Can God Forgive Me?

"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:9). That promise ought to bring immense comfort to every child of God. If we have sinned, forgiveness is always available. But do we sometimes sabotage our forgiveness by inventing limitations on God’s promise? We do when we say…

"God can’t forgive me of this." This person thinks God’s forgiveness only covers certain sins. He thinks what he has done is so bad that God could never forgive him. We do need to recognize sin’s ugliness, but we must also recognize the depth of God’s mercy. The promise is, "If we confess, He will forgive." And the Bible shows us God forgiving even the ugliest sins: the adultery of David, the blasphemy and persecution of Paul, the vile immorality of the Corinthians. If He could forgive those, He can forgive you.

"God can’t forgive me again." This person thinks God’s forgiveness has a maximum payout limit, and he has exceeded it. He has struggled with sin many times. Each time his remorse has been genuine, his repentance sincere. But here he is again. He is ashamed to seek God’s mercy. But the promise is, "If we confess, He will forgive." Jesus said, "If [your brother] sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times comes back to you and says, ‘I repent,’ forgive him" (Luke 17:4, NIV). If such mercy is commanded of us, then we can count on even greater mercy from the One who commanded it.

"God can’t forgive me yet." This person thinks God’s forgiveness has extra conditions. He may be willing to confess his sin, but not until he first proves his worthiness. Now, repentance certainly demands a change of conduct, and it may well involve specific actions like returning something I stole or correcting slanderous remarks (see Luke 19:8). But it’s foolish to think that piling up noble deeds makes me worthy of forgiveness, or that it will substitute for confessing my sin. Repentance and confession are about acknowledging my unworthiness! This is the folly of the concept of doing penance. It is also the folly of the wayward Christian who says, "I’ll come back after I get my life straightened out." The promise is, "If we confess, He will forgive." Let’s take God at His word.

King Manasseh's Repentance

Manasseh was the fourteenth ruler of Judah. His 55-year reign was the longest of any of Judah’s kings — and arguably the worst. He rebuilt the “high places” of pagan worship and made altars to foreign gods, even in the temple of the Lord itself. He worshiped the sun, moon, and stars, practiced witchcraft, consulted mediums, and even practiced child sacrifice. He filled Jerusalem with the blood of innocent people. God’s verdict was that Manasseh had made Judah more wicked than the nations that God had driven out of Canaan centuries before (see 2 Kings 21; 2 Chronicles 33).

God punished Manasseh by allowing him to be carried off in disgrace by the Assyrians (2 Chronicles 33:11). Held captive in Babylon, the king humbled himself and prayed to God. The Lord restored Manasseh to his kingdom, and he began the work of setting things right. He fortified Judah’s cities, removed the altars and idols, and commanded the people to serve the Lord.

Manasseh is a memorable example of God’s mercy on those who repent. Praise God that He will forgive us even after we have done so much evil! As the Lord later said through Ezekiel:

But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die. All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him (Ezekiel 18:21-22).

However, while Manasseh’s repentance brought forgiveness in his own life, there was some damage that could not be undone. His repentance didn’t restore the innocent lives he had taken. The children who had perished in the flames of idol worship, the victims of Manasseh’s persecution, all were still dead. No amount of tears could bring them back.

Manasseh’s repentance didn’t salvage his influence on his family. Most scholars believe the king’s change of heart came very late in life — too late, it seems, to prevent his own son from following his early example of ungodliness. When Manasseh died and Amon took the throne, he “multiplied guilt” (2 Chronicles 33:23).

Manasseh’s repentance didn’t erase the stain he had left on the nation. His reforms never fully changed the hearts of the people; idolatry and wickedness still festered in one form or another (2 Chronicles 33:17). Nearly 30 years after his death, God’s temple was still in disrepair, the book of the Law missing (2 Kings 22:8). Furthermore, Manasseh could not avert the judgment that God promised to bring on Judah because of his evil (2 Kings 21:14; Jeremiah 15:4).

There’s a lesson in all this that we sorely need to learn: God’s forgiveness erases sin’s damnation, but not necessarily all of its damage. Even when we’re done with sin, it may not be done with us! It can have lasting effects on our bodies, our minds, our finances, our relationships. It can affect one life or many. As God warned Israel, “Be sure your sin will find you out” (Numbers 32:23).

