Posts

Posted on

Is it Ok to CoSign on the Loan of Another Person?

Proverbs 6

1My child, if you co-sign a loan for a friend or guarantee the debt of someone you hardly know—2if you have trapped yourself by your agreement and are caught by what you said—3quick, get out of it if you possibly can! You have placed yourself at your friend’s mercy. Now swallow your pride; go and beg to have your name erased. 4Don’t put it off. Do it now! Don’t rest until you do. 5Save yourself like a deer escaping from a hunter, like a bird fleeing from a net. (Proverbs 6:1-5, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

The Bible is a guidebook for living and the book of Proverbs, in particular, is written in order to provide instruction for living righteously and with “good conduct.” The author promises that those who read these Proverbs will grow in “wisdom and discipline.”

One area that is addressed throughout Proverbs is the area of finances and money management.

In this passage, Solomon advises the reader against the practice of co-signing a loan for another.

Solomon doesn’t mince words as he describes this scenario as a “trap” because you have placed yourself at your friend’s (or relative’s) mercy.

What does he mean and why does he say that? What’s the big deal?

Many people are unaware of the implications of co-signing a loan.

Co-signing a loan is not simply a matter of going into business with another person or becoming an equal investor in some financial venture.

When you cosign a loan with another person, you are essentially offering a guarantee to the bank that YOU will step in and honor the terms of the loan if the primary borrower cannot.

Co-signing a loan often occurs when the primary borrower (the signer) is deemed by the lender to be a credit risk, and therefore cannot qualify for a loan on their own for whatever they are purchasing.

There are any number of reasons why a person would not be able to qualify on their own for a loan.

One reason is that they don’t make enough money with their job to meet minimum standards the bank has set for income to debt ratios. In other words, based on basic loan standards, the monthly payment amount required for whatever loan the person might be seeking is too high relative to the amount of their monthly income. The bank has all kinds of statistics and predictors to evaluate various loan scenarios and they know that the higher percentage your payment is relative to your income, the more likely you are to default on a loan.

Another reason why a person might not be able to qualify for a loan on their own is because they have a poor credit history. A person’s credit score is a reflection of their ability to honor their financial commitments. Low credit scores often mean the person has missed payments in the past and/or they have too much personal debt. The lower your credit score, the more you are perceived by the lender to be a risky borrower – someone who has missed payments, made late payments or has completely defaulted on a loan.

So when a person finds themselves unable to borrow money, they may turn to a friend or relative to help them secure the loan by acting as a co-signer for the loan.

Solomon says that you shouldn’t put yourself in the position of being a cosigner. It’s incredibly foolish for a number of reasons.

When you co-sign a loan for another person, you are legally guaranteeing to the lender that if the primary borrower defaults, you will be responsible for the loan.

Why would anyone do that?

Think about it. If the bank won’t lend to the person on their own, why would they lend to them with you as a cosigner? The reason is because you have good credit and you are essentially vouching for the person in such a way that you’re putting yourself on the hook for that financial obligation should they default. If they are already deemed by the bank to be a person who cannot be relied upon to pay back a loan, they will STILL be unreliable even after you cosign. You will then be the guarantor for that loan.

In other words, cosigning a loan is incredibly foolish because there is a good chance it will become your legal obligation.

Horror stories abound when things go sideways after cosigning a loan. You may have creditors coming after you. Your wages could get garnished as creditors seek to recover unpaid payments, penalties and interest. Your credit score might get damaged as someone else’s debts and poor financial track record gets tied to you.

A poor credit score might impact your own ability to get a car loan or even buy a house, as lenders now view you as a borrowing risk, all because someone else decided that being financially responsible wasn’t important to them.

I know what you’re thinking…

“Shouldn’t we help people? Wouldn’t it be mean not to help a person who is in a bind? Shouldn’t we be Good Samaritans?”

Yes, it is a good thing to help people but not every course of action is helpful or wise. Helping another person does not mean you should do something foolish like guarantee their loan. Perhaps the best way to help a person is to force them to live in the reality of their financial situation.

Cosigning a loan for someone else has zero upside for the cosigner but the downsides are innumerable. This is why Solomon says it’s a trap. With absolutely no financial benefit to you, cosigning a loan has the potential to bring about tremendous personal financial ruin.

For a more complete list of possible downsides to cosigning a loan, see this article.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What are some reasons a person might ask you to cosign a loan?

On a scale of 1-10, how hard would it be for you to say no to a close friend or relative who asked you to help them by cosigning a loan?

If you gave a low value to the last question, meaning that it would be very difficult for you to say no to some people if they asked you for financial help by cosigning a loan, what options might be available to you to help ensure that you did not fall into this “trap”?

If a person were to come to you wanting you to cosign a loan (a friend or relative) what do you think are some options for helping them that would NOT require you to risk your own financial position by cosigning a loan?

Or put it another way….if you are the person in financial stress and you are wanting a loan that you cannot get, what options might be available to you BESIDES asking someone to cosign a loan for you?

 

Photo by RDNE Stock project: https://www.pexels.com/photo/close-up-photo-of-an-agreement-on-a-paper-7841821/

Posted on

Why Did Paul Confront Peter in Galatians 2?

Galatians 2

11But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.

13The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. 14But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?

15“We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles; 16nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

17“But if, while seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves have also been found sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin? May it never be! 18“For if I rebuild what I have once destroyed, I prove myself to be a transgressor. 19“For through the Law I died to the Law, so that I might live to God.

20“I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. 21“I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.” (Galatians 2:11-21, NLT)

NOTE: Cephas is another name for Peter

The Daily DAVEotional

In the second half of Galatians 2, Paul mentions an odd encounter that he once had with Peter. He says that he (Paul) had to confront Peter (also known as Cephas) publicly because he was acting like a hypocrite.

The whole ordeal sounds pretty uncomfortable and embarrassing. What’s actually happening here?

To more clearly understand Paul’s encounter with Peter in this passage, we need to know a little bit about the context of this letter and why Paul is writing it in the first place.

Paul and Barnabas had established a number of churches in the Southern province of Galatia as an outcome of their first missionary journey (see Acts 13-14).

However, even though their mission of planting a number of new churches was wildly successful, it wasn’t all smooth sailing, as Paul and Barnabas encountered quite a bit of opposition along the way, primarily from Jewish unbelievers.

