“While Jesus was here on earth, he offered prayers and
pleadings, with a loud cry and tears, to the one who could rescue him from
death” (Heb. 5:7).
Of Andrew Bonar, a Scottish minister used mightily of God during the
great Revival of 1839-1840, it is said, he cared, wept and prayed like Jesus.
In the 17th century, Samuel Rutherford, said, “A bed watered with tears, a throat dry with praying, eyes a fountain of tears for the sins of the land are rarely to be found among us.”
Recently, David Smithers of the “Awake and Go Prayer
Global Network,” wrote, “Far too often our own eyes are dry because we are blind
to the needs around us... blinded by the temporal, we
can no longer see the holiness of heaven and horrors of
hell.” (edited)
Last week, an article in the newspape about “Cohabiting Couples” caught my attention. As I read the morally impartial article, I thought to myself, 'When did “living in sin” or “shacking up” become amoral cohabitation?' You see, I'm an old man, so I can ask myself questions like this!
I turned to my trusted internet resource “Wikipedia” for the answer; it defined “living in sin” or “shacking up”, not surprisingly, as “living with and having sex with a person to whom one is not legally married.” But then Wiki further explained that these phrases are associated with negative attitudes of the church, but in modern times, are used in humor (meaning, derisively).
Yes, indeed, in our modern times, 'cohabitation' has been normalized. Consequently, many new believers will be in such relationships. How should we address them? I'm quite sure Jesus doesn't want us to throw stones at them. But to love and teach them. In the morally depraved city of Corinth, there were undoubtedly some 'cohabitating' converts. But with compassionate understanding of sexual temptation, Paul admonishes them to be married (1 Cor. 7:2). Maybe things haven't changed that much. But then, neither has the need to be compassionate, yet truthful (Eph 4:15). And that won't be easy in a culture that rejects all moral absolutes.
The expression “I have no heart for that” means to have no enthusiasm for it. The phrase came to my mind after reading this quote by Andrew Murray: “Jesus has carried away our hearts with Him. We have no heart left for anyone but Him, or for anything that He is not part of.” The phrase “she/he stole my heart” also came to mind. Logically (I thought), if someone’s heart had been carried away or stolen, then they would have no heart—they would be heartless.
Now of course the word “heartless” has an entirely different connotation, doesn't it! It means ‘devoid of feelings.’ I fear, however, that this word may indeed be more characteristic, than not, of too many professing Christians who have little or no heart for the deeper things of God.
Jesus said the entire Law could be summed up in this statement: “Love the Lord God with all your heart” (Matt. 22:37). Think about it! If we truly did that, we would be anything but “heartless.” We would be “heartfull”—because God would fill our hearts with His love, comfort, and joy; he would fill us with the fruit of righteousness, with the knowledge of His will; we would be full of His Spirit, who would then fill us with His fullness. (Rom. 5:5; 2 Cor. 7:4; Eph 5:18; Phil. 1:11; Col 1:9; Eph 3:19). Heartless? No! "Heartfull?" Yes!
Due to their brevity, my comments in yesterday’s blog on ‘Bikini Baristas’ fell short of adequately addressing the many-faceted issue. It is not easy to find the balance between our calling to be salt & light in a sinful world while conveying Jesus’ heart of compassion. This has been brought to our attention (quite painfully) by the current case before the Supreme Court: "Snyder v. Phelps." Rev. Phelps and his church hold what-can-only-be-called 'mean-spirited' protests at funerals of soldiers for no other reason than their tie to the military where homosexuals are allowed to serve (the soldiers whose funerals have been protested were not gay), with signs that read “Thank God for Dead Soldiers.”
Following is an excerpt from an article by John MacArthur on How Christians ought to live in a pagan society.
The church will really change society for the better only when individual believers make their chief concern their own spiritual maturity, which means living in a way that honors God's commands and glorifies His name. Such a concern inherently includes a firm grasp on Scripture and an understanding that its primary mandate to us is to know Christ and proclaim His gospel. A godly attitude coupled with godly living makes the saving message of the gospel credible to the unsaved. If we claim to be saved but still convey proud, unloving attitudes toward the lost, our preaching and teaching—no matter how doctrinally orthodox or politically savvy and persuasive—will be ignored or rejected.