This highlights a huge defect in modern thinking: we think being forgiven of sin should mean being exempt from any consequences whatsoever. God does not promise that! He forgives sexual immorality, but that doesn’t un-break a broken home or make an unwanted pregnancy or disease disappear (cf. Proverbs 6:27-29). God forgives drunkenness, but that doesn’t restore a diseased liver or resurrect a victim of drunk driving (cf. Proverbs 23:31f). God forgives malicious strife, but that may not wipe away the mistrust and ruined influence left behind. God forgives divorce, but that doesn’t mean one is free to remarry (Mark 10:11-12; Matthew 19:9f). God forgives laziness or neglect, but the opportunities missed cannot be regained.

God is not obligated to forgive our sins, but He has promised that He will if we repent. God is not obligated to remove all the misery that sin leaves behind, either — and He hasn’t promised to! Let Manasseh’s example encourage us to rejoice in God’s forgiveness. But let it also give us one more reason to keep from sin, knowing that “the way of the transgressor is hard” (Proverbs 13:15).

Worship: It's Not About Me

Worship has always been a fundamental part of a godly life. From Abel to Noah to Abraham to the Israelites and on, the Old Testament describes expressions of praise to God from His people (see Genesis 4:3-5; 8:20; 12:8; Exodus 15). Worship was important to early Christians, as well. The first disciples “continually devoted themselves” to it (Acts 2:42). The apostles spoke of its importance and even gave instructions to govern it (1 Corinthians 11:17f; 16:1-2; et. al.).

But these days, people are often heard to say, “I just don’t get much out of the worship services.” How do we address that problem? Maybe it will help if we consider what worship is all about.

It’s About God

By definition, God is the object of our worship. It isn’t that God needs our attention (Acts 17:24-25), but that He is worthy of our praise (Psalm 96). Worship expresses praise for God’s nature and character. It also expresses thankfulness and joy over His blessings (Colossians 3:16; James 5:13). Always, the motivation for worship is love and reverence for our Creator (see John 4:24).

Since God is the object of worship, it follows that what we do as worship should be defined not by what we want, but by what God wants. If we offer as worship what God has not authorized, how can we say that our worship is all about God? When I come to worship, it should be to give the praises of a reverent, thankful heart. Worship is not about what I get, but what I give: praise to God.

It’s About Others

God’s word teaches us to build one another up (Romans 14:19; 1 Thessalonians 5:11). The word translated “edify” or “build up” literally referred to building a house; the New Testament uses it as a metaphor for promoting spiritual growth in others. Worship is a vital means of doing this. While worship’s main purpose is to praise God, it has the added benefit of building people up in knowledge, faith, hope, and love (Hebrews 10:24-25; 1 Corinthians 14:26; Colossians 3:16).

God teaches me to seek the welfare of others before my own (Philippians 2:3-4). So when I come to worship, my thought should be how I can build up my brothers and sisters. Worship is not about what I get, but what I give: strength to my fellow saints.

It’s Not All About Me

Worship is about giving God the praise He deserves and giving my fellow-worshipers the strength they need. Remembering these purposes of worship should put an end to our quibbling and excuse-making about things like…

• Attendance. These commands and examples show that God requires us to worship. But Biblical worship is not just fulfilling a requirement; it is the outpouring of grateful hearts to God. If I reverence God and care about my brethren’s souls, I will be there. My personal want or convenience is not the issue. Like the psalmist of old, I will say, “I was glad when they said to me, ‘Let us go to the house of the Lord’” (Psalm 122:1).

• Dress. If I respect God, I will dress for worship in a respectful way. Enough said.

• Participation. If I honor God, I will join in praising Him in song, listen attentively to His word, join fervently in prayer, give cheerfully, and thoughtfully remember Christ’s death in the Supper. If I have regard for my brethren, I will teach and admonish them in song and do my part to help them stay focused on worship. Likewise, I will not do things that show disregard for God, or that distract, hinder, or discourage those who are worshiping with me.

When we gripe about getting nothing out of worship services, we’ve missed the point: worship is about giving, not getting!

Does this mean there is nothing in worship for me? Hardly. It means that, as with anything else in life, what I get out of worship depends on what I put into it. It's when I give of myself that I get the greatest blessings. But I must understand that what true worship does for me is not to appeal to my selfish interests.

A story is told about a hymn written by the great composer George Friedrich Handel. The king heard the hymn sung and complemented Handel on how much he enjoyed it. The composer humbly replied, “M’lord, I wrote it not for you to enjoy, but to make you better.” Perhaps this is the reason we don’t get more out of worship — because we think of it first as something we should enjoy rather than something that should make us better.

