Taking the Lord's Name in Vain - Oh, My God!

Our adversary is very clever. For millennia, he has been working tirelessly to cloud the minds of
humanity by means of underhanded, subtle trickery. Challenge to obvious truth is too risky, but stirring confusion with what is already confusing is an inevitable recipe for success.

The examples of Satan's brilliance in this area are nearly endless. Christendom as a whole has bought into his many lies, hook line and sinker. Satan wants Christians to deny the literal death of Christ; what bettter way to accomplish his task than to introduce a concept like the trinity, which denies Christ's death while at the same time proclaiming His majesty as "God?" Our enemy thrives on Christians rejecting God's sovereignty. Is there a better way to convince them that they are more powerful than their Maker than by introducing the false doctrine of free will, which makes God seem generous but at the same time powerless?

Christendom is littered with popular vignettes that seem, on their surface, to line up with Scripture, but in reality oppose it. Here are a few examples: "All sins are equal in the eyes of God," "God helps those who help themselves," "Jesus is my copilot," "Christians must go to church," and "prayer changes things."

One of these more subtle lies is the notion that taking the Lord's name in vain means saying "Oh, my God" or "God, damn it." When asked, most Christians claim that these phrases take the Lord's name in vain by using His name in an "empty" or "meaningless" way. After all - they reason - God's name should not be used flippantly or disrespectfully.

When we read through the Law of Moses and discover that God forbade taking His name in vain as one of the ten commandments to the Hebrews, we should pause to consider whether something as trifle as saying "Oh my God" really constitutes taking the Lord's name in vain. Among the commandments, we find that God's ideal includes not murdering, stealing, or committing adultery. Can a simple three-word phrase really measure up to those sins? Is an everyday phrase on the same level? Can we picture God squirming in anguish when His name is used by someone who is merely reacting in surprise?

To anyone with a brain, it should be crystal clear that taking the Lord's name in vain does not mean saying "Oh my God" or "God damn it!" What, then, does it mean?

Let's first examine the two notorious phrases. What are we saying when we say "Oh, my God?" For one, we are calling out to God! We are acknowledging His existence, and in our surprise, we are actually acknowledging His sovereignty in a sense. Granted, those who frequently use the phrase do not think of this when they say it, but the phrase implies this nonetheless. What about the phrase "God damn it?" This undoubtedly seems far worse to most because it includes the word "damn." Surely this must be an example of taking the Lord's name in vain!

But is it? What are we really saying when we say "God, damn it?" In frustration, we are asking God to "damn," or "curse" the things that caused us frustration. In the original text, to "damn" meant to "down-judge." We might as well say, "God, curse this!" Is there any harm in asking God to curse something that's harmful?

If taking the Lord's name in vain doesn't mean what most think it means, we should attempt to determine what it does mean. As with most dilemmas, we should consult an accurate translation of Scripture to arrive at the truth. When we do (such as the Concordant), we discover that taking the Lord's name in vain means using His name in a futile, or useless way, with no practical result.

God is not concerned with people referencing Him as part of a common phrase. What He is concerned about is people taking up His name for no purpose or for falsity. If I make a false and detrimental claim in the name of God, I have taken His name in vain because I have ascribed His name to something He never decreed. I have "forged His signature," in a sense. To "take" God's name is to use His name. Using His name falsely is taking His name in vain.

A while back, my daughter said "Oh, my God." A while back, Benny Hinn said, "In the name of God I cast out your demon." Which of the two took the Lord's name in vain?

© 2013 by Stephen Hill

Are We ALL God's Children?

The children of the flesh, not these are the children of God, but the children of the promise is He 

reckoning for the seed.                 -Romans 9:8

One of Christendom's most popular phrases is "we are all the children of God." Christians habitually use this phrase in an effort to demonstrate God's love while at the same time hypocritically believing He delights in tormenting nearly all of His children without end. Popes have frequently used the phrase when addressing large crowds from around the world in an effort to promote unity and ecumenism, and church billboards bear the phrase along highways at every turn. 

The claim that all people are God's children appears to promote God's loving nature and providence. It seems on its surface to be harmless and immune to speculation. Yet, as is the case with most of Christendom's most popular idioms, the notion that all people are God's children is unbiblical and misleading. 

