Author: elizabethprata

Christian writer and Georgia reading teacher who loves Jesus, a quiet life, art, beauty, and children.
Posted in christian life, theology

On a life in service

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

UpstairsDownstairsClassic_Cast_600x338
Original cast of the classic PBS period drama, Upstairs, Downstairs

Do you remember the original Upstairs, Downstairs TV show? The show ran on PBS from 1971-1975. It was the original famous period drama, depicting the doings of a wealthy Edwardian family in London from the point of view of the aristocrats living upstairs, and from the servants who lived downstairs. It was set in the time of 1903-1930.

In the PBS show Downton Abbey, we see another show depicting the lives of the aristocrats who lived upstairs and the servants who lived downstairs. This show ran from 2010 to 2015 and was also set in the Edwardian period, with its events spanning from 1912-1926.

I love a good Edwardian period piece. Even as a high school aged girl watching the 1970s Upstairs, Downstairs show for the first time, I was fascinated with the downstairs. Why do the servants do what they do? They often spoke of a life ‘in service’. What is it like to spend one’s life in service to a household? How do they maintain a lifetime of loyalty to a family?

Edwardian servants were expected to be very disciplined and reliable. …A butler was the most important servant of an Edwardian house and acted as the liaison between the servant and his master. Source

In Upstairs, Downstairs, Hudson was the Butler. This was the highest rank of servants that existed. He was responsible for the staff’s training and perfect execution of their various jobs, the goal of which was the smooth life of the lords and ladies upstairs. Hudson said his calling was a life “in service.” Though his sister ran a boarding house and his brother was a civil engineer, Hudson felt his calling was to serve others in a household. He did so with utter dignity and pride.

In Downton Abbey, it was Carson who managed the household staff. In the show we see him training the other servants on how to set the table, using rulers to ensure symmetry in the place settings, exhorting them to be invisible, not to draw attention to themselves, but to perform the job as smoothly as possible.

Carson the Butler’s exactitude to detail, his nearly round the clock call to service, his extreme loyalty to the lord of the household were all part of the package. The benefit to the servant was that he had a home to live in, a lifetime tenure usually, and salary.

carson
‘Carson’ in the period drama Downton Abbey

Hudson and Carson were fictional characters, but their lives were based on millions of men who performed the faithful service. I’m sure by now you see exactly where I’m going with this metaphor. ‘Hudson’ and ‘Carson’ (and the men they were based on) served their lord with all their strength and mind and body. They did it for what? A bed under a roof, and a salary?

How is our service to the Lord of all? We are called to a life of service when He regenerates us. We are new creatures. Instead of serving satan and our own lusts, we now serve Lord Jesus in any and every way He desires. We have been released from a life in service to the devil, and now in gratitude and obedience, in Spirit power, we must serve Jesus with all our strength, soul, mind and soul.

hudson
‘Hudson’ polishing an item

When we watch a period drama like the ones I’ve mentioned, and we see the loyalty and attention to detail, the ceaseless service of the Butler, sometimes we might wryly curl our lip and say, ‘man those guys were rigorous!’ Yet how rigorous are we in our service to the One whom we owe everything? Those guys did it for the pride in their job, and a bed and a few dollars. We are co-heirs with Christ, who achieved a perfect life so He could hang on the cross and endure all of God’s wrath, for us. He did it in obedience to the Father. Jesus was rigorous in every detail, diligent and exact in following the Law, all so He could die on the cross in abject humiliation, endure terrifying wrath, so that we could live.

When we see Hudson carefully polishing the ash tray so it shines and glitters, we see a man who takes every task, no matter how low or insignificant, to its complete end in pride and honor. All of the household tasks were ultimately done for the honor of the aristocrat living upstairs.

As for us, when we ready ourselves for church, do we do the same? Or do we throw on any old clothes, arrive huffing at church just before the opening, plop in the pew, and mindlessly begin singing?

