Goodness in Context: A Closer Look at Romans 8:28

After examining Philippians 4:13 in its context in a previous post, today we turn to another of Paul’s epistles to look at another verse that is frequently misunderstood—Romans 8:28, coming near the end of one of the most beautiful chapters in all of Scripture. Although its place in the rest of Romans 8 is often forgotten, this verse is also simply misquoted at times, resulting in just as much misunderstanding as when it is taken out of context. So what does Romans 8:28 say?

“And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose” (ESV).

Right off the bat, we should notice that the first word is a huge clue that there is more to see. “And” is a word of addition, so when a verse begins with “and,” we can be confident that there is a multi-part point being made and that the verse in question is only one part of it. So what is the point Paul is making in Romans 8?

To answer that question, we must step back even further and look at the overall outline of the book of Romans. Romans is Paul’s grand theological treatise in which he explains powerful truths about the righteousness of God.[i] The first eleven chapters show our need for a Savior, the means of our salvation, the effect of our salvation, and God’s sovereignty over the whole process, while the last five chapters explore how we are to live in light of our salvation.[ii] Romans 8 is the final chapter in a three-chapter section discussing the effect of our salvation—namely, our sanctification (i.e. our being made holy). In chapter 6, Paul talks about sanctification and sin, in chapter 7 about sanctification and the law, and in chapter 8 about sanctification and the Holy Spirit.[iii]

Paul begins chapter 8 explaining the difference between living in the Spirit and living in the flesh before discussing how those who are in the Spirit are adopted by God and therefore become co-heirs with Jesus. In this section, he returns to the concept of suffering, which he mentioned earlier, where he showed that followers of Jesus can rejoice in suffering because of what it produces in our lives (see Romans 5:3-5). In verse 18, he writes that our current sufferings pale in comparison to the future glory we will experience.

But this future glory is just that—in the future. In the present, we still live in a fallen world struggling against the desires of the flesh that war against our spirits. So as we wait for this future glory, there is a lot of groaning going on, yearning for the day when the new heaven and the new earth come to be. “For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. […] Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words” (Rom. 8:22-23, 26, ESV, emphasis added). Until our bodies and all of creation are redeemed, we live in partial weakness, even as we have the power of God within us. We have been saved, but the extent of our salvation has not yet been fulfilled—we have yet to be glorified.

In the meantime, we experience hardship and suffering, just as creation experiences wildfires and earthquakes and other disruptions reflective of the fact that the earth has not yet been made new. But in this suffering, we have the comfort of knowing that we are not alone. And more than that, we have an active advocate—the very Spirit of God—who “helps us in our weakness” and “intercedes for us” (v. 26). But as if that wasn’t enough, Paul adds something else about the Spirit: “And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God” (v. 27). The Spirit doesn’t just pray for us; He prays according to God’s will, meaning His prayers are always perfect and consist of exactly what is needed in each and every situation.

You may have noticed that we made it to verse 27, one verse before the verse of our focus today. So we’ve seen that after establishing what it means to live in the Spirit, what the hope for our future is, and what our present realities still are, Paul gives a string of encouragements. First, the Holy Spirit helps us and intercedes for us (v. 26). Second, He does so in accordance with God’s will (v. 27). And the third we find in verse 28: “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.” So now that we know the preceding context, let’s unpack this verse.

Often, Romans 8:28 is misquoted to say, “We know that all things work together for good.” But this leaves out two key phrases that put conditions on whom this verse can be applied to. As much as we would like it to be true, we can’t use this verse to say all things work together for good for everyone—because they don’t. This encouragement is only “for those who love God,” which, stated another way means “for those who are called according to his purpose.” In other words, only those who fit the description in the preceding verses of chapter 8, those who are filled with the Spirit, who have been adopted as God’s children, are those who can claim this promise.

But even when we get that part right, we can still misunderstand the point of this verse by holding onto a faulty idea of what it means for things to be “good.” In our limited perspective, we think that good equals easy, happy, or pain-free, and that anything difficult, sad, or painful is therefore bad. This view stems from our desire to live a comfortable life. But God’s framework for goodness is different from ours. His ultimate goal for us is not that we be comfortable but that we be holy, so that we may better enjoy and reflect His perfection and glory.

We see this in what comes immediately after verse 28: “For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son” (v. 29a, ESV). That is our destination—being made more like Jesus. That is the ultimate good, and that is what God uses “all things” to work toward in the lives of His adopted children. 

So the encouragement to us is that God is able to use even the brokenness of the world and flesh we live in to achieve the ultimate purpose for our lives—our sanctification. He is able to take the suffering and the groaning as we wait and make it work together for our good. Because, as Paul said in Romans 5:3-5, God makes it so that “suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us” (ESV). In God’s economy, suffering can be redeemed to produce goodness—and it is redeemed in the lives of those who follow Jesus.

So while Romans 8:28 isn’t a blanket promise for everyone to have a “good” life by the world’s standards of goodness, it’s a much better promise—that no matter what we face in life as followers of Jesus, God uses it all for present and eternal good in our lives as He molds us into Christ’s likeness. And there’s more good news, too. Although this verse doesn’t apply to everyone, it does not exclude the possibility of its applying to anyone; that is, the door is open for anyone to call on Jesus and be saved, becoming His follower, an adopted child of God, and a recipient of His Spirit and the promise of Romans 8:28. For anyone who turns from a life of serving self, with all the sin that such a life entails, and turns to a life of serving God, placing their trust in Jesus and what He did for us on the cross, this promise becomes theirs—immediately and eternally. How amazing is the goodness of God!

To read the Arabic translation of this post, click here.

لقراءة الترجمة العربية لهذا المنشور إضغط هنا.

---

[i] Nelson’s Complete Book of Bible Maps and Charts, 3^rd ed (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1996), 366.