Not long after establishing these new churches, false teachers had infiltrated and were leading the Galatians astray. Paul tells these young believers that what they were following was a false gospel, a distortion of the truth.

At issue was the very nature of how a person is saved. I wrote about this issue in another blog post “A Pivotal Council in the Early Church” which I encourage you to read for context.

The summary is that there were a number of Jewish Pharisees who had become believers in Jesus. They held the view that in order for Gentiles to be saved, they not only needed to believe in Jesus as the Messiah, but they also had to convert to Judaism and adhere to all of its religious and cultural demands.

A council was convened to discuss this issue. The leaders of the church, including Peter, unanimously agreed that Gentiles do NOT need to become Jewish culturally in order to be saved. They determined that ALL men, regardless of cultural background, are saved by simply putting their faith in Jesus.

So what’s happening here in Galatians 2? Why does Paul confront Peter?

Apparently Peter showed up at the church in Antioch, which was known for having a mix of Jewish and Gentile believers. While there, Peter enjoyed hanging out with and eating with these new Gentile brothers and sisters. After all, he came to understand In Acts 10 that Gentiles are accepted by God in the same manner that Jews are – by faith.

However, the text says that Peter began to pull back from associating with these Gentile believers when a certain group came to visit the church in Antioch. It says that there was a group of Jewish believers who were friends with James. When these guys showed up, Peter begins acting like he doesn’t know the Gentiles with whom he had been freely associating.

This James Gang (not to be confused with the classic rock band of the same name) had a certain view and understanding that was not compatible with the gospel. This was a group that had favored the view that was rejected at the Council of Jerusalem, namely, that Gentiles needed to adhere to Jewish religious laws and cultures too.

There was an air of superiority with this group. They looked down on Gentiles, mainly because it had been drilled into them their whole lives that Gentiles were unclean and “less than” Jews. They were sinners, without the Law of God.

But Peter had been given a direct revelation from God in Acts 10 that this view was not godly. God does not look down on Gentiles and for Jews to do so was not honoring to God. One might even say it was racist.

Peter responded to that revelation in Acts 10 and the result was that Cornelius, the Roman soldier, came to faith and it was at this point that Gentiles are first inaugurated into the body of Christ.

Now here in Galatians 2, Paul tells his audience that Peter enjoyed fellowshipping with his Gentile brothers and sisters and no doubt enjoyed eating non-kosher foods as well.

But when this “party of the circumcision” arrived, Peter was afraid of what they might think. So he pulled back and disassociated himself from the Gentiles.

This exact scenario is beautifully illustrated in the 2017 movie Wonder, in which a disfigured boy named Auggie is hopelessly tortured by a group of schoolyard bullies.

Auggie is befriended by Noah who learns to overlook Auggie’s physical appearance in favor of his kind nature. 

However, there is a critical scene in the movie where Noah purposefully betrays Auggie’s friendship in order to gain favor with this group of bullies. This Halloween scene in the movie mirrors the situation with Peter described by Paul. I recommend watching this movie, taking note of your emotional response to this scene. Then read this passage again. Perhaps you will see the destructive effects of hypocrisy and partiality in a new light.

Paul calls Peter a hypocrite. The word hypocrite is actually an acting term (Greek hypokrites). In those times, all the parts in a theater production were played by just a few actors, mostly men. The actors would put different masks on to represent the part they were playing. The word hypocrite refers to the mask that the actor wore.

So, to be a hypocrite is really to wear a mask. It’s when we seek to project an image to others that doesn’t represent who we really are or what we really believe.

That’s what Paul accused Peter of doing. Peter believed that Gentiles were saved just as Jews are and he enjoyed connecting with this group of non-Jews, that is, until the James gang showed up. Then Peter, fearing what these Jewish zealots might think, sought to give the impression that he saw these Gentiles as unclean, as the old Jewish laws promoted.

If Peter, one of the foremost leaders of the early church, could fall into hypocrisy, then anyone can.

All of us are hypocrites to some degree. We’re often negatively influenced by others and we can tend to order our lives around creating a favorable impression of ourselves to those around us. This is what John Ortberg, in his book “The Life You’ve Always Wanted” calls impression management.

Jesus called the Pharisees hypocrites because they created an outward impression of religious perfectionism that didn’t match their internal brokenness and depravity.

This is why we need the gospel. We are hopelessly broken and corrupt inwardly, and yet we seek to project an image of success and “having it all together” to those around us.

With the gospel, we not only experience forgiveness for our depravity, but we have the hope of transformation so that over time, our outward actions begin to more accurately reflect the new heart that we have been given.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What are some examples of hypocrisy that you are aware of? People you’ve known personally or in the media?

When have you acted in a hypocritical manner?

Sometimes hypocrisy can spread due to peer pressure (as it did in this passage). When have you seen someone or a group of people act against their own beliefs and values as a result of peer pressure?

What are some ways you tend to manage your image to those around you? In what ways have you compromised your values or beliefs in order to garner favor with an individual or group?

What do you think are practical steps you can take to avoid hypocrisy? 

How do you think the gospel message provides hope for becoming a person of integrity and not a person who is hypocritical?

 

Photo by Finan Akbar on Unsplash

Posted on

Can Christians Pray Directly to Jesus or Only God the Father?

Acts 7

51“You stubborn people! You are heathen at heart and deaf to the truth. Must you forever resist the Holy Spirit? But your ancestors did, and so do you! 52Name one prophet your ancestors didn’t persecute! They even killed the ones who predicted the coming of the Righteous One—the Messiah whom you betrayed and murdered. 53You deliberately disobeyed God’s law, though you received it from the hands of angels. ”

54The Jewish leaders were infuriated by Stephen’s accusation, and they shook their fists in rage. 55But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed steadily upward into heaven and saw the glory of God, and he saw Jesus standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand. 56And he told them, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!”

57Then they put their hands over their ears, and drowning out his voice with their shouts, they rushed at him. 58They dragged him out of the city and began to stone him. The official witnesses took off their coats and laid them at the feet of a young man named Saul.