In the passage above, Paul plainly informs the Romans that only the children of the promise bear the right to be called "God's children." In Colossians 1:16, though, Paul points out that everyone is created by God, which seems to indicate that we are all, by nature, His children. In order to understand Paul, we must recognize what, exactly, is meant by the term "child of God." 

The term "child" is just that - a term. It is a title which, like all titles, takes on a particular meaning in relation to the context in which it is used. This fact is true of all titles in all languages. A good example of this fact can be seen with the title "god." In 2 Corinthians 4:4, Satan is referred to as the "god of this eon." This seems shocking until we recognize that "god" is a title which derives its meaning from context. A "god," by definition, is a subjector - one who, by authority, subjects others beneath himself. It is fitting, then, that Satan be labeled a god, but not in the same sense as the Almighty God (with a capital "G"). 

Deciphering titles is extremely important as we attempt to uncover truth. By referring to Christ as "God," we may mean that He is in every way coequal with the Father, or that He is a subjector. If we mean the former, we make a grave error and ultimately deny the literal death of Christ; if we mean the latter, we recognize the truth. It is crucial to always narrowly define titles.

When we apply this rule to the term "children," it becomes clear that we must distinguish between the various meanings of the title "child" in the Scriptures. We are all God's children in the sense that we are all His creation and under His sovereign control, but we are not all His children in terms of our sonship. 

We tend to define what it means to be a child in biological terms. I refer to myself as the child of my parents because I am their biological offspring. In relation to God, though, no one except Christ has ever been biologically fathered by God. To be God's child, then, is not defined in biological terms, but in spiritual terms. How is one, according to Scripture then, a child of God?

In John 1:12-13, we read, "Yet whoever obtained Him, to them He gives the right to become children of God, to those who are believing in His name, who were begotten, not of bloods, neither of the will of the flesh, neither of the will of a man, but of God." Likewise, 1 John 3:1 states, "Perceive what manner of love the Father has given us, that we may be called children of God! And we are! Therefore the world does not know us, for it did not know Him."

Writing to Israel, John, like Paul, makes it clear that believers bear the unique right to be called the children of God. He makes the distinction between believers and those of the world who "did not know" God. In John 8:42-44, we witness Jesus rebuking the Pharisees, saying, "If God were your Father, you would have loved Me" and, "You are of your father, the Adversary."

Were the Pharisees created by God and in His image? Yes. Did Jesus refer to them as the children of God? No. He did the complete opposite by calling them children of the Adversary! 

As believers, we have been given the glorious privilege to be called the children of God! Through faith, we have been adopted as sons (Rom. 8:14-16, Gal. 3:26 & 4:5-6, Eph. 1:5). As God's adopted children, we are "especially saved" (1 Tim. 4:10) and graciously granted eonian life.

Yet, as the Creator of all, God will eventually show Himself to be the Father of all! Though unbelievers do not recognize God's fatherhood now, they one day will when He draws all men to Himself (John 12:32, 1 Cor. 15:28). They will be separated from their present father, the Adversary, and adopted by their loving Father Who, through His only begotten Son, has redeemed them. For now, believers alone bear the right to be called God's children, but in due time everyone will learn to cry "Abba, Father!"

© 2013 by Stephen Hill 

A Servant or a Slave?

I recently watched a short video of a Bible translation committee debating how to translate a particular Greek word. In an effort to be consistent, the committee members agreed from the outset that once they determined how to translate the word, they would translate it the same way in every passage it appears. The word they debated was the Greek word doulos.

The KJV translates doulos consistently as "servant" (as do most versions), and a handful of versions (including the Concordant Version) translate it as "slave." The committee in the video debated over which of these two English words would most appropriately communicate the meaning of the original Greek. Nearly every member of the committee agreed that "slave" is, in fact, the accurate transliteration of the Greek doulos. However, the majority felt that "slave" possesses too negative a connotation and that modern readers would be misled by the true translation or too disgusted to appreciate the text. In the end, the committee concluded, by majority vote, to translate doulos as "servant" in spite of its inaccuracy.