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] Ibid., 367.

Convicting Questions in Light of the European Conflict

In my last post, I shared a couple of reasons we outside observers of the current conflict in Eastern Europe shouldn’t be shocked that such turmoil still exists in our world. But as I’ve been burdened by these recent events, there has been more to my thought process as I’ve been submitting my own perspectives and preconceptions to scrutiny. So today, I challenge you to join me in asking these questions of ourselves. They are difficult and painful to answer but worth answering honestly, no matter how uncomfortable it might be. Are you ready? Here we go...

Am I quick to have negative assumptions of individuals simply because of their nationality?

I’ve been encouraged in recent days to see many people reminding others that the Russian people are distinct from the Russian government (as could be said for Ukrainians and their government). It’s been heartening to see people verbalizing the truth that we shouldn’t be angry at all Russian citizens simply because we’re angry their government decided to invade another country. But it’s also telling and somewhat saddening that there is a need to verbalize such a truth, that it isn’t something everyone already understands and exhibits.

And yet, it still has to be said. Why? Because prejudice runs deep in the human heart, and humans, who love to take the easy path, tend to oversimplify things. Put those two things together, and it becomes understandable why we like to lump people into categories and ignore the nuances that make individuals different from each other. It’s a lot easier to think of all people who share a certain characteristic, like nationality, for instance, as falling into the same category to which we can apply a single value in our minds, either positive or negative. It’s more difficult to take the time and mental effort to parse the points of divergence among those people, especially when Person A might agree with Person B on one thing but with Person C on another thing, and Persons B and C, disagreeing on the first two things, might agree with each other but disagree with Person A on a third thing.

Age, gender, and ethnicity stereotypes are talked about a lot, but stereotyping nationalities is just as problematic. Often nationality stereotypes are tied to government actions. For example, individuals from a country might view individuals from a rival country with contempt, simply because the two countries are rivals. Or, people might assume that an individual from another country agrees with that country’s position on every issue. From traveling to multiple countries to now living in the Middle East, I know what it’s like to be viewed through the lens of my government, and it’s not fun to say the least.

So I have to ask myself: Do I do the same to other people? Do I think less of them because I don’t like what their government is doing? Do I think citizens of a corrupt government are correspondingly corrupt? Do I impute certain characteristics, mindsets, or motives onto people without first hearing from them directly—or even knowing them personally at all?

The current conflict in Europe is a good reminder to us to reevaluate our attitudes toward other people. And for those of us who are followers of Jesus, we have all the more reason to put to death our prejudices regarding nationality. Not only are we called to die to ourselves, but we are also commanded to treat others as we would want to be treated and are reminded in Scripture that God does not show favoritism, which stated another way, means He also shows no prejudice. May we submit our attitudes and opinions to Christ, allowing Him to refine us and remove the impurities of a prejudicial heart and mind.

But there’s another way we can exhibit latent prejudice in response to conflicts such as those we have seen in recent weeks, which brings me to another question:

Have I been so burdened by what is happening with Russia and Ukraine because I think Europeans are somehow above this kind of conflict in contrast to other parts of the world?

We are rightly burdened when we hear the stories and see the videos of children hunkered down in bomb shelters, of teenagers finding themselves in need of defending their homes with force, of babies being born underground, of people from all walks of life taking up arms to defend their cities. Brokenness in our world should hurt our hearts and fill us with compassion, just as it does our Savior. So, just as the last blog post was not minimizing the traumatic shock that those living through an earthly hell are experiencing, this section is in no way to diminish the suffering that is happening right now in Eastern Europe.

But as I have heard people’s heartrending stories straight from their mouths, I’ve had this nagging conviction press upon my heart. Am I burdened to the extent that I am because these people look like me and come from a part of the world whose way of life is very similar to my own? Do I think that somehow the experience of the Ukrainians and the Russian soldiers is more horrific than that of the people experiencing similar violence in the Middle East, Asia, or Africa because I think Europeans should be “past that kind of barbarity?” Or, put another way, do I think less of the oppression and violence on other continents because I think people from those parts of the world are less sophisticated and thus oppression and violence are just part of their way of life?

Remember when I said these questions wouldn’t be fun? As much as I’m ashamed to admit it, a part of me did look at the suffering in Europe differently from the suffering in other parts of the world, and I had to repent of my prejudice in this area.

Now some have said, and it is true, that it is not wrong for us to be more focused on some issues more than others. As David Platt has expressed in his book Counter Culture, God did not create us with the emotional capacity to carry the burdens of the entire world—only He can do that. So my challenge in this area is not to say that we have to give equally of our time, money, or care to every single conflict across the globe. God has laid different causes on different people’s hearts and given people particular passions to meet particular needs. But what I am doing is challenging us to examine our mindsets, to evaluate the way we think about people experiencing trauma whether from occupation, invasion, oppression, persecution, abuse, famine, disease, or natural disasters, and not to show favoritism or prejudice in our attitudes toward them.  

Every human being is created in the image of God and therefore has inherent value. Just because someone is born into a culture that tends to be more violent than another does not mean the trauma experienced is any less significant, any less horrific, or any less moving to God. So may we ask God to give us the heart of Christ, a heart of compassion for all who are suffering, regardless of what they look like or what country they are from. And as we continue to pray for Europe and to follow the Lord’s leading in sending support to the suffering, may we remember to do the same for other parts of the world as well, and may we find peace in knowing that God is strong enough to carry the burdens of all those we cannot reach or do not know. After all, He loves them more than anyone could ever imagine—just as He loves us. 

Food for Thought from the Breadbasket of Europe: Reflections on Ukraine, Russia, and the World in which We Live

I was planning this week on writing a second installment about Bible verses that are taken out of context, but with recent developments in Eastern Europe, I found my thoughts coalescing around other topics. So instead, I’ll be sharing some of my multi-track-train of thought regarding these current events and how they can serve as a reminder to us of some important truths.