59And as they stoned him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60And he fell to his knees, shouting, “Lord, don’t charge them with this sin!” And with that, he died. (Acts 7:51-60, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

Last week on X (formerly Twitter), I saw an exchange that made me think. A pastor with a very large following was calling out a well-known politician who claims to be a Christian for the way he prayed.

Attached to the post was a screenshot of the text of the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew 6, along with the following admonition:

Someone should tell (name of politician) that Christians don’t pray to Jesus. We pray to God the Father in the name of Jesus.

My first thought was disappointment at the realization that we now appear to have an online Prayer Police force that is monitoring our actions over the internet.

My second thought was, “Wait, I pray to Jesus all the time. Have I been doing it wrong all these years? Have I been participating in a doctrinally dubious practice?”

It’s a valid question. How exactly are we to pray? Is there a right and wrong format? What are God’s expectations of us as we seek to engage with Him in the practice of prayer?

I’ve been a Christian for a looooong time and I’ve honestly never thought that a person could NOT pray directly to Jesus. After all, when I first heard the gospel as a young boy, I was told that Jesus was standing at the door of my heart and he was knocking (Revelation 3:20). If I was listening to his voice and if I opened the door, he would come into my life! In short, if I responded to Jesus, IN PRAYER, and invited him in, I would become a Christian and receive the gift of eternal life.

I’ve heard many prayers over the years where Jesus was addressed directly and I’ve never, even once, seen or heard someone be corrected for directing their prayers to Jesus, if this is indeed a wrong practice.

I suppose that’s why this post on X, from a pastor with a large following, and a PhD no less, seemed to be coming out of left field.

Disregarding the tone and posture of the tweet, which came off as more sanctimonious rebuke than loving correction, I found myself asking the question, “is he correct?”

The disciples had asked Jesus to teach them to pray. Jesus responded by telling them:

9“Pray, then, in this way:

‘Our Father who is in heaven,

Hallowed be Your name.

10‘Your kingdom come.

Your will be done,

On earth as it is in heaven.

11‘Give us this day our daily bread.

12‘And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.

13‘And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. [For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.]’ (Matthew 6:9-13, NASB)

I decided to survey the prayers in the New Testament that I was aware of, mostly from the book of Acts.

What I found is that most of the prayers ARE directed to God the Father and NOT Jesus, EXCEPT this one example that we find from Stephen in our passage today.

We first meet Stephen in Acts 6 when he is selected, along with six other men, for the special task of meeting a critical need in the early church. These seven men were the first deacons of the church. The text says that Stephen was a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit. He was not a man of marginal commitment or questionable devotion. He walked with God.

By the end of chapter 6, Stephen is no longer serving as an administrator in the church’s food distribution program, but instead, he is having a major impact as an evangelistic preacher. Stephen’s influence had increased significantly and he was now a major leader in the early church movement.

One day, Stephen gets into a debate with some Jews and the text says that:

None of them was able to stand against the wisdom and Spirit by which Stephen spoke. (Acts 6:10, NLT)

They couldn’t defeat his arguments so they found some people to lie about him and he was arrested by the religious rulers and brought before the high council. The Council leaders ask Stephen to respond to the charges that had been brought against him. His response is recorded in Acts 7, which is a lengthy discourse on the history of the Jewish people, including their long-standing pattern of rebelling against God and resisting God’s appointed messengers (His prophets).

For brevity, I haven’t included the full text of that response (Acts 7 in its entirety), but it’s worth the read. For our purposes, I’ve included the relevant part at the end of Acts 7 where Stephen shifts his response from explaining the history of the nation of Israel to his indictment on its leaders for their pride and rebellion.

You can see that the Council leaders and its members don’t take too kindly to Stephen’s accusation and the result is that they dragged Stephen out of the city and stoned him.

What is interesting about this text is that Stephen, as he is being stoned, looks up toward heaven and he prays!

What does he pray?

“Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” (Acts 7:59)

Stephen, a man who the text says was filled with the Spirit, prayed to Jesus, not the Father.

To me, this provided indisputable proof that it must be ok to direct our prayers to Jesus and not God the Father only.

So I responded to the pastor’s post on X by saying that praying to Jesus must be ok because we have an example in the New Testament with Stephen praying directly to Jesus.

The pastor replied to my response, doubling down by saying:

That was descriptive, not prescriptive.

What does that mean?

He’s actually correct. What that means is that the book of Acts is historical narrative, not didactic teaching. That means that Luke (the author of Acts) was simply recording things that happened. Just because he recorded an event does not mean that what is recorded is supposed to be the normal pattern for all believers.

But Jesus’ words in Matthew 6 are direct teaching. He is instructing us in what to do and how to do it.

So what this pastor was saying in his reply is that just because Stephen is recorded as praying to Jesus doesn’t mean we are supposed to, especially since Jesus’ prayer instruction shows the prayer addressing “our Father”.

So yes, it’s true. Jesus’ teaching is prescriptive, explaining to his disciples how we should pray. And the example of Stephen is descriptive. It’s part of a larger narrative that just describes an event. It’s not part of a passage that is teaching us how to pray.

Does that mean that the pastor’s assertion that we are only to pray to God the Father is correct? Is that the end of the discussion?

Not exactly.

While Jesus teaches the Lord’s prayer in Matthew 6 (and Luke 11), his teaching is not an exhaustive discourse on the subject of prayer. In other words, even though Jesus gives some teaching on prayer in these passages, what he says is not ALL there is to know and learn about prayer.

To make a determination of whether it’s ok to pray to Jesus directly, consider the following:

    • Jesus tells his disciples to pray like this, and then he shares the Lord’s prayer. Does this mean that ALL prayers must repeat these words exactly? If so, why do we never see this exact prayer repeated in the New Testament?
    • Jesus gives his disciples a model, or example of how to pray, which includes addressing “our Father”. Does this mean that a person can never pray to Jesus? What about the Holy Spirit? Can you call on the Holy Spirit?
    • If we are not allowed to pray to Jesus, how are we supposed to respond to Him if he is at the door of our heart knocking? How exactly do we invite Him in?
    • If Jesus promises to come in and dine with us and have fellowship with us, how exactly do we have fellowship with someone we are not supposed to talk (pray) to directly?
    • It’s clear that Jesus is our High priest. The role of a priest is a mediator. Jesus is the mediator between us and holy God. It’s because of Jesus and his atoning sacrifice on the cross that we are able to boldly approach the throne of grace and enter the presence of God the Father. Are we really supposed to believe that Jesus is the mediator between man and God but we are not allowed to talk to him directly?

