it essential.  

We can talk about how a women should dress. The Bible doesn’t say anything about what a woman can and cannot wear, it only talks about modesty. That is left open to the interpretation of the female, however it must be modest. Does her dress cover up her body, or does it draw attention to it? Many will magnify something that scripture leaves broad and impose it on others. Some mothers may force their daughters to wear only turtle necks. Heaven forbid.

I’ll give you a personal example. I come from a very family oriented background. My parents have never been divorced and I always felt like my home life was stable. I have some very strong opinions about the family life here in America. These issues include: family meals, non-disciplinary parenting, the media, schooling, etc. If I’m not very careful, I can react violently against these convictions and go beyond scripture, because those were my standards growing up.

As Christians (especially pastors) we need to be careful not to be too hard on our fellow brothers and sisters struggling with these types of issues.

I have a friend who attends an Eastern Orthodox church over in Seattle. His emphasis on attending Church seems to revolve around the manner in which the service is conducted. Images of Mary and Christ as well as some of the apostles are all over the sanctuary. He sometimes argues with me that the early church would have these images, so we should emulate that. Therefore, his feelings on most mega-churches is nothing short of negative

This is just what the author of Hebrews is talking about. “Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings”. These teachings become so essential to you, that you begin to hate other believers who adhere to the opposite. These types of people are arrogant, misinformed, and easily angered. Have you ever had a conversation with someone like this before?

I must confess, I sometimes throw fire at Arminians, or any other denominations that do not adhere to Calvinism, the Doctrines of Grace, or people who just have a wrong biblical view of God in general. So then I can make the teachings of Calvinism an idol rather than holy scripture. If I don’t see the word “Calvinism” stamped on the front cover, I’m easily prone to list it off as heretical.

We all have some legalism in us though. A legalist always has his focus on PEOPLE and they often start with pure motives. They see other people compromise and they react to that compromise and thus become more strict. That isn’t always bad, but the problem is that they react to all these modern day compromises when they should be acting on the ancient truth of scripture.

If Satan can get you reacting all the time, you can actually become a problem yourself. This can also be a form of idolatry.

Just like when Jesus was eating with the prostitutes and tax collectors. This spurred in the Pharisees a burning hatred and a self righteous disdain towards Jesus. But the reason why Jesus could do these things that were so seemingly counter cultural is because he was going by the truth of His father, and not by the truth of men.  This allowed to Jesus to have freedom (liberties) that the Pharisee’s (legalists) did not understand.

Paul writes to the church in Colossae,

Colossians 2:8
“See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.”

So it sounds like the church in Colossae was doing great, until someone preached a particular doctrine with his own philosophical spin. It’s even possible that his teaching may not have been wrong, but the PEOPLE used him wrong. They made an idol in their own mind. They made his convictions and personal preferences into scripture.

This is what Paul meant when he warns the people at the church of Corinth.

1 Corinthians 1:12
“What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.”

You might read this holy guys book, and it’s got some great stuff in it, but you take it too far. Soon enough, you’re chasing this movement, then that movement.

John Calvin once said, “In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, Liberty, but in all things love.”

Listen, if your conscience tells you not to eat meat, praise God. But if you think that makes you better before God you’re wrong.

You just can’t add to perfection.

Never forget this for as long as you live. The struggle with sin is a sign of life. Read it again.

The struggle with sin is a sign of life.

When I’m at community group, and I ask someone how they’ve been, and they reply, “I’m struggling a lot with this sin right now.” Then next week, the same thing happens, and the next week and the next. Then you start to ask yourself, is this person really trying hard enough? By now shouldn’t they be aware of their sin so much that it should break them to the point of absolute repentance?

When people struggle with sin in their life, sure they are to be broken, but why is it always communicated as a bad thing?

Guess what? Unconverted, unrepentant, unregenerate sinners DO NOT struggle with sin.

Back when I was in high school/college, looking at porn didn’t phase me a bit. In fact, if I had a struggle, it was how can I do it more?

The struggle with sin does not begin until fully committing yourself to Jesus and his cause. If you’re struggling, you should be praising God, because the struggle itself proves that there is something in you that wants to take you away from your sin nature, carnality, and the way the world is leading you.

Someone forgot to tell us along the way, that the struggle itself was a good thing!

The Bible says in Proverbs 24:16,

“for though a righteous man falls seven times, he rises again, but the wicked are brought down by calamity.”

Notice how it doesn’t say that a righteous man never falls. But why does a righteous man keep falling? Because he keeps getting up. This is the secret to the Christian walk. ***Obedience even though we are not perfect.***

Look at 1 John 1:7-9.