This tragic and all too common occurrence serves as an example of how poorly most Bible translations are produced. Rather than trusting in God's ability to communicate His truth in the most effective way, translators feel the need to help God by making His message more palatable. In doing so, countless readers are misled.

In this article, I will attempt to demonstrate just how detrimental the error of this translation committee is and why we who seek truth should care. Rather than attempt to "help" God and make this subject easier to swallow, I will present His Word, just as it is, and trust in its ability to communicate truth to the reader.

Strong's defines doulos as "a slave... in a qualified sense of subjection or subservience." The word is derived from the Greek deo, meaning "to bind... in bonds, knit, tie, etc." A doulos, then, is a slave or bondsman, literally bound in service.

To most, the distinction between a slave and a servant is not a matter of vital importance. The two terms seem to be more or less interchangeable. A slave certainly serves, and many servants may feel like slaves. Yet there is, in fact, a significant difference between these two terms - namely, that a servant acts voluntarily and is hired by his master, whereas a slave's action is often involuntary and he is owned by his master. In addition, a slave is bound while a servant is unbound. 

The committee members I discussed were certainly correct in their assessment that slavery bears an intensely negative connotation in our modern age. As Americans, we recall the brutal treatment of many slaves leading up to the Civil War, and this imagery is so imbedded in our minds that we can hardly escape associating the term with tragedy. To fully appreciate Paul's meaning when he uses the term, we must attempt to view slavery in light of what our apostle meant and not what our minds conjure up.

Understanding that we are slaves of God and Christ and not mere servants causes us to see our sonship in a new light. It causes us to recognize that we are owned by our Maker as Christ has paid a price for us. We are bound to God as sons, not commissioned as strangers.

Paul confidently identified himself as a "slave of Christ Jesus" (Rom. 1:1, Gal. 1:10, Phil. 1:1) and a "slave of God" (Tit. 1:1). This title is not something to be ashamed of in Paul's view, but is rather a glorious position to hold! As imitators of our apostle, we should strive to view our slavery to God and Christ in the same way. Yet how is this possible when slavery seems to possess no benefits? How is it that we are "free in Christ" (Rom. 8:2, Gal. 5:1) but also His slaves?

Paul explains this paradox in 1 Corinthians 7 where he states, "In the Lord, he who is being called a slave, is the Lord's freedman. Likewise, he who is being called, being free, is a slave of Christ. With a price are you bought" (1 Cor. 7:22).

So, according to Paul, our slavery to Christ makes us free. Free from what, though? Fortunately, Paul also answers this question. In Romans 8:2, we read that "the spirit's law of life in Christ Jesus frees you from the law of sin and death" and in verse 21 that we "shall be freed from the slavery of corruption."

As we are no longer slaves to sin and death, we are now sons; and as sons, enjoyers of an "allotment from God, through Christ" (Gal. 4:7). We are bound as slaves to God - not in the worldly sense as loathsome, despised creatures - but as cherished sons. Unlike worldly slave masters who were cruel and abusive, our Father - the perfect "Slave Master" - is perfect and loving. Our slavery to God and Christ is, in every sense, the opposite of our previous slavery to sin and death!

In conclusion, Paul's depiction of our dual slavery and freedom in God and Christ is this: We are slaves, bought and owned by our Master, Who is the perfect and loving Caregiver. Our slavery, which we cannot voluntarily enter or leave, provides us with freedom from the bondage of sin and death and binds us, instead, to life and glory. We are no longer slaves to sin and death, but are slaves now to God and Christ, making us sons and enjoyers of the allotment.

Thank God that we are His slaves, not merely His servants!

© 2013 by Stephen Hill

The Irony of Spiritual Maturity

When we hear the term "maturity," we tend to equate it with good behavior and adulthood. To the world - and, in fact, most believers - maturity is best defined in terms of age and conduct. We may refer to a teenager as "mature" because he is going through puberty. In this sense, maturity bears a physical definition. Then again, we may refer to a much younger child as "mature" because she acts much older than her age. In this case, maturity is defined in terms of conduct rather than age or physical characteristics. To the world, maturity, in every sense, revolves around adulthood. To be mature in the world's eyes, we must be an adult, act like an adult, or both.