In the early hours after Russia’s attacks on Ukraine began on Thursday, I heard multiple people on the news, on social media, and through private conversations express amazement that such a turn of events was possible in the 21^st century. It was as if they were genuinely stunned that with all our technological advancement, global collaboration, and general “progress,” it was still possible for countries to want to forcibly take over other countries and for individuals to be so power-hungry that they are willing to sacrifice countless lives to get what they want. “I can’t believe this is happening in 2022.” “This is just unreal that we are facing this in the 21^st century.” Such were the general utterances.

I’ll admit, when I first heard this sentiment expressed, I was inclined to agree. As much as we hear talk of “world peace,” a “global community,” showing kindness to others, and just “getting along,” it can be hard to imagine that there are still people who seek to cause division, assert dominance, and fracture harmony on the world stage. As much as we hear about the past cruelties of Hitler and Stalin, it can be hard to imagine that similarly-minded men are able to rise to and remain in places of power in the present. But once I started to ruminate on the shock that so many people were showing, I realized there are two reasons the recent conflict in the breadbasket of Europe shouldn’t shock us at all.

An important side note: the shock that I am referring to here is not the experiential shock that those who are actually living through these events first-hand are facing but rather the perplexed shock of outside observers whose day-to-day lives are continuing essentially as usual. The traumatic shock of being forced to flee your home on foot, of being separated from family members you might never see again, of seeing and hearing and feeling the places you know and love be obliterated by a neighboring, foreign military—the shock that these things are happening to your home and you are the one having to make unthinkable decisions is completely warranted, and nothing said in this post should be construed as trivializing or belittling that. Now that that’s cleared up, let’s get to those reasons that outside observers of these events shouldn’t really be surprised.

Understanding current events is next to impossible when accurate history is not understood.

I would venture a guess that most people have the association “Hitler=bad” in their awareness of world history. But how many people know why he is one of the most infamous men in history? Other than the fact that his regime killed millions of people, how many people know what motivated him, why he was able to rise to power in the first place, or what his goal in life was? How many people know about the causal connection between how the end of World War I was handled and how World War II began? How many people comprehend the nature of shifting alliances throughout history, or are even aware, for example, that the United States and the Soviets were allies before they were enemies? How many people understand the ways in which the map of Europe was drawn and redrawn and redrawn again over the course of the past several hundred years?

It’s a famous saying from George Santayana that “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” and an equally famous variation on the theme, from Winston Churchill, that “those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” I would wholeheartedly agree with both men, but I would go one step further and say that those who do not understand history are not able to recognize when others—or themselves—repeat it. When we fail to understand how events cause other events, how actions (or lack of actions) have ripple effects, how past atrocities are not unconnected from the present but rather fall within a succession of days, each one touching the one after it until tomorrow becomes today, then it is no wonder we find ourselves shocked when the things we thought were reserved to the history books suddenly splash into our insulated “peace, love, and harmony” lives.

History is not just dusty old stories of days long gone. History is the events of the past that have had direct consequences on events of today. And if we want to avoid seeing more repeats of the world’s lowlight reel, we would do well to seek out accurate accounts of the past, to become students of the mistakes, successes, triumphs, and failures of those who have gone before us, and to become well-informed citizens of our local communities, our nations, and our world, so that we can understand where we’ve been and where we’re headed and course-correct accordingly. When we do understand these things, we won’t be so shocked by what we see on the news. But there’s another reason we shouldn’t be shocked that “something like this is happening in our modern (or post-modern) society.”

Human nature is just as fallen today as it has been throughout history.

Some of the astonished remarks mentioned above revealed a lack of historical awareness, but what they also reveal is a misplaced hope in the betterment of humanity through human striving. We have global athletic events such as the Olympics with themes focusing on togetherness; we have diplomatic bodies with at least a stated purpose of preserving world peace; we have technological advancements that were the stuff of science fiction mere decades ago; we have remote work and social media networks that connect and humanize people around the world in a way never before experienced. Shouldn’t we be past ethnic conflicts? Shouldn’t we be past reckless hubris? Shouldn’t we be past bloody wars over pieces of land? So the thinking goes.

But the answer to those questions is, “No, we shouldn’t.” Because no amount of technological, diplomatic, or goodwill-engendering “progress” will change the fact that the default of human beings is self-serving, self-righteous self-exaltation that seeks personal glory instead of God’s glory, that seeks to live by our own law instead of God’s, and that seeks to build our own thrones instead of kneeling in worship at the throne of the King of Kings. We have no reason to expect humanity to be doing better today than it did in previous centuries.

Humans cannot evolve into morally superior beings; we can’t work our way into an unblemished state; we can’t repair the seared consciences we were born with. “As it is written: ‘None are righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one’” (Romans 3:10-12, ESV). This means that all the self-help books, all the sensitivity trainings, all the social harmony exercises are impotent to root out the problems of pride, prejudice, racism, hatred, envy, and greed that characterize our fallenness. Only one thing has the power to do that, or rather, only one Person.

The One who created the unblemished human nature is the only one able to remove the blemishes that disfigured that nature once Adam and Eve disobeyed. He can do this because He came himself to live among us as Jesus Christ, fully man yet still fully God, and lived the perfect, righteous, blameless life that none of us are able to. Then He took our punishment for us—nothing less than death—so that anyone who believes in Him can be rescued from experiencing that punishment themselves. And finally, He sent His Spirit to give new life to those who believe in Him, enabling those people to forsake the vices of their old, fallen nature and be changed from the inside out. In the absence of this regenerative work, then, there is no lasting hope of peace on earth and goodwill among men.