When we hop in the car to deliver a lesson to a small group, have we been diligent in seeking the highest and best possible outcome? Researching in detail, crafting our sentences with delight and conviction? Did we even pray?

Before setting off to vacuum the church and dust the pews, do we take as much care as an Edwardian butler would have in ensuring the place of worship is gleaming and showing its best, on behalf of the Lord upstairs?

If the butlers of old served with loyalty and honor, diligence and exactitude, how much more so, should we? We serve others on earth, and ultimately we serve for the dignity and honor of the Lord in heaven.

Let’s take stock of our service to the Lord today.

For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. (Galatians 5:13)

Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling. (Psalm 2:11)

Posted in discernment, theology

What does Jesus think about discernment? This verse tells you

Posted on by elizabethprata

We live in an age where fellow Christians say that to speak of someone specific being a false teacher is mean, or ill-mannered, or inappropriate. “Just let them alone, God will take care if them,” they say. Or they claim that speaking against false teaching is uncivil, and to “Just pray for them.” Many of thems ay, “You can’t know if he/she is false, you don’t know their heart.”

The skill of discernment (and the gift, too) involves vigilance. It is extremely important. John MacArthur wrote,

In its simplest definition, discernment is nothing more than the ability to decide between truth and error, right and wrong. Discernment is the process of making careful distinctions in our thinking about truth. In other words, the ability to think with discernment is synonymous with an ability to think biblically.

Every book of the New Testament (except Philemon) has some passage or chapter devoted to its writer urging fellow Christians to practice discernment in order to combat some false teaching or other. Jude is entirely taken up with the topic. And the exhortations in those books of the Bible are not to stand by and let false teachers be. Those admonishments are not to tolerate false teaching and wait until Jesus comes back to judge it. Not only the NT writers, but Jesus also has some very explicit thoughts about churches that practice discernment. And those instructions are not to overlook it, be passive abou ti, or ignore it. Quite the opposite.

You might know that the book of Revelation is a considered an apocalyptic book. It deals with last things, and Jesus’ return in victory. However the first two chapters are letters to churches of the time, but also warnings and encouragements for us in this day and all present days. Some churches received a commendation only, some received a hard warning only and most churches received a little of both.

In the letter to the church at Ephesus, we read that Jesus directed the apostle John to write,

I know your works, your toil and your patient endurance, and how you cannot bear with those who are evil, but have tested those who call themselves apostles and are not, and found them to be false. (Revelation 2:2).

In this letter, Jesus opens by congratulating the church for being discerning. They are lauded for their persevering efforts to retain the highest purity possible in their church. How? First, they can’t bear the evil ones in their midst, and second, they tested those who call themselves teachers. Their discernment was apparently a skilled discernment, because Jesus congratulates them for worming out which teachers were false.

Never, ever let anyone tell you that discernment is unnecessary.

John MacArthur preached on this verse from Revelation, saying in part,

Beyond that, verse 3 says something else about them: ‘You cannot tolerate evil men. You cannot tolerate evil men.’ They were intolerant of sin. They were sensitive to the presence of evil. They hated evildoers as God hates evildoers. They resented evil; they resented evildoers. They resented sin; they resented sin in the church. They recognized the damage that sin does to the fellowship and the testimony. They saw that sin in the church destroys the unity of the church and destroys the testimony of the church. They hated all that was morally bad, all that was spiritually bad. They knew that a little leaven leavens the whole lump.

…Or, you could say this: ‘You put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false.’ This is a church with discernment.

Where does discernment come from? Well, where does discernment come from; clearly, it comes from a knowledge of the truth, right? The only way you can discern error is know what? Truth. You have to have the truth in order to see the error.

Many evil people come into the congregations, particularly in the early church. Satan was infiltrating these early churches all the time. Judaizers, false teachers were everywhere. This church took the warning seriously.