Considering how opposite the world's ways are to God's, it will do us well to consult the Scriptures in search of God's definition for what it means to be mature as a believer, and in particular, what it means to be spiritually mature. When we do, we find (not surprisingly) that the world's definition of maturity leaves much to be desired.

The loftiest goal of every believer should be to come into a greater realization of God and His Son. God desires to be known, and the more we understand Who He is, the better we know Him. It stands to reason, then, that knowledge should be one of our primary endeavors. Paul continually confirms this in his epistles. To the Corinthians, Paul upheld knowledge as a spiritual gift (1 Cor. 12:8). To the Colossians, he shared his prayer that they would be "filled full with the realization of [God's] will, in all wisdom and spiritual understanding... growing in the realization of God" (Col. 1:9-10). To the Ephesians, he stressed "the realization of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature of the complement of the Christ, that we may by no means still be minors" (Eph. 4:13-14).

Yet in spite of Paul's emphasis on knowledge, we also witness him telling the Corinthians that "knowledge puffs up, yet love builds up" (1 Cor. 8:1). Paul's words here may be better understood with the phrasing "knowledge inflates pride, but love edifies." Growing in knowledge, therefore, requires a great deal of humility. We must be careful to always keep our ego at bay as increasing in knowledge has the potential to give us a feeling of superiority.

Paul often preached a different message to the nations than Jesus preached to Israel, but in this case we find what it means to be spiritually mature in Jesus' words as well as Paul's. Contrary to the popular worldview that maturity revolves around adulthood, Jesus informed the Jews that "who, then, will be humbling himself as [a] little child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of the heavens" (Matt. 18:4, Lu. 18:17). What exactly does Jesus' statement mean? If we are to endeavor to increase in our knowledge, how can we also be like little children who are greatly lacking in knowledge?

This is the irony of spiritual maturity. To be mature, we must increase in knowledge while, at the same time, becoming more child-like. As adults, we have experienced the realities and hardships of life and tend to be more skeptical, cynical, and pessimistic. We also tend to be more arrogant because of our increased knowledge. Children, on the other hand are, by their very nature, humble because they rely on their parents and other adults to care for them and to teach them everything. They believe all things, endure all things, and hope for all things. Because of their humility, children are much more apt to live out faith and love. They are more trusting, and that trust is a key to maturity.

To the world, being more "adult" means being independent and untrusting. Behaving like an adult means adhering to societally accepted norms. For the believer, rooted in true knowledge of God and strong faith, we strive for the exact opposite. As we grow in faith, we become increasingly more dependent on our Father, more trusting of Him, and more eager to follow His ways than the world's. In doing so, we experience persecution from others who view us as ignorant and foolish (i.e., more child-like).

It is important to note that when Jesus upheld children as a model He was not promoting a childish lack of knowledge or poor behavior. He was very specific in the child-like quality He praised, which is humility. The Pharisees possessed knowledge coupled with a great deal of pride, and Jesus stressed their need for humility to be mature. In saying "we see" their sin remained.

In 1 Corinthians 3, Paul refers to the Corinthians as "minors in Christ" to whom he gave milk to drink rather than solid food to eat (spiritually speaking). The reason, according to Paul, is that they were "still fleshly... walking according to man." The issue among the ecclesia at Corinth was not a lack of knowledge; it was their lack of humility which caused them to act inappropriately. They knew the message Paul had preached to them, but they reacted in a worldly (fleshly) way by letting their knowledge inflate their pride, whereas a humble response would have caused them to react in a godly (spiritual) way.

Thus, Paul's use of the term "minors" is not a contradiction of Jesus' words on children. The Corinthians Paul addressed were "minors" in the sense that they possessed knowledge of the truth but had fallen into the trap of putting their knowledge above love for one another. Like the Pharisees, they made the mistake of being too prideful because of their knowledge. Had they been mature, they would have put love above all. In this sense, they would have actually been more child-like.