The whole premise seems a bit absurd. Based on all of the relevant data, it seems clear that while Jesus does instruct his followers to pray to God the Father, there is never a prohibition for believers to address Jesus directly.

It seems clear that because Jesus is our mediator and he is the one knocking at the door of our heart, wanting to come into our lives, that we CAN address him directly.

Furthermore, we have a documented case where a godly, Spirit-filled leader of the early church  (Stephen) addresses Jesus directly. There is no indication, anywhere in scripture, that this is somehow wrong.

One last item is worth mentioning. In the final words of the New Testament, John, in the book of Revelation, pens these words:

Amen! Come, Lord Jesus! (Revelation 22:20, NLT)

If the apostle John finds that it’s ok to pray to Jesus, inviting him to “come”, then I’d say that it’s ok for any of us to address our prayers to Jesus as well.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What would your response have been to this pastor who posted on X? How would you have either affirmed his position or argued against it?

What has been your pattern in prayer? Do you think it’s ok to pray directly to Jesus or should Christians pray ONLY to God the Father? What is the reasoning for your answer?

How have you used the Lord’s Prayer in your walk with Christ? Do you believe that Jesus taught that the Lord’s prayer was THE way to pray – that it is the ONLY pattern for praying? 

What do you think it means that Jesus is our high priest? What is the role of a priest? How do we interact with a priest or mediator?

 

Photo by Brian Lundquist on Unsplash

Posted on

Will Christians Really Experience a Bodily Resurrection?

1 Corinthians 15

12But tell me this—since we preach that Christ rose from the dead, why are some of you saying there will be no resurrection of the dead? 13For if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised either. 14And if Christ was not raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your trust in God is useless. 15And we apostles would all be lying about God, for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave, but that can’t be true if there is no resurrection of the dead. 16If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. 17And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless, and you are still under condemnation for your sins. 18In that case, all who have died believing in Christ have perished! 19And if we have hope in Christ only for this life, we are the most miserable people in the world.

20But the fact is that Christ has been raised from the dead. He has become the first of a great harvest of those who will be raised to life again. (1 Corinthians 15:12-20, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

The resurrection of Jesus is one of the cornerstone doctrines that sets Christianity apart from all other religions.

The resurrection is vitally important because without the resurrection, there is no Christianity. What we think of as Christianity just becomes another religion where its followers seek to adhere to the advice and admonitions of a self-proclaimed guru.

Quite simply, the resurrection proves that Jesus is God, which is significant because only God could provide complete atonement for the sins of mankind. if you want to understand the theological ramifications of the resurrection, I explain more of the logical reasoning behind this idea in my post “He is Risen…Why Does it Matter?”

In this section of his letter to the Corinthians, Paul is responding to an apparent misunderstanding about the resurrection that was circulating within the church.

It seems that many in the church could not wrap their mind around the idea that they would experience a bodily resurrection. This aligns with prevalent Greek understanding at that time, in which the body was seen as a prison or a shell for the soul. Greek philosophy had a concept of the immortality of the soul but not so much for the body.

In this passage, Paul addresses the faulty thinking that denied a future bodily resurrection. His argument is as follows:

    • If there is no such thing as a resurrection, then obviously, Christ was not resurrected (verse 13)
    • If Christ hasn’t been raised (resurrected) then our preaching is in vain (wasted) and as a result, your faith is in vain because it is predicated on the message we preached (verse 14)
    • In addition, we are then false witnesses because we preached the resurrection of Jesus whom God did not raise (verse 15)
    • Hence, If Christ hasn’t been raised, your faith is worthless and you are still in your sins; they have not been paid for (verse 17)
    • Furthermore, those who have died then have perished (verse 18)
    • Therefore, if the hope of Christ is for this life only, we should be pitied (verse 19)

Paul then ends the argument in verse 20, saying:

But the fact is that Christ has been raised from the dead. He has become the first of a great harvest of those who will be raised to life again. [emphasis added]

In short, without a resurrection, there can be no salvation and as a result, this life is all there is. That makes life ultimately meaningless and Christianity is just a nihilistic ideology with lipstick.

The resurrection is not only the cornerstone of the Christian faith, proving that Jesus is God and therefore His death completely atones for the sins of mankind, but the resurrection also signifies that those who believe in Christ will ALSO experience a bodily resurrection, just as Jesus did.

So if you like your body, the good news is that you will have an even better model in eternity. And if you DON’T like your body for whatever reason, you can rest assured that your resurrected body will be an upgrade, free from defects, flaws and imperfections.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

Reflection

What has been your concept of life after death? In other words, what do you imagine heaven to be like for you and others who are there?

How does the concept of having a resurrected body align or contradict your thinking about heaven and eternal life?

How confident are you in the resurrection of Jesus? What are some reasons that cause you to doubt whether it is actually true?

If Jesus was not resurrected, how do you explain the crucifixion? What was it’s purpose? What did it accomplish?

 

Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

Posted on

What is Sexual Immorality?

1 Corinthians 7

1Now about the questions you asked in your letter. Yes, it is good to live a celibate life. 2But because there is so much sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman should have her own husband.

3The husband should not deprive his wife of sexual intimacy, which is her right as a married woman, nor should the wife deprive her husband. 4The wife gives authority over her body to her husband, and the husband also gives authority over his body to his wife. 5So do not deprive each other of sexual relations. The only exception to this rule would be the agreement of both husband and wife to refrain from sexual intimacy for a limited time, so they can give themselves more completely to prayer. Afterward they should come together again so that Satan won’t be able to tempt them because of their lack of self-control. 6This is only my suggestion. It’s not meant to be an absolute rule. 7I wish everyone could get along without marrying, just as I do. But we are not all the same. God gives some the gift of marriage, and to others he gives the gift of singleness. 8Now I say to those who aren’t married and to widows—it’s better to stay unmarried, just as I am. 9But if they can’t control themselves, they should go ahead and marry. It’s better to marry than to burn with lust. (1 Corinthians 7:1-8, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

We live in a highly sexualized culture.  After all, “sex sells” as they say.