Read or listen to the full sermon here

Practice discernment, whether you have been given the spiritual gift or not. It matters to Jesus. And if it matters to Jesus, it should matter to us.

discernment

Posted in encouragement, theology

How to read the Puritans

Posted on by elizabethprata

On blind spots…JD Greear said,

Our Christian forebears were fallible men and women, but so are we. And we fool ourselves to simply assume that we would have had the courage to act differently when every societal pressure was pushing one direction. They had blind spots which we see clearly now. But we too have blind spots that our children and grandchildren will speak of with shame.

Greear was specifically speaking of slavery, but his concept applies to theology too. There has never been a time when the fundamentals and the tangential items of the faith were completely settled. During Jesus’ day, His ‘new’ theology, which was really the original theology, was misapplied, misunderstood, and rejected. Even Nicodemus, THE Teacher of Israel, whiffed the concepts of suffering servant/sacrificial atonement/new birth. The Pharisees certainly didn’t get it and at one point even John the Baptist, who’d had the Spirit in him since the womb, asked if Jesus was the one or should they wait for another.

During the Apostolic age, there were many points of theology to be settled, and the succeeding councils during the centuries after to hash them out are testament to the fluid nature of man’s understanding of the Kingdom. Early church fathers were certainly fallible men. Origen’s theology (c. 184-c. 253) was hailed either as the “height of faithful theology or the depth of horrendous error.”

Augustine (354-430) adhered to many theologies that were solid but he clung to many that were not. Hailed as a brilliant thinker, at the same time, his philosophies “also considerably skewed the Christian vision.”

I could go on, but far be it for anyone to think that the faith delivered once for all to the saints is understood widely by all the saints for all time. In every era men struggle with certain elements of it due to their cultural blind spots of the time in which we live.

jedwards
Jonathan Edwards

By the time of the Reformation, the understanding of the faith delivered once for all to the saints had been polluted beyond saving, and the Puritans started afresh, breaking completely with the Roman Catholic Church.

Suffice to say that the theologians in each era were duly conscientious of their thinking, striving to understand all that is required, and to explain it in ways the common man could understand, too. But they had blind spots, being products of their own generation. This is the way of it. We in this era have blind spots too, being products of our own generation. When we read a modern book, we nod and say, yes, yes, not realizing that the constructs of our own culture and time are blinding us to this or to that. Our grandchildren will look at our books of the millennium na shake their heads at us.

This is why it is important to read the products of the ancient and historical thinkers. We see their blind spots clearly, and we are happily exposed to theology that can and does enhance our understanding of the faith.

But oftentimes the ancients and historical fathers are difficult to read as well. Language changes. When reading Spurgeon, (1834 –1892) his words seem quaint. Backing up a hundred years, Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) is a bit more difficult. By the time we get to the Puritan John Owen, (1616-1683) his works present comprehension difficulties nearly impossible to overcome. Even the great theologian JI Packer called Owen “cumbersome” and Kris Lundgaard took an hour to read just 8 or so pages of Owen, re-reading sentences three and four times and using a dictionary to look up certain words. The common man who finds these hurdles insurmountable miss out on great thinkers and founding fathers of the past.

What to do?

I have a few tips on how to grapple the ancients and the historical men who’ve contributed mightily to the faith but whose works present difficulties.

I’ve found that pairing books helps. For example, this summer I read John Bunyan’s spiritual autobiography Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners paired with A Pilgrim Who Made Progress, the Life Story of John Bunyan, by William Deal. I found that Deal’s book offered historical information that helped me understand some of Bunyan’s spiritual choices. That Deal’s book is aimed at the Youth demographic was actually a help.

If you’re interested in Augustine’s Confessions, the biography by Peter Brown is a good pairing. Brown’s treatment of Augustine seems to have become THE standard bio of Augustine since its publication nearly fifty years ago. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography.