Through worship I am reminded of who God is — His greatness, His love, His compassion, His justice, His mercy. I am drawn closer to Him. Through worship I am strengthened by the other Christians around me. Through worship I am made better. How could I not enjoy that? How could I not get anything out of that?

Let's Talk

I have a confession to make: I’ve always disliked the “receiving line” at the close of worship assemblies — the tradition of having the preacher stand at the door of the meeting house and shake hands with everyone as they exit. I especially dislike it because I’m the preacher.

It’s not that I don’t want to talk to people. The problem is that I do want to talk to people, and you can hardly do that in a receiving line. In order to speak to everyone who files past, you can’t say much more than, “Have a nice day.” Stop to actually converse with someone, and you risk letting a dozen people slip past you un-greeted, or else you block the door and create a traffic jam (and trust me, you do not want to do that!). By the time you’ve “shaken them all out” and can take time to talk, half the folks have already gone home.

That’s often how our lives go, isn’t it? We hardly have time to spend with one another. It’s not that we don’t want to. But we have so much going on, so many different commitments. It’s hard to squeeze in any time for each other, and harder still to make that time very meaningful. Think: when was the last time you had a real conversation with another Christian about something more important than sports or the weather? When was the last time the discussion involved helping each other with faults (James 5:16), or motivating each other to better service (Hebrews 10:24), or sharing each other’s burdens (Galatians 6:2)? When was the last time the conversation turned to the spiritual health of the church, or the subject of last Wednesday’s Bible class, or someone you’d like to teach about Jesus?

Paul wrote that “Bad company corrupts good character” (1 Corinthians 15:33). “Company” in that verse denotes companionship, interaction, and even — to borrow the term from the King James Version — communication. If close association with the wicked can corrupt us, isn’t it also true that close association with Christians can strengthen us? And if so, why aren’t we seeking more of it?

This Sunday, you’ll still be able to find me in my usual spot near the door after services. (I guess I’m not ready to buck tradition just yet.) But let’s make an effort to find each other and talk. I mean really talk. Often. We need it.

Flip-Flops

I don’t like wearing flip-flops. They fall off my feet, they’re noisy, and they make me trip. You can wear them if you like, but I’d just as soon go barefoot.

There’s another kind of flip-flop that bothers me: the human flip-flop, when a person takes a dramatic U-turn in his convictions. Politicians are accused of it all the time, and often rightly so. Some are anti-abortion one week, pro-abortion the next. Today they want to cut taxes, tomorrow they want to raise them.

Sometimes Christians flip-flop, too. It usually goes like this: A Christian recognizes the Bible’s condemnation of some sin, lives by that belief, and teaches it. But then someone he knows and loves, or even he himself, gets caught up in that sin — and all of a sudden he’s changed his mind.

A brother believes what Jesus taught about divorce and remarriage (cf. Matthew 5:32; 19:9) until someone close to him divorces and remarries unscripturally. Then he suddenly decides it’s OK and starts finding all kinds of reasons why Jesus’ words don’t really mean what they say.

A sister believes what Paul said about homosexuality (cf. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10) until a close friend or relative comes out of the closet. All at once she decides that Paul’s teaching is “unclear” or “taken out of context” or “doesn’t apply today.”

What happened? These people have let their feelings get in the way of the truth. They refuse to accept the thought that someone they love (or themselves) is not right before God. Rather than seeking a change in conduct, they take the less painful path of changing the way they look at the Bible.

When we abandon God’s word as our standard in favor of our own feelings, we become disciples of a reckless master. “Cursed is the man who trusts in mankind and makes flesh his strength, and whose heart turns away from the Lord.…The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately sick; who can understand it?” (Jeremiah 17:5,9). “There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death” (Pro­verbs 14:12).

Household Baptism = Infant Baptism?

At Philippi, a woman named Lydia “and her household” were baptized into Christ (Acts 16:15). Also at Philippi, the jailer was baptized, “he and all his household” (Acts 16:33). And at Corinth, Paul baptized “the household of Stephanas” (1 Corinthians 1:16). Do these baptisms of entire households imply that Paul and other first-century preachers baptized infants?

Some people say yes. They reason that a “household” likely included at least one baby, therefore babies were among those baptized in these cases. For example, commentator Albert Barnes wrote that the case of Lydia “affords a strong presumptive proof that this was an instance of household or infant baptism.”

Can you see the problem with this reasoning? It’s simple: a household may contain infants, but it also may not. We simply can’t tell from the mere use of the word “household.” What is there to prove that Lydia, the jailer, or Stephanas had any infant children? What Barnes calls “presumptive proof” is really just presumption.