Our culture’s current views on sex can be traced back to the sexual revolution of the 1960’s. Until then, it was commonly understood and accepted within the culture that sex was reserved for marriage. Any portrayal outside of that paradigm was generally frowned upon.

I remember watching reruns of “I Love Lucy” as a kid and when they showed Ricky and Lucy’s bedroom, there were two twin beds.

Opening scene of “I Love Lucy” from the episode “Lucy is Envious” (Season 3, Episode 23) showing Lucy and Ricky’s bedroom in which Lucy and Ricky sleep in separate beds.

Now everyone knew that married couples sleep together but there was a stigma associated with sex. It wasn’t talked about and it certainly wasn’t portrayed on screen.

But things started to change in the 1960’s with the sexual revolution, which sought to break down the social mores that existed at the time, promoting sexual activity for anyone who might want to partake, even if you weren’t married.

Sex was just an activity, the thinking went. It was just pleasure. Nothing more, nothing less. Why should two people who wanted to engage in something pleasurable be denied this activity? Why should society shame people who weren’t married but happened to be engaging in intercourse?

And so for the last 50+ years, our culture has engaged in one of the most intense, long-lasting and successful media campaigns to change the culture’s perception of sex.

I say it’s been successful because there is no doubt that our culture’s views and attitudes toward sex have drastically changed over the last 50-60 years. What started with posters and buttons telling us to “Make Love, not War” advanced to TV shows and movies that continued to push the envelope in terms of what was shown to viewers.

Throughout the culture at large, the stigma that existed with people engaging in sex outside of marriage has largely been erased. In fact, the topic of sex, which was once considered taboo and off limits in public is actively promoted by our education system as well as the media in TV shows and movies.

Christians who hold to the authority of the Bible are perhaps the last holdout for the antiquated view that sex is reserved for marriage between a man and woman.

But in recent years, even the Bible has come under attack for its views on sex. Many people who identify as Christians no longer believe that the Bible restricts sexual activity to married couples.

Many Christians believe that it’s ok to have sex before marriage and still others believe that the Bible affirms sexual activity among same-sex couples.

The problem with some of these views is this phrase “sexual immorality”. The Bible clearly condemns sexual immorality in both the Old and New Testaments. There is nowhere in the Bible where sexual immorality is not condemned as sinful.

The question then is: what is sexual immorality? While there may be wider agreement that sexual immorality is wrong (I mean, it’s hard to deny since the word “immoral” is embedded in the phrase), there is less agreement on what activities fall under that larger umbrella term.

This post is not long enough to do justice to this topic, but this passage does give some insight into the issue.

It appears that one of the issues this church was dealing with had to do with prohibited sexual practices. Like our culture, the Corinthian culture was highly sexualized and sexual temptation abounded. Some were suggesting that the remedy for avoiding sexual temptation was a commitment to celibacy, even within the confines of marriage.

Being single himself, Paul affirmed that being celibate has certain advantages. However, his solution for combating sexual temptation was NOT abstinence. Instead, Paul’s solution for those who have strong sexual urges and are struggling to control them is to satisfy those sexual desires within a marriage relationship.

Whatever your definition of sexual immorality is, Paul’s solution to addressing the sexual temptation is to get married and to get busy!

What I find interesting is that Paul says that each MAN should have his own wife and each WOMAN should have her own husband.

In just these few verses, Paul establishes that sex within the confines of marriage between a husband and wife is NOT sexual immorality, but is the antidote to sexual immorality. The strong implication is that any sexual activity that is not between a married man and woman IS sexual immorality.

There are some who undoubtedly will disagree with this assertion, stating that Paul only mentions the marriage relationship and doesn’t mention other potentially acceptable sexual relationships because of cultural reasons.

That is exactly the point though. The Bible clearly condemns sexual immorality but in our culture, morality is no longer tethered to any objective standard.

Hence, the list of activities that are considered sexually immoral and therefore prohibited are continually being condensed by the culture. This means that any appeal to the Bible regarding sexual ethics has to be reframed or explained in such a way to allow for those practices that have traditionally been considered sexually immoral.

This passage certainly isn’t the last word on biblical sexual ethics. It may not even be a main passage used for or against one’s preferred sexual views.

But it’s clear that sexual temptation, which was very strong in this culture and was a major issue within the Corinthian church, prompted Paul to make a statement regarding how to deal with that temptation. The ONE thing he affirms as being appropriate and NOT sexually immoral, is for husbands and wives to be engaged and active sexually.

This is the traditional, biblical view of sexual ethics – that only sex within the context of a marriage union between one man and one woman is ordained by God, and it is clearly affirmed by Paul in this passage.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

How would you define sexual immorality? What do you think is included in that category?

How did you arrive at your answer to the previous question? What role does the Bible play in determining your morality?

Do you think that there are some sexual sins that the Bible prohibited but that are no morally ok? If so, what is the reasoning for your position?

In what ways do you see the culture influencing people’s views on sex and morality in general?

 

Photo by Dima Solomin on Unsplash

Posted on

Where Passion and Opportunity Intersect

Last summer, I met a young adult at our church named Daniel. We met through a men’s leadership group we were both invited to be part of. When we met, I learned more of Daniel’s story and life trajectory. Daniel is a typical young adult. He had recently graduated from college but wasn’t yet working full-time. He was wrestling with figuring out a career path and he wasn’t quite sure where God was leading him. He was struggling to discern God’s leading and direction in his life.

I learned that Daniel is passionate about two things, really THREE things. He loves sports, particularly baseball. He was a standout baseball player at the same high school where our boys attended and he played collegiately for a few years before Covid derailed things.

Daniel is also passionate about high schoolers. He’s very active with the high school ministry at our church, leading a LIFE group for guys and helping with weekend services, retreats and other events. Daniel is also a part-time baseball coach for a local high school.

Being a high school baseball coach seems like a great way to integrate two things Daniel loves: sports and mentoring high school guys. But the coaching gig is only part-time and currently isn’t a viable vocational pathway.

Daniel has a THIRD passion – God! He loves the Lord and would LOVE to go into vocational ministry at some point, but he wasn’t sure what avenue would be best or what options might be available.

Last spring, Daniel was approached by the local FCA (Fellowship of Christian Athletes) regional director about joining FCA as a Field Staff, overseeing FCA chapters on several local high school campuses.