Another kind of paring I’ve done is for example, I read Kris Lundgaard’s The Enemy Within paired with John Owen’s Indwelling Sin. Lundgaard’s book is essentially a re-write/Cliff’s Notes to Owen’s towering work. My version of Owen’s book was from the Puritan Paperback series. Where Lundgaard’s is a total re-write using modern examples, the PP series is a slightly edited and slightly modernized version of the original Puritan work. It’s put out by Banner of Truth Trust, an organization, you can, well, trust!

Fra_angelico_-_conversion_de_saint_augustin-e1440725829425
Fra Angelico, The Conversion of St. Augustine

I read Lundgaard on Mondays and the same Owen chapter the next day. I found that Lundgaard’s version helped me prepare my heart and my mind for the depth of the main meal Owen serves up.

 

Lundgaard also wrote Through the Looking Glass: Reflections on Christ that Change Us as a modernized re-write of Owen’s Glory of Christ, so that could be another pairing.

For Moby Dick, a theological but difficult book, (1851) there are many are study guides online. I used this one as I read the book itself.

For Pilgrim’s Progress, (a 1678 Christian allegory) there are study guides also. I bought The Pilgrim’s Progress Study Guide by Maureen L. Bradley.

Ligonier also has a wonderful teaching series on video by Derek Thomas, as well as a hard copy study guide by the same author. Ligonier says of the teaching series:

The Pilgrim’s Progress, written by John Bunyan over 300 years ago, is one of the most widely-circulated books ever to be published in the English language. In spite of its popularity in the past, many people today are not familiar with this masterpiece. Join Dr. Derek Thomas as he leads a guided tour of this allegorical work, showing that Christians have as much to gain from this book today as they did hundreds of years ago.

The first video is free. The remainder of the series are fee-based.

So, you can pair books with re-writes of books. Or you can pair books with a biography of the author you’re trying to read. You can use a study guide. Go through a teaching series. Buy a Puritan Paperback which is lightly modernized and abridged.

Any way you do it, don’t let the classics languish. There is a multitude of good theology in them we should not lose our connection to. I’ve offered some ways to ease the difficulty so to speak. If you have ideas, please do share them.

Posted in discernment, theology

Music in worship

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

I saw a couple of quotes today one after the other (not linked or published on purpose, just happenstance) that made me think about music in worship once again.

Not to debate contemporary vs. traditional. Though I’m a huge traditionalist, I’m also a realist, and I know there has been good music written after 1900, though, lol.

I enjoyed my own church’s service yesterday, as I always do. We are a nearly three-year church plant. We have a plurality of elders (4), a time of confession during the service, and good music. It’s a mixture of old and new. The team takes care to select songs and hymns that match the theme of the sermon.

Music isn’t all there is to a service, meaning, it’s not primary. But it’s not secondary either. It’s important and has its place. Yesterday I was thinking about how important it is when we hear the word preached and when we sing and hear the song words sung. It is all supposed to edify us.

Ligonier tweeted,

Ligonier Ministries, @Ligonier
3:30 PM – 29 Jul 2018

We should be careful about the words of the music we sing and ensure that those words communicate truth. —@RCSproul

My friend Rachel tweeted,

Rachel, @REL4077
8:21 PM – 29 Jul 2018

I’ve listened to a lot of Christian music from the 70s/80s and a lot of CM from that time focused so much on Christ’s return, who Jesus is, and the need to share the Gospel. What happened since then that we have songs about reckless love and our “messed up” lives?!! Give me Jesus.

I agree. To that end, here is a thoughtful article from the Reformed Church in America. (Note: I liked the article but don’t know much about the website as a whole, but they seem a bit social justic-y to me “make the world a better place”, and they use the word ‘broken’.)

This article lists some thoughtful things about how we approach music in worship.

THE THEOLOGY AND PLACE OF MUSIC IN WORSHIP

Here are just a few quotes from the article, which again, I enjoyed. It outlines some facts about music in worship and then outlines a framework to think about when selecting music.

The church’s ministry of song is for the edification of God’s people

The church’s ministry of song is for the glory of God
It is also important that the emotional power of music in worship be evocative rather than manipulative, honest rather than manufactured, and that the congregation’s singing allow for the full range of emotions in worship.

