QC and SG accountability (12/10/18)
Eugene shared about a recent gathering where 2 OT passages (Jer 29:11-14 and 2 Ki 13:14-19) were used (?abused) and asked ourselves whether it was fair to apply the promises and principles in these passages to ourselves. After all, the first passage is for the Israelites in exile in Babylon, and the second is a somewhat bizzare action we are unlikely to perform (hit arrows on the ground).
We said that, yes - If the passage has to do with the character of God, or the way in which God deals with His people, then the passages can be applied to us as the new Israel, the people of God. God does not change (Heb 13:8). The OT also looks forward to the NT and is quoted in the NT in ways which support this principle. For example, the blessings of the new covenant are alluded to in Jer 32:39--40. Rom 8:28 restates the same idea explicitly.
On the other hand, we cannot fully apply passages where God speaks to his people as a nation-state.So promises of material prosperity, for instance in Deut 28, cannot be taken to support prosperity teaching today. It would also be wholly inappropriate to take the promises of God to the nation of Israel in the OT and apply them to the present-day state of Israel, or America, or Singapore.This is not to say (c.f. Rom 11) that there will not be a great turning of ethnic Jews to Jesus before He returns.
We should be cautious about applying narrative passages to our own experience. With the 2 Ki 13 passage it is valid to draw the principles that 1) God wants us to be wholehearted in our response to His word 2) He often wants to do more for us than we can ask or imagine.
We noted that the story of Elisha continues after his death, when his bones bring life to the dead (2 Ki 13:20-21). This, and passages such as Ac 19:11 and Lk 8:44) have been used to support the Roman Catholic view of relics. I am reluctant to say that God does not perform such 'extraordinary miracles' (Ac 19:11) today. I think some people have their faith (= 'trusting dependence") focused and strengthened through physical objects. But this is not the NT norm, and should not be our norm as well. Faith is not a quantifiable material that empowers us to achieve miracles once we accumulate and reach a certain level of faith. Jesus taught that the quantity of faith is not as important as the object of our faith (Mt 17:20). Some have a gift of extraordinary faith (1 Co 13:2) that enables them to perform miracles, but I think that in the usual cause of events the factor that determines the effect (healing, miracles) is God's power and will coupled with believing prayer. "Commanding" healing (which implies authority) and "claiming" healing (which implies right or entitlement) are not things I think we should be doing without clear discernment from the Holy Spirit.
We said that, yes - If the passage has to do with the character of God, or the way in which God deals with His people, then the passages can be applied to us as the new Israel, the people of God. God does not change (Heb 13:8). The OT also looks forward to the NT and is quoted in the NT in ways which support this principle. For example, the blessings of the new covenant are alluded to in Jer 32:39--40. Rom 8:28 restates the same idea explicitly.
On the other hand, we cannot fully apply passages where God speaks to his people as a nation-state.So promises of material prosperity, for instance in Deut 28, cannot be taken to support prosperity teaching today. It would also be wholly inappropriate to take the promises of God to the nation of Israel in the OT and apply them to the present-day state of Israel, or America, or Singapore.This is not to say (c.f. Rom 11) that there will not be a great turning of ethnic Jews to Jesus before He returns.
We should be cautious about applying narrative passages to our own experience. With the 2 Ki 13 passage it is valid to draw the principles that 1) God wants us to be wholehearted in our response to His word 2) He often wants to do more for us than we can ask or imagine.
We noted that the story of Elisha continues after his death, when his bones bring life to the dead (2 Ki 13:20-21). This, and passages such as Ac 19:11 and Lk 8:44) have been used to support the Roman Catholic view of relics. I am reluctant to say that God does not perform such 'extraordinary miracles' (Ac 19:11) today. I think some people have their faith (= 'trusting dependence") focused and strengthened through physical objects. But this is not the NT norm, and should not be our norm as well. Faith is not a quantifiable material that empowers us to achieve miracles once we accumulate and reach a certain level of faith. Jesus taught that the quantity of faith is not as important as the object of our faith (Mt 17:20). Some have a gift of extraordinary faith (1 Co 13:2) that enables them to perform miracles, but I think that in the usual cause of events the factor that determines the effect (healing, miracles) is God's power and will coupled with believing prayer. "Commanding" healing (which implies authority) and "claiming" healing (which implies right or entitlement) are not things I think we should be doing without clear discernment from the Holy Spirit.
Comments
Post a Comment