While Daniel was excited about the opportunity to integrate THREE of his great passions he was honestly scared about the idea of raising funds. He wasn’t quite sure how to process God’s leading in the face of uncertainty and anxiety.

Given our experience in ministry, I was able to share what it looks like to process information and make a godly decision, despite the fears. In addition, as someone who has spent 37+ years raising funds for ministry, I was able to help Daniel address his fears, offer encouragement, vision and practical coaching advice to help him move forward.

Daniel decided to take a step of faith by saying yes to the opportunity to serve with FCA. He’s now in the process of raising funds to serve as a full-time FCA staff member, where he’ll have the opportunity to mentor high schoolers at a number of local schools, including the high school he attended! .

Daniel is seeing God’s provision in new and amazing ways. His faith is being stretched and his vision is increasing. His excitement for the ministry is off the charts.

Daniel is an example of a young adult who is finding his niche and moving forward in faith to make an impact where God is directing him.

Thank you for your partnership which enables us to impact young adults like Daniel, who in turn are impacting others for the glory of Jesus!

 

If you’re interested in Daniel’s ministry with FCA, please click here.

Posted on

How to Study an Epistle

Many people would love to know the Bible better but don’t know where to begin or how to go about it.

The problem with the Bible is that it’s not a book that you can read like a John Grisham or Steven King novel.

The Bible is actually a collection of works written over a long period of time by many different authors in different languages and in different settings.

There are many types of literary genres represented in the Bible. Some of the books are historical narrative while other books are poetry, wisdom literature or books of prophecy.

In the New Testament, the gospels are historical narrative, detailing the life of Jesus from the different perspectives of the 4 different authors, but most of the New Testament comes to us in the form of epistles, or letters that were written to individuals and churches.

How does one study an epistle? Is it different than how one might approach the gospels?

The short answer is that yes, the way one approaches an epistle is different than how one might approach the gospels or some other book that is largely historical narrative.

With historical narrative, like the gospels or the book of Acts, the author is telling you a story, giving you relevant details along the way. The author includes important events and people to make the point he wants to make.

An epistle, on the other hand, is really one side of a two-way conversation.

To illustrate what I mean, consider the following situation. The other day, my wife received a phone call. After answering “hello”, she moved to the other room, but I could still hear everything she was saying.

I wasn’t sure who had called or why, but after about 10-15 minutes of conversation, it was more clear to me who my wife was talking to and what the topic was. I was only hearing one side of the conversation but from that one side, I was able to determine what was being discussed.

Reading and studying a New Testament epistle is much the same. Most of these New Testament letters were written to individuals or churches in response to questions that had been asked or some problem that was being addressed.

Hence, studying an epistle requires some literary detective skills.

Now being a Bible study sleuth takes some practice, but here are a few things that you may find helpful as you get started:

    1. Read the whole letter in one sitting. This will give you a better big picture perspective. This will be easier with shorter letters like 2 Timothy, Colossians or Philippians but will require more time and patience with longer letters like Romans, 1 Corinthians or Hebrews.
    2. Note who the author is and who the audience is.
    3. What is the context for the letter? What is the tone of the letter? What do you know about the audience or the recipient that might be helpful to understanding the contents of the letter?
    4. What are the themes that surface in the letter? What is the main argument being made?

When studying an epistle, you always want to try to determine what is the issue or problem being addressed. What is the reason the author is writing the letter?

Epistles often have a logical argument or a persuasive message. By noticing repeated words and phrases and outlining the message of the letter, you can begin to get a better picture, so to speak, of the author’s intent for writing.

When studying an epistle, it’s helpful to break it down into smaller sections for a deeper dive.

Think of it this way – a lawyer might have 3 or 4 bullet points to support an argument or defend a position. Sometimes, the New Testament writers will have a multi-pronged argument to make their case or defend a thesis. Part of the job of Bible study is determining the logical argument and the bullet points that support the argument.

For some, this might seem like too much work. “I’ll just let the pastor tell me what it says” or “I’ll just read a commentary that explains it”.

That is certainly faster and doesn’t require as much work or effort. But if you want to understand the Bible for yourself, learning some good Bible study skills is essential.

Go ahead and give it a try. Start with a shorter book like Colossians, Philippians, Galatians or Ephesians. These letters are filled with great doctrinal truths and practical instruction for living as Christians but aren’t so long that they’re too difficult to manage. It’s the equivalent of starting out running a mile or two before attempting to run a half-marathon.

Reflection

What has been your experience with studying the Bible? 

How would you rate your desire to study the Bible? How would you rate your experience or skill in being able to study the Bible?

What keeps you from studying the Bible more consistently (time, motivation, fear, etc.)? What would help you become more active in studying the Bible consistently?

What epistles have you studied in depth? What epistles are on your “bucket” list of books you’d like to study?

 

Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash

Posted on

What Does it Mean to Have Eternal Life?

John 17

1After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed:

“Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you.  2For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. 3Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. (John 17:1-3, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

An overwhelming number of people in the U.S. believe in an afterlife. According to a major Pew research study in 2023-24 and released in 2025, 70% of Americans believe there is, or there probably is an afterlife.

If there really is an afterlife, what does it look like and, more importantly, how do we experience it?

Christianity teaches that after people die physically, they experience either eternal life or eternal death.

But what exactly is eternal life?

I’ve asked hundreds, if not thousands of people that exact question over the course of my years in ministry and the most common answer I received is that eternal life is “living forever after you die”.

Now that’s obvious isn’t it? The word “eternal” means “forever” and “life” is the opposite of “death” so it kind of seems obvious that “eternal life” must be “living forever” because that’s exactly what the words mean.

Many people are surprised to learn, however, that Jesus actually defined eternal life and his definition doesn’t exactly line up with our traditional understanding of the term.

Most people think of eternal life as something you receive AFTER you die, like going to heaven.

But Jesus defined eternal life as something you can have NOW and then it continues on into eternity.

In John 17:3, Jesus defined eternal life as knowing God – having a relationship with Him. Hence, eternal life is beginning a relationship with Jesus now, on earth, so that when you die, you will live with Him for eternity.

This distinction might seem insignificant but it’s actually quite important.

If eternal life is just going to heaven when I die, then it’s not necessarily something I need to worry about until later in life.