Does our congregational singng include the many moods and types of prayer, including praise, thanksgiving, confession, lament, intercession, and dedication? A congregation which sings only “upbeat” praise choruses and hymns, for example, will have a diminished and restricted understanding of prayer.

I pray that you enjoy the thoughts here, the article at thelink, and most of all, music in worship.

music verse 1

Posted in christian life, theology

Mail Call: What is your opinion on the Christian’s responsibility regarding voting?

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

mail call
Mail Call on the old TV show M*A*S*H

Q.
I would like your opinion on the Christian’s responsibility regarding voting.

A.
I’m not a good person to ask. I am very conflicted over my own behavior in this issue.

I used to be intensely involved in politics, being a reporter/editor of a weekly newspaper and covering all the politics there was. I had and still hold a firm belief that the US is the best country to live in, and that an aware and involved citizenry is what’s best for America. However, I ingested a little too much of local politics back then covering it for the paper, and now I have a healthy distaste for all politics! The level of greed & corruption disgusts me, and the news media’s current hatred toward all conservatives doesn’t help. It’s a minefield trying to educate myself on the local referenda or the national issues because of all the blatant fake news.

I do vote for President and usually Senator/Representative. But that is about it. I don’t do a lot of research into local ordinances, zoning, or  ballots any more because it all still turns my stomach.

I also believe what John MacArthur preached as the Christian’s responsibility toward government involvement. Here is the opening of his part 3 sermon on the topic, and of course he went on with scripture and biblical examples.

Christians and Politics part 3

My point is not that Christians should remain totally uninvolved in politics or civic activities and causes. They ought to express their political beliefs in the voting booth, and it is appropriate to support legitimate measures designed to correct a glaring social or political wrong. Complete noninvolvement would be contrary to what God’s Word says about doing good in society: “Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith” (Gal. 6:10; cf. Titus 3:1-2).

It would also display a lack of gratitude for whatever amount of religious freedom the government allows us to enjoy. Furthermore, such pious apathy toward government and politics would reveal a lack of appreciation for the many appropriate legal remedies believers in democracies have for maintaining or improving the civil order.

A certain amount of healthy and balanced concern with current trends in government and the community is acceptable, as long as we realize that that interest is not vital to our spiritual growth, our righteous testimony, or the advancement of the kingdom of Christ. Above all, the believer’s political involvement should never displace the priority of preaching and teaching the gospel.

I am always trying to find that balance between what Dr MacArthur Mac phrased as “pious apathy” and the Bible’s concept of “responsible involvement.” I don’t think I’ve hit it. And I always hold my nose whichever course I take. So those are my thoughts! What are your thoughts?

Question used with permission from sender.

Posted in discernment, theology

One more thought on direct revelation

Posted on by elizabethprata

Yesterday I wrote an essay describing the preeminence of Jesus and how God in Hebrews 1:1-2 said He has spoken through His Son. What this means, for claimants of direct revelation, is that once God said He has spoken through His perfect, holy, supreme being of His son, God then chose to speak to and through Joe Blow in Peoria and Jane Q. Public in Waco? No. Jesus’ preeminence means God has the perfect vessel through which to speak, He has spoken, and He is no longer speaking through prophets, bushes, donkeys, mountains, or men. I’d made the bold claim that if a person says they have heard directly from God or Jesus, they do not believe Jesus is preeminent.

This post is a PS to that thought regarding direct revelation. It involves the content of these supposed revelations.

One thing you notice about these revelations, visions, dreams and intuitions, is that the content of them is small. They usually involve advice on jobs, careers, or other personal mundanities. If they involve biblical content, the revelations do not usually align with the Bible. Sarah Young, author of Jesus Calling, comes to mind, where the totality of her revelations are strikingly similar to one another and to what a middle aged white woman in America would say or think, not God’s grand redemptive plan. For example,

Softly I announce my Presence. Shimmering hues of radiance tap gently at your consciousness, seeking entrance. Though I have all Power in heaven and on earth, I am infinitely tender with you…

Like He was with Saul/Paul? Thrown to the ground and blinded?