In short, we can hardly be surprised when those enslaved to sin keep on sinning against God and against their fellow human beings. And until we recognize that none of us has the power to fix anyone else, we will keep being surprised when our collective efforts to “make the world a better place” and “live in peace” fail time and time again. May the horrid brokenness that we see in our world today drive us to admit that we cannot help ourselves. May it cause us to cry out to the mercy of the good Creator God whose kindness draws people to repentance (see Romans 2:4). May it prompt us to kneel in humility and raise our hands in surrender, acknowledging that we are powerless to do better—to be better—on our own. And may it light a fire within us to carry the hope of Jesus into the darkness with an urgency like never before.

Strength in Context: A Closer Look at Philippians 4:13

Among the things I count most valuable from my history training is an understanding of the importance of context. It’s something that influences much of the way I think and interact with the world, because I’ve found that without it the chance of misunderstanding and miscommunication grows exponentially, whether interpersonally, scholastically, or cross-culturally. And when it comes to reading the Bible, context is no less important.

Yet so often, we pluck a single verse as if it were a daisy while ignoring the field of flowers in which it lives. We interpret a verse to mean a certain thing with no understanding of what was said just before or just after it. You can imagine the mess that could result from someone overhearing only a single sentence of a 20-minute conversation and formulating an entire opinion of the speaker and the situation based on that one out-of-context statement. So why do we think we can do the same with Scripture and avoid a similar misunderstanding? If we want to responsibly interact with God’s Word, then we should care about reading it in context and interpreting and applying it accordingly.

With that in mind, today’s post marks the first in a new miniseries here on An Iris Awaits in which we’ll look more closely at some of the Bible verses that are often taken out of context and thus misinterpreted. And what better place to start than perhaps the most commonly context-stripped verse of all—Philippians 4:13. One of the first verses children memorize, it’s plastered all over athletic posters, spoken in team huddles, whispered as a mantra, depended on as motivation in the face of something requiring physical exertion, and on and on. You know the one: “I can do all things through him who strengthens me” (ESV), or in another translation: “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me” (NKJV).

When we look at this verse by itself, it seems pretty straightforward. I mean, “all” means “all,” right? Well, yes and no. I think we can agree that someone committing fraud, murder, or any other number of sins would be off base quoting this verse to themselves as encouragement to carry out their schemes. So if Paul wasn’t making a blanket statement about God giving us strength to do whatever we want, then what was he talking about? Any guesses as to how we find out? If you said, “Look at the context!” then you’d be right! It's important to remember that Paul didn’t make this statement in a vacuum. In fact, Philippians 4:13 is nestled right in the middle of a section in which Paul is making a point about something very specific—receiving generosity and being content.

Coming at the end of his letter to the Philippians, this section begins with Paul’s rejoicing over the ways in which the Philippian believers, part of Paul’s family in Christ, have provided for his physical needs. Let’s take a look:

“I rejoiced in the Lord greatly that now at length you have revived your concern for me. You were indeed concerned for me, but you had no opportunity. Not that I am speaking of being in need, for I have learned in whatever situation I am to be content. I know how to be brought low, and I know how to abound. In any and every circumstance, I have learned the secret of facing plenty and hunger, abundance and need. I can do all things through him who strengthens me.

"Yet it was kind of you to share my trouble. And you Philippians yourselves know that in the beginning of the gospel, when I left Macedonia, no church entered into partnership with me in giving and receiving, except you only. Even in Thessalonica you sent me help for my needs once and again. Not that I seek the gift, but I seek the fruit that increases to your credit. I have received full payment, and more. I am well supplied, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God. And my God will supply every need of yours according to his riches in glory in Christ Jesus. To our God and Father be glory forever and ever. Amen” (Philippians 4:10-20, ESV).

So after referring to the recent way God used the Philippians to provide for him, Paul looks further back and shares from personal experience how God had used all kinds of situations to teach him how to be content “in any and every circumstance.” Regardless of whether he was faced with scarcity or enjoying having more than he needed, he had learned to be content. And it’s in this context that he shares, “I can do all things through him who strengthens me.” In other words, he was able to “be brought low” with graciousness just as he was able to enjoy abundance with the same attitude because of the strength of Christ.

The New International Version, a functional translation rather than a literal one[i], translates the verse this way, which I think better expresses Paul’s original intent: “I can do all this through him who gives me strength” (emphasis added). When we look at the context of Philippians 4, we can see that when Paul says “all,” he is talking about all kinds of circumstances, not all kinds of tasks, all kinds of situations, not all kinds of endeavors. He was able to be content “in whatever situation” because Christ gave him the strength to do so—and I think we can all agree that being content in any and every circumstance requires a strength beyond our own.

Now of course, we know that God does give us strength to do any number of things, even things that are insignificant in the scheme of eternity. Every breath we breathe, every ability to move every muscle, every capacity for thought and reason, every ounce of sustenance both physical and spiritual comes from Him. And when we are lacking strength in any area, we are certainly right to come before His throne of grace and ask Him to give us strength. Looking at Philippians 4:13 in its context does not negate these things.

But while it is true that any physical strength we have to run a race or lift a weight, any mental strength we have to take an exam or learn a language, any emotional strength we have to love others or put to death envy or anger is only ours because God has given it to us, those things are not the point of Philippians 4:13. In this verse, Paul is talking about a deep, inner strength by which he was able to live in contentment regardless of his circumstances. And even though he was speaking about his own personal experience, I think the principle that God’s strength is sufficient to equip a person with contentment is applicable to us as well. Whatever joyous or painful things come our way, regardless of whether we are hungry or full, regardless of whether we are covered or unsheltered, we can be content in any circumstance through Christ who gives us strength. Praise be to God for this supernatural gift!

To read the Arabic translation of this post, click here.

.لقراءة الترجمة العربية لهذا المنشور إضغط هنا

Artwork by Karla Forrest. 