From the examples of Jesus and Paul, we see that spiritual maturity requires grown-up knowledge coupled with child-like humility. If either is missing, we will remain minors in Christ. The good news is that the more we come into a true knowledge and understanding of our Father, the more child-like we will become! The more we know of God's goodness, the more we will trust Him as a child trusts his parents. The more we recognize His perfection, the more we will believe His promises as a child believes. The more we understand the wonders of grace, the more humble we will become.

In short, spiritual maturity is an ironic equation. Adult-like knowledge, plus child-like humility, equals spiritual maturity. To the world, an increase in knowledge leads to a decrease in faith; but to those who believe, the opposite is true. The more we know our Father, the more we trust Him and yearn to be His faithful children.

© 2013 by Stephen Hill

Learning to Cry "Daddy!"

Throughout His Word, God refers to Himself by many different titles. Each of these titles possesses a specific meaning which is intended to convey a unique characteristic of God's holiness, might, and provision. In light of this fact, it is no surprise that God first revealed many of His titles to Israel in order to provide His people with a fuller and more intimate understanding of His nature.

When we confine our search for titles to the epistles of our apostle, Paul, we find an interesting trend. Unlike the Hebrew Scriptures which emphasize an endless array of God's characteristics, Paul confines His depiction of God almost exclusively to one title - that of Father.

Of course, Paul often refers to God simply as "God," but even in those cases He often includes the title "Father" along with "God." In fact, in every single one of his epistles, Paul begins with a brief self-acknowledgement followed by the greeting, "Grace to you and peace from God, our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ." The only exceptions to this rule are his letters to Timothy in which he includes "mercy" with his greeting: "Grace, mercy, peace, from God, our Father, and Christ Jesus, our Lord." 

In his second letter to the Corinthians, Paul extends his greeting by referring to God as the "Father of pities and God of all consolation." Then, in Ephesians 1:17, he calls Him the "Father of glory."

Clearly, Paul made it a point to emphasize God's nature as our Father above the many other titles He possesses. As imitators of Paul and members of His evangel, we would do well to take this fact to heart as we come into a greater realization of God's relationship to us. We are privileged to view God in a much more intimate way than Israel previously had been allowed. Having the spirit of sonship, we can cry "Abba, Father!" (Rom. 8:15) and call God not only by the title Father, but by the affectionate, warm title, "Daddy!"

When we fully grasp this amazing and heart warming truth, all our fears subside. For, what child fears a loving father? When we recognize the comforting closeness of our Dad, it is impossible to not trust Him. For, what son or daughter refuses to trust completely in their daddy when they know he is working all out for their good (Rom. 8:28)? 

No matter what we face, we know that it is part of our Father's perfect plan for our lives and that it is for our good! We have, literally, nothing to fear!

In John 13, we see a beautiful image of what our relationship to our Daddy looks like. In this passage, the beloved disciple John is "lying back in the bosom of Jesus." As the visible image of the invisible Father, we can look to Jesus to see what our relationship with the Father looks like in tangible form. We can picture ourselves, like John, resting against our Daddy in complete comfort and peace.

If you have not come to view God as your perfect, loving, and comforting Father, turn to Paul's epistles. Do not hold yourself hostage by a false, fearful view of God as a tyrant or the view Israel had prior to Christ's death and resurrection. Be a son or daughter as you are a son or daughter. Be at peace as you picture yourself resting in your comforting Daddy's loving arms. 

© 2013 by Stephen Hill

Learning to Walk the Talk

A man had two sons; and coming to the first, he said, "Son, go work today in my vineyard." He answered, "I will, sir," but went not. And coming to the second, he said the same. And he answering, said, "I will not;" but afterwards repenting, he went. Which of the two performed the father's will? They say, "The latter."            

-Matthew 21:28-31, Emphatic Diaglott

This passage from Matthew is one of the lesser-known of Jesus' ministry. This may be due, in part, to the fact that it is shorter than the majority of Jesus' parables. While less known and shorter, however, it is no less meaningful.

In this parable, Jesus paints the picture of two sons who react in opposing ways to their father's request. The first son states that he will do what his father requests but does not keep his word, while the second initially refuses and then changes his mind. Jesus asks, "Which of the two performed the father's will?" The correct answer, as indicated in the text, is the son who actually does his father's will in spite of initially saying he wouldn't.