But if eternal life is a relationship with God – something I can experience NOW, then waiting to receive eternal life will result in me missing out on a relationship with God.

Jesus didn’t go to the cross and die for us just so we could go to heaven after we die. Jesus died on the cross to give us LIFE….NOW!

Jesus wants us to know Him and that’s something we can begin to experience now in this life. Knowing Jesus simply means responding to the invitation of forgiveness that He offers through His death on the cross for us.

When we respond to Jesus’ invitation, Jesus comes into our lives and we become adopted sons and daughters in His family.

At that moment, our real life begins. This relationship with Jesus is permanent and never-ending.

Do you want to experience eternal life? You don’t have to wait until you die to experience it. You can experience eternal life right now, simply by entering into a relationship with Jesus, which simply requires that you put your trust in Him.

For more information on what it means to begin a relationship with Jesus, read the short article “FOUR POINTS TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO EXPERIENCE ETERNAL LIFE”.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

Before reading this short post, what was your understanding of “eternal life”? How did you define it?

Most people think of eternal life as going to heaven after you die. But Jesus defined eternal life as knowing God and having a relationship with Jesus? How does this difference impact you? In what ways does this change or impact your desire to have eternal life?

On a scale of 0-100 (0 being no desire and 100 being the highest level of desire possible), how would you rate your desire to know God? What factors caused you to choose the number that you did?

On that same scale of 0-100, what do you think is God’s desire for you to know Him?

What would keep you from putting your faith in Jesus and beginning a relationship with Him?

 

Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

Posted on

The Story of the “Other” Son

Luke 15

25“Meanwhile, the older son was in the fields working. When he returned home, he heard music and dancing in the house, 26and he asked one of the servants what was going on. 27‘Your brother is back,’ he was told, ‘and your father has killed the calf we were fattening and has prepared a great feast. We are celebrating because of his safe return.’

28“The older brother was angry and wouldn’t go in. His father came out and begged him, 29but he replied, ‘All these years I’ve worked hard for you and never once refused to do a single thing you told me to. And in all that time you never gave me even one young goat for a feast with my friends. 30Yet when this son of yours comes back after squandering your money on prostitutes, you celebrate by killing the finest calf we have.’

31“His father said to him, ‘Look, dear son, you and I are very close, and everything I have is yours. 32We had to celebrate this happy day. For your brother was dead and has come back to life! He was lost, but now he is found!’” (Luke 15:25-32, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

In a previous post, Revisiting the Story of the Prodigal Son, I shared what the story of the Prodigal Son reveals to us about God, particularly the depth of His love.

In that story, the younger son commits the most egregious act of disrespect imaginable. The father does not stop him, but simply allows him to follow his own path. The father also does not shield his son from the consequences of his misguided choices.

The younger son pursues a life of hedonism, squandering all of his father’s money and wasting his life. But the text says that “he came to his senses”, which means that he repented.

He returned to his father fully expecting to be admonished and punished. Instead, he’s greeted with joy and a loving embrace. He was immediately reconciled and fully restored positionally in the family.

The point of the story is to demonstrate the incredible depth of God’s love and compassion for us. There is nothing we can do that would be so bad that God would not run to us with open arms if we were simply to “come to our senses” and return to Him.

But there’s more to this story, and that’s what this post is about. The younger son was the rebel, the black sheep of the family. But there’s another son, the older son. The loyal and dutiful son.

While the younger son completely disrespected his father and blew his father’s wealth on wild living, the older son stayed home, submissively serving his father as cultural etiquette required.

So what’s the problem? It seems like the older son is the example we’re supposed to follow.

Not exactly.

Have you ever wondered why this part of the story is included? If Jesus simply wanted to illustrate the depth of God’s love, why not just end the story after the younger son returns and is accepted back into the fold by the father?

Jesus clearly had more to say about who He is AND who we are and there’s a reason why Jesus gives us this insight into the older son.

You see, the younger son was the rebel, the wild child. A select group of people will read this story and see themselves as the younger son. But not everyone identifies as a black sheep within their family. Hence Jesus gives us another son in the story, one who is NOT a black sheep at all.

The older son is not lifted up in this story as someone we should emulate because he actually suffers the SAME problem as the younger son. Both sons are disconnected from their father – they just express it in different ways.

While the younger son is brash and disrespectful, the older son is reserved and compliant, But the older son clearly did not demonstrate love and appreciation for his father. That becomes quite evident as soon as the younger son returns home.

Notice the older son’s reaction. The text says he’s angry. I imagine the older son as the type who always does what he’s told but doesn’t express much emotion, until something triggering occurs that causes him to erupt.

That’s the scenario here. The older son isn’t happy the younger son returned, nor is he happy that his father is joyful at his brother’s return. He’s upset at the whole thing, jealous really, that his brother is getting so much favorable treatment.

What’s telling about the older son is what he valued. He’s upset that he never got to have a party with his friends, but his younger brother, the black sheep, is being celebrated for bad behavior.

Have you ever experienced that?

You work your tail off but don’t get the results you want. Meanwhile, some knucklehead you know screws around and seems to break all the rules, and they somehow get rewarded despite their indiscretions.

It doesn’t seem fair does it?

But that’s exactly what Jesus is trying to highlight. The older son stayed with the father, which really is its own reward. The older son missed it completely. The father is the treasure, but the older son was hoping for some other material treasure instead.

The older son suffers from a lack of perspective. The father tells him, “look you and I are very close, and everything I have is yours.”

The father is reminding his son that he has an inheritance.

The older son was not looking toward his future inheritance. Instead, he was coveting some present material reward.

So there you have it. There’s a younger son who is the screw up and there’s the older son who is privately jealous and envious. Both take their relationship with their father for granted. Instead of enjoying the relationship with their loving father, each seeks contentment and pleasure through material means. The younger son is overt in his desire to “live it up” while the older son is more indirect in his thirst for worldly satisfaction.

Which of the sons are you?

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

When is a time in your life when you rebelled against God and went your own way? What prompted you to wander away?

What keeps you from “coming to your senses” when you find yourself disconnected from God?

Which son do you resonate with more – the younger son or the older son? What are some reasons for your choice?