Used with permission.

---

[i] Functional translations of the Bible translate phrases of the original language into phrases that mean the same thing in the new language, with the effect that the ideas communicated are the same even though there is not a one-to-one correspondence between the words from each language. Literal translations translate each individual word.

“Copperhead Christianity”

Recently, I’ve been doing research to help me contextualize the life of my 3x-great-grandfather, Vasa Bozarris Jones (1823-1910), who served for a time as a circuit-riding preacher in Ohio with the United Brethren in Christ. This denomination published a newspaper called the Religious Telescope, and as I was browsing the issues from 1864, I came across an article that appears to have been republished from the New York Tribune (basically a “retweet” of the 19th century) entitled “Copperhead Christianity.”[i] The article was striking on so many levels, I thought I would share it here with some commentary.

But first, some context. Published January 6, 1864, this issue was released in the late-middle of the Civil War by a publisher based in the North. The battles of Manassas/Bull Run, Antietam, Shiloh, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, Vicksburg, and Chattanooga were in the rearview mirror, and the Wilderness, Cold Harbor, Atlanta, the Crater, Franklin, and Appomattox were still to come. Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation had been issued just over a year earlier in September 1862, and African-Americans had been fighting for the Union in the US Colored Troops division for several months.

The Religious Telescope kept its readers up-to-date with the latest war news, publishing accounts of battles, the latest from Washington, D. C., letters from soldiers on the front, and reports from a captured surgeon in a POW camp. But they also tied the doctrine of their religious beliefs to the war effort, particularly with the issue of slavery. The United Brethren in Christ was a strictly abolitionist denomination, meaning they opposed slavery and wanted it to end. The 1861 edition of their doctrinal and constitutional book, known as the Discipline for short, explicitly states, “All slavery in every sense of the word, is totally prohibited, and shall in no way be tolerated in our church. Should any be found in our society who hold slaves, they can not continue as members unless they do personally manumit or set free such slaves.”[ii] So the Religious Telescope was accordingly abolitionist in sentiment.

The same could not be said for all Christian denominations, however. In fact, throughout the country, but especially in the South, there were Christians who misinterpreted specific passages of the Bible and used them to support their belief that slavery was not only not-wrong but was actually God-ordained. Sadly, my own denomination fell into this category at that time, but thankfully Vasa’s didn’t.

But just as religion was split over the war and slavery, so too was politics. During the Civil War, unlike today, the South was overwhelmingly Democratic, whereas the North was predominantly Republican. Pro-slavery, racist attitudes and the Democratic Party went hand-in-hand as the Confederacy fought not only to become independent from the United States but also to protect the institution of slavery. Democrats in the North were divided regarding their level of support for the war. One faction, that was particularly opposed to the war and wanted to negotiate with the South, was known as Peace Democrats or Copperheads, and racism, along with hatred of abolitionists, often characterized its ranks.

With those contextual notes in mind, we can now turn to the article entitled, “Copperhead Christianity.” The quoted portions will be italicized, with my comments interspersed in regular print.

“The peace ‘Democrats’ of Ohio are to have a New Gospel preached unto them by a brace of Apostles rejoicing in the names of Edson B. Olds and Virgil E. Shaw. That they may accomplish this ecclesiastical phenomenon, Olds and Shaw have addressed an epistle to Gov. Medary, begging him to summon at an early day, in conjunction with said Olds and Shaw, ‘a State Convention for devising some plan for a new Church organization, in which Democrats may enjoy the privilege of hearing pure Gospel unmixed with Abolition fanaticism.’ Medary responds that he is ‘gratified,’ and he invokes all Democratic professors and confessors, where they are in majority in any church, ‘to see to it that Magdalen Devils are expunged, and that the control of the church is placed in hands which will not disgrace the religion such churches profess.’”

Olds, a former U.S. Congressman, was a leading Peace Democrat and was serving in the Ohio House of Representatives at the time this article was written. Presumably, Shaw was a Peace Democrat as well. Governor Medary, another outspoken Copperhead, was not the governor of Ohio as one might assume, but rather was a newspaper man who had served in the Ohio House and Senate. The “governor” title referred to his previous positions as governor of the Minnesota and Kansas Territories during the 1850s.

As the article explains, Olds and Shaw wrote a letter to Medary asking him to organize a gathering to create a new denomination for Democrats who didn’t want to hear anti-slavery sentiment from the pulpit. Their statement that the “pure Gospel” had nothing to do with abolitionism is appalling to our ears today but reveals the twisted theology that many blindly accepted at the time. Medary seemed to share this theology, as he revealed his opinion of abolitionism as that which would “disgrace the religion.” He goes a step further and equates abolitionists to Magdalen Devils, apparently referencing the demons that Jesus cast out of Mary Magdalene.

The article continues, dripping with the author’s sarcasm:

“We would suggest, if our profane suggestions might be permitted, a kind of composite or eclectic faith, which shall contain elegant extracts from a variety of creeds, and embrace whatever is tenderly savage, sweetly barbarous, deliciously cruel and virtuously brutal in all religions ancient and modern.

“Fully satisfied as we are of the ability of Medary and his friends to found a religion from which both faith and works shall be rigorously excluded, while whatever things are false, whatever things are dishonest, whatever are unjust, whatever things are impure, whatever things are of evil report, shall be affectionately included—and very much we should like to hear the Rev Mr. Medary preach his first sermon!”