How often do you say "no" to God when initially confronted with His will? Each and every one of us can identify with one of the two brothers in this parable with nearly every major decision in our lives. We tend to either say "yes" but not act upon our word, or say "no" and eventually do what is right.

We've all heard the slogan, "You can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?" Unlike the majority of Christendom's mantras, this one is actually valid. In His parable of the two sons, Jesus depicts one son who merely says (talks), while another actually does (walks). The son who "walks" is given credit as the one who does his father's will, in spite of his initial refusal.

This parable teaches us two important lessons. First: we do no not have to say "yes" from the outset to do God's will. What's important is that we eventually do it! Second: our actions are more important than our words. What we actually do is more meaningful than what we merely say we will do.

Throughout my life, I have, at times, said that I would do certain things and have delayed doing them or, even, never done them. In each instance where I have neglected to act, the results have not been favorable. On the other hand, I have occasionally refused to act at first but have decided to act at a later date. In those cases, the results have been favorable.

In Jesus' story, the son who said "yes" would have been viewed more favorably by his father for his initial obedience. Without hesitation, he agreed to do what his father asked. On the contrary, the other son whose heart seemed, at first, to be rebellious, would have been viewed less favorably by his father. When all was said and done and the father knew what each son had done, he would have viewed each son in an opposite light. The one son's words mean nothing when he doesn't act; the other son's eventual action means everything in spite of his negative words.

I meet many people who struggle with doing, at first, what they know to be right. These people allow their fears to prevent them from being unquestionably obedient to God. This makes sense, of course, given the fact that a life of faith is filled with trial and suffering which nobody welcomes with open arms. In Jesus' story about the two sons, neither son wanted to work in the father's vineyard; neither welcomed the idea of manual labor in the hot sun. Their willingness to work or not work was dependent on their desire to obey their father and trust in his judgment. The same can be said of us. When confronted with God's will in our personal lives, we will rarely want to do it. It will seem in nearly every case to be the harder road. Faithfulness, then, demands trust in God's promises which leads us to obey.

Jesus taught this story to demonstrate to the self-righteous Pharisees that it was not enough for them to merely say "yes" to God. Their words made them appear obedient, but their actions proved that they were disobedient. No doubt, this hypocritical paradigm is every bit as common among the religious elite today.

In Jesus' example of the two sons, neither son is entirely in the right; neither is completely mature. While the righteous son does eventually do his father's will, his initial response was not what it should have been. Rather than say "no" and eventually do his father's will, he should have said "yes" and immediately done it. The more we mature in our faith, the more we will say "yes" like the one son and do as God instructs like the other. We should strive to both say and do what is right.

Ask yourself which son you tend to align with. Do you say "yes" to God but never act accordingly, or do you say "no" and eventually overcome your fears? If your actions don't line up with your words, understand that it is not enough to merely say "yes." Your words are meaningless when they are not supported with action. On the other hand, if you tend to be defiant out of fear but eventually do what is right, make a commitment to be bold in your faith. Recognize that while following God may mean more trial at first, it means more blessing in the long run. Let your words and your deeds demonstrate a life of faithful obedience. Let your "walk" always match your "talk."

© 2013 by Stephen Hill

The ABSOLUTE Sovereignty of God

"Now at [Christ's] already drawing near to the descent of the mount of Olives, the entire multitude of the disciples begins rejoicing, praising God with a loud voice concerning all the powerful deeds which they perceived, saying, 'Blessed be the King coming in the name of the Lord! In heaven peace, and glory among the highest!' And some of the Pharisees from the throng say to Him, 'Teacher, rebuke your disciples!' And answering, He said to them, 'I am saying to you that, if ever these will be silent, the stones will be crying.'"                        

- Luke 19:37-40

For me, this passage in Luke is one of the most moving in all of Scripture. Imagine Jesus walking amidst a quiet crowd and the inanimate stones on the ground suddenly coming to life, crying out in praise! Imagine being one of the Pharisees He addressed with such a humbling, powerful claim.

More than anything, this passage serves to prove the absolute sovereignty of God. It is important that we include "absolute" or a similarly all-encompassing term when we describe God's sovereignty because, unlike the sovereignty of earthly rulers, God's sovereignty is not limited in any way. He is in complete control over everything in His creation, no matter how seemingly insignificant.