Proponents of infant baptism assume that “household” necessarily implies “infants.” But let’s look at some other passages and try that on for size. In each of the following verses, substitute “infant children” where the text has “household.”

● In the case of the Philippian jailer: “And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with his infant children” (Acts 16:32). “And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his infant children” (verse 34).

● In the city of Corinth, “Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his infant children” (Acts 18:8).

● “You know the infant children of Stephanas…that they have devoted themselves for ministry to the saints” (1 Corinthians 16:15).

Does any of that make sense? One might answer, “Of course not; infants can’t listen to gospel preaching, believe, or devote themselves to service.” Right! Yet New Testament baptism always followed a person’s hearing the gospel, believing on Jesus, and repenting (see Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; 8:35-38; 18:8). Since infants can do none of those things, they cannot be scripturally baptized. That is why it is impossible to conclude that infants were baptized at Philippi, Corinth, or anywhere else.

25 Years of MTV

[This article was originally published in August to mark MTV's 25th anniversary.]


August, 1981. Reagan’s presidency was just hitting stride. NASA’s new space shuttle program wowed the world. And cable TV brought a new sensation into American homes: a 24-hour channel featuring video clips of pop and rock music stars performing their songs, plus news items from the popular music world. It was called “Music Television,” better known by its acronym: MTV.

MTV was an instant success. Youngsters all over America clamored for it, and soon it was part of every basic cable package in the country. I was just entering my teen years, a huge music fan. To me and my junior high school friends, MTV was the greatest thing since the microwave oven. Lots of our parents, however, thought it was a tool of the devil.

As it turns out, our parents were right.

August, 2006. MTV has now been part of American culture for 25 years. It has redefined the music industry, spawned an entire category of TV channels (think VH1, CMT, BET, etc.), and made household words of names like Sting, Prince, Madonna, Bono, and Eminem. According to Nielsen Media Research, MTV is the most recognized network among people ages 12 to 34. About 75% of teenagers watch MTV, consuming an average of more than six hours every week.

MTV has changed a lot over the past quarter-century. As its popularity grew during the ’80s and ’90s, the network added more feature programming to its lineup. And the focus of that programming slowly shifted from music to lifestyles and social issues. Eventually the fare included game shows, talk shows, documentaries, cartoons, political interviews, dramas, sitcoms, and even the original “reality” show, The Real World, now in its 17th season. Today barely half of MTV’s air time has anything to do with music.

As the content evolved, so did its emphasis. Clear­ly, today’s MTV aims not just to entertain kids, but to shape their view of the world. And that’s the problem. Because the world view that MTV pushes is one where rebellion, obscenity, alcohol/drug use, and unrestrained sex are all normal and good. Where such behavior should be not just tolerated, but encouraged; not just encouraged, but celebrated.

In 2004, researchers with the Parents’ Television Council studied MTV’s programming during just one week — 171 hours total. They found that MTV’s levels of sexuality, profanity, and violence (day or night) were far higher than those of prime-time network TV (the 9-11 pm slot). For instance, an average hour of MTV contained nearly twice as many sexual scenes (sex, various forms of nudity, and/or verbal sexual dialogue) and more than four times as many instances of profanity (“bleeped” or otherwise) as the 10 o’clock hour on broadcast networks. Remember, most 10 o’clock network shows are aimed at adults; MTV is aimed at kids.

There’s more — you can read the entire PTC report at www.parentstv.org — but I trust you get the idea. This is what three-fourths of America’s teens watch for nearly an hour every day.

And if you believe this barrage of coarseness and sensuality doesn’t affect the way young people think, wake up. According to the PTC report, “research shows that watching MTV changes the attitudes and perceptions of young viewers.” For instance, one study found that “seventh and ninth graders were more likely to approve of premarital sex after watch­ing MTV for one hour.” One hour?

I know some younger readers will think I’m getting worked up over nothing. I know some parents will think I must be exaggerating. But the facts speak for themselves. I’d tell you to watch MTV for a few hours and see for yourself, but I really can’t do that in good conscience. If you do, don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Young Christian, what’s your standard going to be for deciding how to dress, talk, think, and act: MTV or the word of God? Take the pledge of David: “I will set no worthless thing before my eyes” (Psalm 101:3)? Follow Paul’s instruction: “…whatever is true, whatever is honorable, what­ever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things” (Philippians 4:8).

Christian parent, what will you do? Will you stand by and let your kids become victims of the MTV mind set, or will you get involved and point them to a better way?