The-Conversion-of-Saul-by-Michelangelo
The Conversion of Saul, by Michaelangelo

My face is shining upon you, beaming out Peace that transcends understanding. You are surrounded by a sea of problems, but you are face to face with Me, your Peace… ~Sarah Young, Jesus Calling

‘Beaming out peace’ to even one of His believers?

zechariah
The angel strikes Zechariah mute

In the past, when God spoke to people or through intermediaries, did He dispense personal advice? Suggest jobs or where to buy a house? Promise career success? Give tips on how to resolve that prickly relationship with the mother-in-law? No, He only spoke of His redemptive plan or addressed immediate circumstances if it affected His redemptive plan, not the minutiae of personal life. See these excerpted thoughts from the Titus Institute. (Other than this one article I am not familiar with the Titus Institute, though it seems to be a good resource on first glance).

How Has God Spoken To His People Throughout the OT and NT?

After the fall, what we see throughout the Scriptures is God communicating with specific individuals at specific times for specific purposes that always involve his redemptive plan. He only addressed personal sin or other personal issues when it involved his redemptive plan.

God spoke to our forefathers (OT believers) through the prophets and has spoken to us (NT believers) in his Son.

God spoke to the people of Israel through intermediaries, the prophets. When he spoke to the prophets, it always had to do with his redemptive plan, not personal issues in their lives unless it involved his redemptive plan.

The pattern in both the OT and NT is God speaking to his people through intermediaries and those intermediaries receiving revelation only regarding matters involving God’s redemptive plan. Those intermediaries were then to speak to God’s people about righteousness. This involved preaching about what is good and right before God and about what is sin and evil before God which we as God’s people are to apply in our lives.

Those intermediaries then wrote that revelation down which became the OT and NT.
Even when God spoke to these intermediaries, we see infrequent communication rather than frequent regular communication.

He spoke to Noah 5 times over 950 yrs, Abraham 8 times over 175 yrs, Isaac 2 times and 1 time to Rebekah over 180 yrs, Jacob 7 times and 1 time to Laban over Jacob’s lifetime. These are just some examples.

We also see that God does not address personal issues, only issues that involve his redemptive plan.

In the New Testament,

Two major things we notice, the revelation from God was infrequent and it was purposeful, always concerning Peter and Paul’s ministry, not personal matters.
Most of the time, Peter and Paul were ministering for the Lord without receiving direct revelation from the Lord.

Even at important times of decision the Lord did not always speak to them. In Acts 1:21-26, Peter used the casting of lots to determine the Lord’s will. In Acts 6:1-7, there is no record of revelation regarding the selection of men for the widow’s ministry. In Acts 15, there is no record of revelation in the first doctrinal crisis of the early church regarding what is necessary to be saved.

We see that man forfeited at the fall, direct communication with God on a personal basis. He then only received direct revelation through intermediaries. God communicated infrequently and only as He deemed necessary to fulfill His redemptive plan.

When we get to heaven we will have direct communication with God again. That is part of the blessing of redemption.

Now Ladies, if you would, please think of how often we hear and see today’s ‘Bible teachers’ claim they heard personally from God. Then please compare with God’s actual activity recorded in the Bible. Think about how infrequently He spoke and about what kinds of things He said.

Beware of ‘teachers’ who claim to have had revelations apart from the Bible. If you think you have had a revelation yourself, please re-think that and refer again to the scripture in Hebrews 1:1-2. God spoke through His Son, who appeared in the flesh on earth to seek and save the lost, to die in our place for our sin, and who rose again to take His place next to the father. He is THE Word. His life and teachings are recorded in the Bible, which would take years and lifetimes to learn, understand.