Nearly all professing Christians uphold God's sovereignty on the surface; but dig beneath the surface and you will soon discover many underlying layers which prove that they really view God as anything but sovereign. The God of Christendom is one of great power but shocking inability. He has the desire and power to save all humanity, but man's authority overpowers His will. He intends for the world to be perfect, but man's continual failure forces Him to, instead, spend all of His time putting out fires. In short, the God of Christendom is not the RulER of men; He is the RulED of men.

The greatest assault on the sovereignty of God is the false doctrine of man's free will. In order for man's will to be "free," God must relinquish His authority. Many make the claim that God sovereignly chooses to give man free will. In this way, God appears to retain His control when He has actually given it up. Few claims defy logic as much as this one.

"Sovereign" is a title which is upheld by a set of specific qualities. When the qualities that define the title are absent, the title is no longer valid. Thus, for God to be called "sovereign," He must be sovereign! He cannot give up the characteristics that define His title and still retain the title. According to the doctrine of man's free will, it is man, not God, who is - by definition - sovereign.

Fortunately, Christendom's assault on God's sovereignty is, itself, under God's sovereign control. God has planned man's ignorance and every other wicked occurrence (Is. 45:7) in order to fulfill His purpose. He "locks up all together in stubbornness, that He should be merciful to all" (Rom. 11:32). Man's failure was not a surprise to God - it was planned by Him! Every moment of every life has been penned before it's begun by the Great Author Who has our every hair numbered (Ma. 10:30). No particle of dust, gust of wind, blade of grass or grain of sand moves along its course apart from the Almighty Creator's command. The sun, moon and stars radiate their light and heat at their Maker's direction. All things - great or small, vast or microscopic - are created, sustained and directed at every second by the hand of Almighty God.

It is impossible for us in our current mortal state to come even close to grasping the awesomeness of God. We can hardly do two things at once, let alone control every atom in existence! God spoke creation into existence. (Please read the prior sentence again.) Questioning God's power is entirely out of the question. 

Because of man's inability to fathom the level of God's control, many view Him as more of a general manager Who controls the "big" things but doesn't bother with the "small" things. I recently had lunch with a former coworker who is on the board for a seminary in Ohio, and we discussed the sovereignty of God during our time together. He was quite taken aback by my claim that God manages even the most seemingly insignificant details of creation, and in response he said, "Well, I believe God controls the big things but not every minor detail. For example, I believe that He orchestrated us both coming to work for the same company, but not that He orchestrated us having lunch together today."

This attitude toward God's sovereignty is, without a doubt, the norm. Yet, where do we draw the line? Is it any easier for God to manage the trillions of "big" things in life than the big and small? If any of the "small" things that are not under God's control happen to cause a problem, what is the result? Clearly, if God is sovereign over all creation, there is nothing left to chance and nothing He regards as unimportant.

Proverbs 16:33 says, "The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord." The casting of lots was an ancient custom for randomly choosing the winner of a prize. We see the casting of lots several times in Scripture, including among the Roman soldiers at Christ's crucifixion and when the disciples chose Matthias to replace Judas. Small bits of stone, wood or other materials (the lots) were thrown (cast) into a garment (lap), and each lot was assigned to one person. The one whose lot fell out first won the prize. 

No doubt, most people view this type of activity as entirely random (one of the "small" things God doesn't bother managing); but this passage in Proverbs informs us that what's random to us isn't random at all to God. The decision of the lot - its direction - is ordained by God. 

The more we come into a realization of God's sovereignty, the more humble and at peace we become. When we see dust particles shimmering in a beam of light and realize that each of their courses is plotted by God, we are able to do nothing but fall to our knees in awe. When we recognize that every action and event is not only allowed by God but commanded by Him, we can rest assured, knowing that nothing is left to chance and that all will turn out just as it should. Most importantly, when we realize that it is God's will, not ours, that is free, we can experience the joy that comes from knowing that our Father sent His Son to save all without giving anyone the "freedom" to reject Him.

© 2013 by Stephen Hill