Here the author points out the backwardness of the Copperheads’ perspective, showing the unbiblical nature of creating a pro-slavery church by referencing Philippians 4:8, which says to think on “whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable,” and replacing each adjective with its opposite. But the author is just getting started…

“For our own part, humanly speaking, we can not sufficiently commend the prudence of this movement. We have long thought it must be extremely painful for devotees of the Medary stamp—human, we suppose, they must be, for do they not wear coats and pantaloons, and eat with a fork?—very painful, indeed for them to go to church, to be told that all men are brethren, equal in the sight of God. They arrive at their conclusion [that all men are not equal] quite honestly. They reason thus: We know that we are not equal with honest men [the implication is that they know they are dishonest], but we also know that we are superior to ‘n[------].’ Therefore all men are not equal. Therefore we will have a new church, in which a sinner can worship comfortably without having his sins impudently thrown in his teeth. What is the use of possessing a religion if you can not enjoy it?”

The author joins in on the insult-throwing a bit, joking that the only thing that makes it clear that pro-slavery Peace Democrats aren’t animals is that they wear clothes and eat with a fork. He then continues his sarcastic rebuttal and provides a thread of reasoning that he supposes the Peace Democrats must follow: they must know deep-down that they are dishonest and so are not equal with honest men but they think themselves superior to people with dark skin, so of course they conclude that men are not created equal—and therefore they can’t tolerate going to a church that preaches the equality of all human beings. This line of reasoning might seem extreme to us, but how often are we guilty of wanting our comfort above sound doctrine? How often do we balk at conviction instead of humbly submitting our thoughts and opinions to the Lordship of Christ?

Having tried to make his point through sarcasm, the author turns next to a more serious approach:

“We must say that we regard this movement as a substantial surrender of the Christian argument in support of Slavery. There are many meeting-houses and many sects in Ohio, numerous forms of faith, and various shades of ecclesiastical polity—Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans, Roman Catholics, Unitarians, Calvinists, Universalists—and here are Governor Medary, and Edson B. Olds, and Virgil E. Shaw, who can not find a single lonesome little chapel in which slaveholding is scrupulously sustained, but are absolutely compelled to set up a private Ebenezer, a separate establishment, an altar of their own!”

The point is that the very expression of a need for a pro-slavery church shows how many churches and denominations in Ohio were standing firm on the truth and speaking out against slavery. With that serious point out of the way, the author turns back to sarcasm:

“But Medary must not be discouraged. Mohammed for a long time had only one convert, and even she was his wife; whereas Medary has two humble and devoted disciples already, viz:—Edson b. Olds and Virgial E. Shaw! Let him thank the proper heathen deity—Mercury, the god of lies, for instance—and take courage!

“These new prophets will doubtless want a new ritual for their new religion; and it would be well for them to send to Utah for a journeyman who is well skilled in such manufactures. A great deal must be done with the Epistle to Philemon. They can have it read as the First Lesson and the Second Lesson—they can have it arranged as an oratorio—they can have a sermon from each of its twenty five verses—they can make much of it, as about the only piece of Scripture which will be edifying in their pulpits.”

Implying that to be pro-slavery is outside the bounds of orthodox Christianity, the author points out that what Medary, Olds, and Shaw are wanting to do is basically start a different religion. And a new religion needs new practices, so the author suggests getting someone from Utah to help, presumably a reference to the Mormons who had begun a new religion under the self-proclaimed new prophet Joseph Smith a few decades earlier. Because a new religion obviously will not adhere to all of Scripture, the author suggests this new pro-slavery “church” will have to lean on Philemon, one of the passages of Scripture that was misinterpreted as an approval of institutionalized slavery. He continues…

“Instead of the usual benediction, the priest can bawl through a speaking trumpet: ‘Cursed be Canaan,’ while all the congregation responds:—‘Cursed be Canaan,’ the voices of Medary, Olds and Shaw being particularly sonorous.”

This refers to what was perhaps the bedrock of pro-slavery theology, a misinterpretation of the curse Noah placed on Ham’s son Canaan found in Genesis 9:25: “Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be to his brothers” (ESV). Because African peoples descend from Ham, people believed that this verse meant Africans were destined to be slaves to the descendants of Shem and Japheth (aka non-Africans). They conveniently ignored the fact that Ham’s descendants through Canaan were actually the Canaanites that we read about in the rest of the Pentateuch and Historical books in the Old Testament.

But this new religion would need more elements to fill its services, so the author says…

“If there be any praying, it must be for Rebel victories—if there be any fasting, it must be for Rebel defeats—if there be any preaching, it must be an exposition of the wickedness of doing unto others as we would have them do unto us. Upon great occasions it would be well to offer up a black man—one caught running through Ohio from Kentucky [i.e. a runaway enslaved man] would be particularly acceptable—and upon very great occasions a woman with her little child might be burned, with a rattling concert of drums presented to the new Ohio church by the Monarch of Dahomey.”

Dahomey was a kingdom in Africa, in the region of modern-day Benin, that was well-known as a major player in the slave trade, capturing fellow Africans and selling them to Europeans. The author’s sarcasm seems to border on shocking here, but it shows the horrors of racism and morally equates support of the institution of slavery with human sacrifice and murder. The point is that all are equally abhorrent. But the horrific language, the author agrees, is a lot to take, as he concludes the article with…

“We know that these discussions can not be quite agreeable to our gentle, genial readers; but we have wished to put upon record this Ohio enterprise. One hundred years hence, such a narrative will be in danger of being regarded as utterly fabulous [i.e. unbelievable]. Should this article then meet the eyes of some antiquarian, we beg leave to assure him that a New Religion was actually set on foot in Ohio in 1863, and that the names of its apostles were Medary, Olds, and shaw [sic]!”

I don’t know about you, but that last paragraph gave me chills. I was the “some antiquarian,” the person interested in things of the past whose eyes happened to meet this article, as the author anticipated. You and I—we are the posterity the author had in mind. He wanted to write this article to record the racism and pro-slavery attitudes that were behind this attempt to create a new church. Why? Because he guessed that in the future people would have a hard time believing that such blatant racism and callousness were second-nature and applauded by so many and so that future generations would realize what had happened in the past and where we had come from as a nation.