God is the treasure in this story, though neither son really saw their relationship with their father as something to cherish. How would you rate your own relationship with God? How much do you see God as a treasure? 

In what ways can you cultivate a relationship with God that is not centered on duty? How do you think you can develop your heart and passion to see God as a treasure, instead of viewing Him as someone who can help you in some material way?

 

Photo by Muhmed Alaa El-Bank on Unsplash

Posted on

Revisiting the Story of the Prodigal Son

Luke 15

11To illustrate the point further, Jesus told them this story: “A man had two sons. 12The younger son told his father, ‘I want my share of your estate now, instead of waiting until you die.’ So his father agreed to divide his wealth between his sons.

13“A few days later this younger son packed all his belongings and took a trip to a distant land, and there he wasted all his money on wild living. 14About the time his money ran out, a great famine swept over the land, and he began to starve. 15He persuaded a local farmer to hire him to feed his pigs. 16The boy became so hungry that even the pods he was feeding the pigs looked good to him. But no one gave him anything.

17“When he finally came to his senses, he said to himself, ‘At home even the hired men have food enough to spare, and here I am, dying of hunger! 18I will go home to my father and say, “Father, I have sinned against both heaven and you, 19and I am no longer worthy of being called your son. Please take me on as a hired man.”’

20“So he returned home to his father. And while he was still a long distance away, his father saw him coming. Filled with love and compassion, he ran to his son, embraced him, and kissed him. 21His son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against both heaven and you, and I am no longer worthy of being called your son.

22“But his father said to the servants, ‘Quick! Bring the finest robe in the house and put it on him. Get a ring for his finger, and sandals for his feet. 23And kill the calf we have been fattening in the pen. We must celebrate with a feast, 24for this son of mine was dead and has now returned to life. He was lost, but now he is found.’ So the party began. (Luke 15:11-24, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

Imagine you are the son (or daughter) of a very wealthy man. You have no job and you still live under his roof.

Now imagine you go to your father and you say, “You know what old man? I wish you were dead, and I wish I could cash out my inheritance right now and blow this popsicle stand.”

This is not too far off from the scenario that Jesus paints in the story of the “lost son”, more commonly referred to as the “prodigal son.”

The son in the story doesn’t use the words I’ve chosen but the effect is pretty much the same, for in the Jewish culture, it was the ultimate slap in the face to ask your father for your inheritance while he was still living. It was more than a slap in the face actually. It was the ultimate sign of disrespect, akin to giving the father the finger.

Now if you happened to be living the imagined scenario I painted at the outset, what kind of response might you expect from your father after telling him you wished he was dad and you wanted your money…NOW?

Amazingly, in the story Jesus tells, the father willingly complies. He doesn’t demonstrate anger or resentment or any kind of vindictiveness, all emotions I imagine I’d express if I were the father in this scenario.

So the son gets his wish. And what does he do?

He goes to a distant land and wastes ALL the money on wild living (i.e. partying and prostitutes). In some ways, the story mutes the degree of nastiness in which the son treats his father and exploits his wealth. But make no mistake, the son is the most extreme example of a rebel that you can fathom.

When you have no job and your sole purpose is to experience hedonism to its fullest extent, eventually you run out of money to support that crazy lifestyle. And that’s exactly what happened here too. The son had no money, no plan and no prospects. He was desperate.

He finally gets a job feeding slop to pigs. Take note of this detail. He was feeding PIGS.

Pigs were unclean animals to Jews, which is just one more detail revealing how far off the son had strayed.

It’s at this point that the story turns. The key passage in this whole story comes in verses 17-19, which says:

17“When he finally came to his senses, he said to himself, ‘At home even the hired men have food enough to spare, and here I am, dying of hunger! 18I will go home to my father and say, “Father, I have sinned against both heaven and you, 19and I am no longer worthy of being called your son. Please take me on as a hired man.”’

The son “came to his senses”. This is a biblical picture of repentance. The son came face to face with reality. He had hit rock bottom and he was finally willing to humble himself and admit the stupidity of his decisions that led to his current situation. In short, he finally took responsibility for his actions.

But he didn’t stop there. He humbled himself and was willing to admit his sin to his father. So he swallowed his pride and returned home to face his father.

Imagine if you were the son in that situation. How difficult would it be to face your father and admit you were wrong? Personally, I think a typical father would be angry and I’d expect their response to follow suit. I’d expect to be berated and “made an example of”. I’m certain I’d need to learn my lesson and take my medicine. Essentially, I’d expect to experience some kind of penalty and punishment.

But that’s not what happens in this case. The text says that when the son was still a long way off, the father SAW HIM COMING. That means the father had to be watching and waiting for the son to return.

The father doesn’t react the way we would expect because he’s like no earthly father any of us have ever experienced. The father doesn’t berate his son. He doesn’t say “I told you so”. He doesn’t require any groveling or penance. He just embraces the son and welcomes him back into the family, with full rights and privileges restored.

The story highlights the incredible love and patience God the Father has for His children.

God is not a dictator. He allows us to choose our own path. He doesn’t restrict our choices but he also doesn’t shield us from the consequences of those choices. He patiently waits for us to return. And if and when we do return, He welcomes us back with a lavish love that is beyond any kind of earthly love we could experience.

On the flip side, the son is an example of the most egregious offenses one could commit. And yet, the Father extends His love and immediately forgives and restores the son. It’s incredible.

This tells me a couple of things. First, there is nothing I can do that God won’t forgive. NOTHING. I only need to come to my senses (repent), humble myself and admit my sin, just as the son in the story did.

God doesn’t require us to grovel or do penance to receive His love and forgiveness. He freely gives it to those who come to Him with a humble heart of surrender. His love is infinite and He freely and unconditionally lavishes it on those who come to Him.

Now imagine experiencing the love of THAT Father!

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What was your relationship like with your earthly father?

If you had done something wrong that you know he would be offended by, what would it have been like for you to think about approaching Him? What kind of reaction might you expect?

When you think of God, what words come to mind? How would you describe God to someone else?

When you find yourself sinning and “straying” from God’s plan, how easy is it for you to “come to your senses”? What keeps you from coming to your senses and returning to God?

What amazes you most about this story?

 

Photo by IP Withers on Unsplash – Charlie Mackesy’s Return of the Prodigal Son statue outside HTB Church London