“But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.

 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.”

The only time that these verses do not apply, is heaven forbid, I stop walking in the light. But guess what? Every time I open my Bible, verses 7 – 9 are still going to be there.

How many times have you promised the Lord that you would never commit that sin again? Then the very next day, it was on your to-do list. Then you feel absolutely broken up over it. You feel abandoned and left for dead. And we then have to wait for God to “cool down”, hoping to get some distance from the sin. We’ve all done it.

When you look at all the vomit and vile that you’ve been rolling around in and you open scripture and realize that the only way to be cleansed is through the blood on Calvary, God stirs in you a supernatural repugnancy towards that which you loved doing. Something you could never have done on your own.

God is faithful and he is patient with us. If you keep confessing your sin on broken knees, crying out to God “Deliver me from this!”, God will eventually deliver you from that and it will be the LAST time. And you’ll walk away from it forever.

Paul Washer, in one of his sermons, says it best. “Don’t expect a perfect repentance.” Today in America, people have a very superficial view of Christianity. You pray this prayer, or repeat these words and BINGO! You’re saved. That is completely unbiblical.

When you look throughout scripture and document all the biblical characteristics of a full-blow repentance, you will come to a realization that no one can be saved (according to those standards). So many people expect to be free from sin, almost like God should just sweep away all those desires and proclivities. People then begin to doubt the assurance of their salvation because in the scrutiny of their own repentance, they expect the maturity like of one of the apostles in the New Testament. That’s just not true!

You might show the kernels of repentance, you have knowledge of it, and you may be somewhat broken over it, but even AFTER you’re saved, you are continually growing in repentance.

It’s the same way with faith. After being saved, you’re faith isn’t going to show the characteristics of a Biblical scholar.

Do you have the seeds of repentance? Are you believing as a child in Christ?

What you need to understand, is that repentance, in its initial stage, is simply a change in the mind. What you expect from your 10 month old daughter is not the same as what you would expect as your 10 year old son.  

The Doctrine of Election: “Before time, God chose those whom He would save, and whom He would secure for salvation.”

Just doing some research on the Doctrine of Election, and this is what I’m hearing.

I don’t understand election. I don’t feel it’s very biblical.

It’s unfair of God.

It makes me feel uncomfortable and therefore isn’t true.

It really boils down to one question. Is man radically depraved? If he is, and he truly hates God (as it says in Romans 3) and if all men are equally evil (and they are), then the question is, how are you standing here right now believing in God while some of your friends who are more moral than you still hate him?

What happened? If you say “you opened up your heart to Jesus,” I’ll say “no you didn’t.” In Acts, the Bible says that God opened up Lydia’s heart so she could believe. If you say “well I repented”.  Repentance is an evangelical grace. It means it comes from God as a gift. If you say “well I believe”, Ephesians 2 says that belief is also a gift.

The problem people have is this.

Let’s say there is no election. It’s gone. It doesn’t exist. Let’s just start fresh. Let’s say that men are really radically depraved and no man can come to God unless God draws him. So God comes down to every man and says “anyone who will bow their knee to me, anyone who will accept my son as their Savior, will be saved.”

Since everyman is radically depraved, they all hate God, they all blaspheme him, turn around, walk away and all go to hell. Is that God’s fault? No.

Let’s say that really is the reality. Let’s say that men hate God that much. So who is going to get saved? Absolutely no one. And if God saves no one because everyone is evil and rejects him, is God wrong in doing that? No.

So that is what you have without election.

The other option is this. Among these evil men, for His own glory, and to demonstrate His own kindness before the foundation of the world, He chooses a group of men out of there to demonstrate His own glory in them. Is that wrong? Did He rip the other men off? What did he do?

You’ve got two choices. God saves a group of people by His own sovereignty and free will or everyone goes to Hell. Because men are that evil.

See what you don’t realize because of the humanistic Christianity in America, you don’t realize that men are really evil. They really are evil. 

You ever watch Lord of the Rings? Saruman begins creating these slimy Orcs that come from the ground evil. Absolutely EVIL from their conception. Then when Aragorn and Legolas come into the picture, they start slaughtering them like insects. What happens to us when we see that? We cheer! It’s awesome to see those evil orcs slain. But that’s our problem. We don’t think that MEN are evil.

The Doctrine of inability states that men cannot come before God as Jesus says in John 6:44. Now if men can’t come before God, then you say how can God Judge them? It’s like judging a blind man because he can’t read. If man can’t come to God then man is not a culprit he’s a victim.