In many ways, his prediction came true. While racism still exists in America—and around the world—many people, and often Christians in particular, have a hard time acknowledging that fact and acknowledging the extreme racism that infected some of the Church and upheld institutional slavery in America in the not-so-distant past. This author’s article makes us confront the ugliness of the self-righteousness and prejudice that ran rampant in our ancestors’ world, and in doing so makes us consider our own society and individual lives.

We would do well to see this article as a reminder that the Church can get it wrong. While there were many churches and many Christians who stayed true to the Bible, as this article also shows, there were still many, like the “Copperhead Christians,” who read God’s Word and misused it to suit their own interests and perpetuate their own sinful behavior, convincing themselves that they weren’t in fact sinning at all. If humans before us could fall into that trap, so can we, and we must remain humble as we approach Scripture, asking God to strip away any selfish misconceptions we might hold and to help us rightly interpret His Word—because “Copperhead Christianity” is not a Christianity worth having at all.

---

[i] “Copperhead Christianity,” Religious Telescope (Dayton, Ohio), Jan. 6, 1864, digital image, Huntington University, https://palni.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p15705coll63/id/477/rec/1 : accessed 27 January 2022.

[ii] Origin, Doctrine, Constitution, and Discipline, of the United Brethren in Christ (Dayton, Ohio: United Brethren Printing Establishment, 1861), 81, digital image, HathiTrust https://hdl.handle.net/2027/nnc1.cr60175818.

What Talking in Circles Showed Me about God

When my husband and I were in the early days of our relationship, I remember finding it difficult to be patient whenever he would tell me stories about his day or his past. It wasn’t that I wasn’t interested, it was just that he seemed to be repeating the same details over and over in the course of a few minutes. “Yes, I got it the first time,” it was hard not to say. But thankfully a friend of mine, who had lived for a time in the Middle East, mentioned one day how Arabs speak circularly and how that can be difficult for Americans, who are very linear by nature, to adjust to.

In case you haven’t noticed, Americans are typically get-to-the-point, cut-to-the-chase, keep-moving-forward kind of people. Repeating the same parts of the story over and over again is a waste of time and energy—and Americans (generally, as a whole) are all about efficiency, productivity, and time. Arabs, on the other hand, are much more laid-back when it comes to life in general. Time is more of an afterthought rather than the ruler of the day; projects don’t have to be completed all in one day just because they can be; community (socializing) and refreshment (rest and food) often take precedence over productivity. 

So when my friend mentioned how the different communication styles are connected to these differences between the cultures, suddenly, it all made sense. My future husband was just communicating in the way his culture had trained him to. And my impatience was just a reflection of the way my brain had been trained to communicate in my culture and how it hadn’t yet grown to the point where it could adapt between the two.

I’m still a work in progress, but with God’s help, I’m learning to be more patient, especially since now it’s not just my husband but my whole community who communicate in a circular way. And while it can be frustrating in the meantime as my brain continues to adjust, I have found that once again a cultural difference has enlightened my understanding of God and of the Bible.

Have you ever noticed particularly, it seems, in the Old Testament how repetitive the Bible is? I’m not talking about the kind of repetition that would indicate points of emphasis that we look for when studying a particular passage of Scripture. I’m talking about instances like in Daniel 3 where the phrase “the sound of the horn, pipe, lyre, trigon, harp, bagpipe, and every kind of music” is repeated almost ad nauseum in the account of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego and the fiery furnace. Like, really? We get it. When you hear the music, you’re supposed to bow down. No need to tell us every single instrument—every single time.

Another example is Ezekiel 21:1-5 (ESV):

The word of the Lord came to me: “Son of man, set your face toward Jerusalem and preach against the sanctuaries. Prophesy against the land of Israel and say to the land of Israel, Thus says the Lord: Behold, I am against you and will draw my sword from its sheath and will cut off from you both righteous and wicked. Because I will cut off from you both righteous and wicked, therefore my sword shall be drawn from its sheath against all flesh from south to north. And all flesh shall know that I am the Lord. I have drawn my sword from its sheath; it shall not be sheathed again.”

Do you see the repetition and circular language? Look at the passage again, marked this time:

The word of the Lord came to me: “Son of man, set your face toward Jerusalem and preach against the sanctuaries. Prophesy against the land of Israel and say to the land of Israel, Thus says the Lord: Behold, I am against you and will draw my sword from its sheath and will cut off from you both righteous and wicked. Because I will cut off from you both righteous and wicked, therefore my sword shall be drawn from its sheath against all flesh from south to north. And all flesh shall know that I am the Lord. I have drawn my sword from its sheath; it shall not be sheathed again.”

I will draw my sword --> I will cut you off --> I will cut you off --> my sword shall be drawn --> I have drawn my sword.

And in Ezekiel 22:19-22 (ESV):

Therefore thus says the Lord God: Because you have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem. As one gathers silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into a furnace, to blow the fire on it in order to melt it, so I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath, and I will put you in and melt you. I will gather you and blow on you with the fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it. As silver is melted in a furnace, so you shall be melted in the midst of it, and you shall know that I am the Lord; I have poured out my wrath upon you.”

Repeated again, with emphasis added:

Therefore thus says the Lord God: Because you have all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem. As one gathers silver and bronze and iron and lead and tin into a furnace, to blow the fire on it in order to melt it, so I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath, and I will put you in and melt you. I will gather you and blow on you with the fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it. As silver is melted in a furnace, so you shall be melted in the midst of it, and you shall know that I am the Lord; I have poured out my wrath upon you.”

I will gather you --> as one gathers silver to melt it --> I will gather you in my wrath and melt you --> I will gather you and blow with my wrath, and you shall be melted --> as silver is melted you shall be melted from my wrath.