The Bible is enough. More than enough, it’s a gift beyond measure. When we are glorified we’ll have an eternity of direct communication with our Savior. For now, rest on His written word, and do not seek vain communiques from a disembodied voice.

Posted in discernment, theology

If you think God is speaking directly today, here is what that means…

Posted on by elizabethprata

A follow-up to this essay is here, One more thought on direct revelation

By Elizabeth Prata

Women have for at least two generations now, grown up in the faith with famous or celebrity women Bible teachers claiming to have had personal revelations and interactions with Jesus. They say “God told me” or “God laid it on my heart to tell you” or “I want to share some of the messages I have received” or “I heard Him specifically say…” Their persistent claims of direct revelation outside of the Bible has normalized it when it was never even normal in Bible times! Worse, it has accomplished two things:

–de facto declared the insufficiency of the Bible
–made a generation of women illiterate, because why do the hard work of studying the Bible when it can just plop down from the sky?

God is not speaking today to people outside of His word.

Whenever I or any of my friends say this, we receive tremendous push back. We are charged with proving it. We are told we’re wrong/bad/ignorant of scripture or history. Or, demands are made for scriptures that say so. But when provided, those very scriptures are dismissed. We are given the excuse that we must not “put God in a box” because, after all, He has the ability to do anything He wants, including speak to us in any way or at any time He wants.

It’s true that in the past He spoke in many different ways. He spoke directly to man (Adam, Noah, Moses et al), through rituals, ceremonies, from the sky, from the mountain, a donkey, angels, prophets, and a burning bush.

I want to come at this from a different tack today. I was listening to Steven J. Lawson preach Hebrews 1:1-4. This is the classic text that declares that God has ceased speaking because, though He spoke in many ways in prior ages, He has spoken finally in this age, through His Son. WHat came to my mind as Lawson preached was this:

Jesus is the Supreme Being of the Universe. He is the unrivaled supreme one.

And that is why God is not speaking to you.

The previous ways God spoke to man described above are indicative of His progressive revelation. God was building revelatory knowledge of His redemptive plan thread by thread, weaving a picture in His tapestry of redemption through the ages. The pinnacle, the capstone, the zenith of that picture, is Christ. Jesus is God’s exact imprint. (Hebrews 1:3). He is the ultimate. He is the highest. He is all-authority. He said and did everything the Father wanted, perfectly. God’s words, His concepts, and His principles are supreme overall, and represent His final word through Christ.

People who insist that God or Jesus speaks to them, do you really think that after having set Jesus up as His apex, declaring Himself pleased, that God will then will go lower and speak through you? When He has Jesus He’s spoken through, He will speak through you instead?

Will God choose to speak through sinful flesh, when He has His own exact imprint of glory and perfection through which He has already spoken? What a ghastly thought! May it never be!

If you believe Jesus is speaking through you, or your favorite Bible ‘teacher’ or author, you do not hold Jesus as supreme. It is as simple as that.

No, the superiority of Christ drowns out every other voice!
~Steve Lawson sermon on Hebrews 1:1-4 The Unrivaled Supremacy of Christ

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross. (Colossians 1:15-20).

god is not speaking he is preeminent

A follow-up to this essay is here, One more thought on direct revelation

Posted in discernment, theology

“Lord, Lord” is such a woeful verse

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ Mt 7:22.

How many is many? The word for ‘many’ is:

polýs – many (high in number); multitudinous, plenteous, “much”; “great” in amount (extent). (Strong’s).

This is terrible to think. It seems that the visible church is filled with believers, but the verse is saying that many aren’t believers after all. I worry for others, but also for myself. “Examine yourselves, whether you be in the faith“. 2 Corinthians 13:5.

Do business with Jesus today, this very day, while there is still time. Here are some resources

Is It Real? : 11 Biblical Tests of Genuine Salvation

What are some of the signs of genuine saving faith?

Assurance of Salvation: You Can Be Sure

Toshiba Exif JPEG