But here is what you have to understand. It’s not that men can’t come to God it’s that men WILL not come to God. They will not come to God and are therefore responsible.

It says in the OT that “Joseph’s brothers could not speak to him peaceably.” They all spoke Aramaic, so why couldn’t they speak to him peaceably? They couldn’t because they hated him.

Are you spiritually dead prior to conversion? Yes. Well then how do you come to Christ? If you’re spiritually blind, how do you see him? Some might say, “He draws me unto him”. But you’re a dead man.

People all over America have been raised on this. “If you believe in Jesus you can be born again.” Where is that in scripture?

All the early Baptist confessions say, “You must be born again to believe in Jesus.”

If I tell a dead man “Look, you’re dead but there is a hospital over here, put on some electrodes, get up, and follow me over to the hospital.” That is nonsensical. If he can get up, he doesn’t need a hospital.

When Jesus looked at Lazarus and said, “Lazarus, come forth.” There is a problem. Lazarus is dead. How does he hear the command? The command must not only be given, but Lazarus must be resurrected to be able to hear the command and respond.

This is why you’re sitting there in church not caring about God or the sermon that is being preached. Maybe you made a profession of faith when you were younger, and then…nothing. Then one day, the gospel is preached  to you and (Woosh!) The blinders are taken off and not only that, you want him. People like the Armenians and the Pelagians say, “God draws me to a certain point and then gives us a choice.” There is only one problem. If God only illuminates the mind of a sinner, then the more the person see’s God, the more they want to run away.

So not only does He change the mind, but He illuminates the heart. You then can say, I love Him. I want Him. I am irresistibly drawn to Him.

What would Jesus do? No you got it all wrong. You should be reading it as WDJD (What DID Jesus Do)

According to Bill Bright, founder and chairman of Campus Crusade for Christ, 2% of professing Christians actively share their faith. I ask myself, why is that?

Is it the fear of man? Afraid of being called out and humiliated among your peers? Maybe you’re afraid that the very mention of Jesus will divide a relationship that you’ve been cultivating. A little strange wouldn’t you say for just mentioning a name, unless of course there is more to his claims that just words.

I personally think its because we don’t feel equipped enough to do it. A soldier isn’t any good with a leaf blower (unless you put a wooden stake in it like in the movie From Dusk Till Dawn) Give the soldier a Katana, and you’re set!

Now you guys have all heard of the acronym WWJD. This principle is great for those who have an understanding of scripture and a sensitive conscience. But like many things in life, people can abuse that statement and use it incorrectly. For example, someone might say. “What would Jesus do? Well he certainly wouldn’t go around judging people and telling them their world view is incorrect. He wouldn’t be telling people that he is the way the truth and the life. That’s not very loving”.

Guess what? Jesus did just that.

Unfortunately, many professing Christians use this to criticize many of their brothers and sisters who are also followers of Christ.

How easy is it to create a different Jesus as Paul says in Galatians 1? How easy is it to see Jesus as this nice guy from the 60’s preaching love, tolerance, and peace? - Basically, this guy below.

So its about time we ask ourselves, “What DID Jesus do”?

Lets look at Luke 18:18-23

A certain ruler asked Jesus, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life? Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. You know the commandments: ‘You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.”

“All these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said.

When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was very wealthy.

What an opportunity this guy had! He had the unique chance to ask God how to inherit eternal life! Now what did Jesus say? Did he say, “My son, in a little while, I will be taken by guards and nailed to a cross. All you need to do is say a simple prayer asking the holy spirit into your heart and believe that I died for your sins. Got it?”

No. Take notice here. Jesus instead says, “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.”

Jesus is correcting this mans perception of what “good” is.

He then goes on later to list the commandments. “You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.”

Now why would Jesus say something like this? He didn’t pray with the man, he didn’t mention anything about the cross. It kinds sounds like a lost opportunity. This guy really lucked out! LAME!

If you walked down the street and asked someone, “Do you think you’re a good person?” Chances are they will say “yes” and list all the good things they’ve done, just like the man in this story.

Proverbs 20:6 says:
“Most men will proclaim each his own goodness.”

But Jesus still found something he was guilty of. No one but Jesus is perfect. Have they ever told a lie? Have they ever coveted? Have they ever looked lustfully at a man or woman? I think the key is really forcing the person to examine their hearts. If you can expose their sin in a non-confrontational way, they start to see that they really aren’t good at all - which is the key to understanding grace.

First we need to understand their idea of what “goodness” is and then take them through the commandments. Do they live up to those standards that God has laid out? No.

After all, this is what Jesus did.