See the circle?

To my American brain, these passages are difficult to read, because it feels like God is just saying the same thing over and over again unnecessarily. But once I realized that this type of circular communication is a characteristic of Middle Eastern culture (likely reaching back to ancient days), I realized that God was speaking to the people in the way that they would understand. Daniel’s repetition of the phrase about all the instruments was a reflection of the communication style of his culture. And God’s words to Ezekiel were spoken in the form that fit the culture they were being spoken into.

So not only must we evaluate the Bible within its historical and cultural contexts, but also we can learn from doing so how kind and considerate and wise the God of the Bible is. Being the all-knowing Creator, He knows how every culture operates. And being the loving Communicator, He reveals Himself to us, His creatures, in ways we will understand. He did this in the days of the Bible, and He is still doing so today.

For example, have you noticed that there are so many more instances of people coming to know Jesus through dreams in Middle Eastern and Eastern cultures than in Western ones? Why is that? Perhaps it’s because dreams are an important part of non-western cultures, whereas westerners tend to be skeptical of dreams and more reliant on reasoning and written communication and because God knows this and provides avenues of learning about Him that will be most meaningful to the receiver.

But the ultimate example of God’s perfectly directed communication style is Jesus Himself. As Hebrews 1:1 says, “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days, he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world” (ESV). God reveals Himself through the written word in the Bible, as he spoke through the prophets in a way the people could understand. But God also revealed Himself in the living Word (see John 1) when He took on human flesh and lived a human life in a human culture so that we could have an intermediary between us and God who can actually relate to us experientially—to our emotions, our struggles, our joys—and to whom we can relate as well (see Hebrews 2:17-18; 4:14-16).

So whether it’s the repetitive passages in the Old Testament or the accounts of Jesus’ life in the New Testament, each serves as a reminder to us of the depth of God’s love. As we read all of Scripture in context and learn about Jesus, we see that God loves us enough to speak to us and, beyond that, to speak in a way that we can understand—even when that meant condescending to live bodily among us. What a wonderful, kind God He is!

Never Out of Office

Have you ever needed to stop by a coworker’s desk only to find that they’ve stepped away or maybe gone to lunch? Or have you ever sent an email only to have the out-of-office reply bounce back to you? Maybe you’ve experienced living in a different time zone from friends or family and having the impulse to text or call them only to realize they’re asleep at that time?

It can be frustrating sometimes when people are not available when we want them to be and, at other times, critical when we need them and they are nowhere to be found. Part of this frustration simply comes from our impatience or selfishness for wanting people to be around when it suits us, but sometimes urgent matters arise, and we truly need assistance right away. When the person who can give that assistance isn’t available, it can be downright frightening.

As we head into 2022, there are a lot of unknowns, just as there are at the beginning of every other year. What will this year hold? What joys will we experience? What goals will we accomplish? What challenges will we face? What grief will we endure? The past two years have held an incredible amount of loss for so many. Will great losses continue this year? Will those we love be around or services and supplies be available when we need them? While the former questions are filled with promise and hope, the latter ones can bring anxiety.

But what if we were guaranteed to always have access to what—or who—we needed? What if we were never met with that out-of-office reply or the out-to-lunch sign? What if our messages were never silenced by “Do Not Disturb”?

Wonderfully for us, the answer to these questions doesn’t have to be hypothetical, because God, the One who created us and sustains us, is always on His throne. As David, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, wrote, “The LORD is in his holy temple” (Psalm 11:4a, ESV). He is not out of the office. The Great Physician is in. The Provider is in. The Justifier is in. The Merciful One is in. When we are ill, we can come to the One who designed every cell of our bodies. When we are in need, we can approach the One who owns everything in existence. When we commit wrong, we can plead the blood of Jesus to the One who is always Just. When we are weak, we can fall into the strong arms of the One who lavishes mercy. Anytime. Anywhere. He is always available.

Unlike the other spiritual forces, inanimate objects, or human beings that people worship as gods, Yahweh, the God of the Bible, is never “relieving himself;” He is never out of town; He is never asleep. (See 1 Kings 18 and Psalm 121.) And above that, despite His upholding and being sovereign over everything, He is never too busy to be attentive to our every prayer, thought, and cry for help. He is never in a meeting. He is never on the phone. He’s never preoccupied. His limitlessness makes it possible for Him to be wholly available to each and every one of us every single moment of our entire lives. I don’t know about you, but that kind of blows my mind.    

There’s more, though. Psalm 11:4 says, “The LORD is in his holy temple;” but it continues, “the LORD’s throne is in heaven” (ESV). See, it’s not just that God is like a manager who’s never out of the office, a parent who’s never distracted, or a friend who’s never asleep. He is always “at His desk” (i.e., on His throne), but His “office” is heaven itself. He sits enthroned in the highest of heights, the holiest of holies. He has the most authority of any being to ever exist and the capacity to exercise that authority flawlessly. In fact, He can’t not be present and attentive and flawless in the exercise of His authority because that would be contrary to the essence of who He is.

There is much to be in awe of when it comes to God, and this two-fold fact—that He is always on His throne and that His throne is above all things—should fill us with wonder, praise, gratitude, and peace. It means that regardless of what we face in the coming year, we will never be without help. We will never be unable to contact the One from whom we most desperately need to hear. We will never encounter something that has taken Him by surprise. We will never be alone.

So as we enter the seemingly blank pages of 2022, may we rest assured that God already knows what they hold, that He is reigning constantly and securely on the mightiest throne, and that when we call out to Him, we will never be met with an out-of-office reply. Because the God of all creation is perfectly and perennially and eternally “in.”

To read the Arabic translation of this post, click here.

لقراءة الترجمة العربية لهذا المنشور إضغط هنا.

PC: Yandle Multimedia Photography. 

Used with permission.