Movie Review - "The Iron Lady"

To be quite honest this movie was not one that I had on my "must see" list, nor was it one that I had read a great deal about. But with a free afternoon, being in the area of the city it was showing, and the "cheaper" matinee tickets, June and I went. I am not necessarily a fan of Meryl Streep, though I recognize her as a greatly talented actress, and I assume that she is politically a bit further to the left than I am (but then again so is Rush Limbaugh). Nevertheless, despite my reservations, I came away from this movie with a greater appreciation for the acting ability of Ms. Streep and greater appreciation for Margret Thatcher as a leader.

Though the movie centers around the memories of the aged, and senile, Prime Minister Thatcher, it shows the values and principles that formed the basis for her political career. She was not a political opportunist who shifted with the drifting tides of public opinion, but a woman who made hard decisions based on what she believed was right. She was unwavering in the face of opposition from those outside of her political party, and from those within. She was as the Russians nicknamed her the "Iron Lady."

One scene that I found enlightening was when she had to make the difficult decision concerning the Argentians taking the Falkland Islands. More specifically, what should be done with the Argentine battleship that was circling the islands at the beginning of the war. Whether or not this was the way it happened - the film has it powerfully depicted. Thatcher is surrounded on one side by her military commanders who have told her what can be accomplished by taking military action. On the other hand her civilian advisers were calling for negotiation and caution. The viewer can see Thatcher's manicured nail tapping on the table and you hear the monumental lines; "Sink it". What is further gripping is that you see her tears and agony at the impact of her actions and the loss of British lives.

The film is not intended to be a "hagiography" of Margret Thatcher, but I would not want it to be. She was certainly a flawed person, as we all are. She sometimes put her public service above her family, and she was difficult to deal with at times. Nevertheless, we need leaders like her and her American counter-part Ronald Reagan today.

Martin Luther King Jr.

I have read the major biographical works on Martin Luther King Jr. and recognize that he was a greatly flawed man, with many weaknesses, and whose theology was less than orthodox. But at the same time I recognize him as an instrument of God, a prophet if you will, who God raised up at a crucial moment in our nation's history to confront the injustice of racial segregation. He become the leading voice of the civil rights movement, not because he sought such a role, but because he found himself thrust into it by the circumstances of the day.


He acted with great physical courage in the face of brutality and lived with the awareness that he most likely would face a martyr's death. I have visited the place where the assassin's bullet took his life and was greatly moved by the recognition that he had given his life to help set a nation free - both black and white.

I have read, and in some instances listened to, several sermons by Dr. King.  Most people are familiar with his famous “I Have a Dream” speech delivered in Washington, D.C., on August 28, 1963. You may remember the message he delivered the night before his death in Memphis entitled “I’ve Been To The Mountaintop.” But the sermon that has most impacted was one that is less known. It was entitled “The Drum Major Instinct.”  It was delivered in the Ebenezer Baptist Church, in Atlanta Georgia, on February 4, 1968. The message conveyed in this sermon based on Mark 10:35-40 resonates with me.

Dr. King begins by laying out the situation as James and John ask to be “seated on Jesus’ right and left in glory” (vs. 37). He then points out that James and John were expressing a common desire for all of us. The desire to be in front leading the parade – the drum major instinct. He then uses this metaphor to describe the negative manifestations it can produce such as racism and class oppression. But he goes on to show that this desire – the drum major instinct – can be properly directed for good. Here is the conclusion of his message:

“If any of you are around when I have to meet my day, I don’t want a long funeral. And if you get somebody to deliver the eulogy, tell them not to talk too long. And every now and then I wonder what I want them to say. Tell them not to mention that I have a Nobel Peace Prize—that isn’t important. Tell them not to mention that I have three or four hundred other awards—that’s not important. Tell them not to mention where I went to school. 

I'd like somebody to mention that day that Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to give his life serving others. 

I'd like for somebody to say that day that Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to love somebody.

I want you to say that day that I tried to be right on the war question. 

I want you to be able to say that day that I did try to feed the hungry. 

And I want you to be able to say that day that I did try in my life to clothe those who were naked. 

I want you to say on that day that I did try in my life to visit those who were in prison.

I want you to say that I tried to love and serve humanity. 

Yes, if you want to say that I was a drum major, say that I was a drum major for justice. Say that I was a drum major for peace.  I was a drum major for righteousness. And all of the other shallow things will not matter. I won't have any money to leave behind. I won't have the fine and luxurious things of life to leave behind. But I just want to leave a committed life behind.  And that's all I want to say.

If I can help somebody as I pass along,

If I can cheer somebody with a word or song,

If I can show somebody he's traveling wrong,

Then my living will not be in vain.

If I can do my duty as a Christian ought,

If I can bring salvation to a world once wrought,

If I can spread the message as the master taught,

Then my living will not be in vain.

Yes, Jesus, I want to be on your right or your left side, not for any selfish reason. I want to be on your right or your left side, not in terms of some political kingdom or ambition. But I just want to be there in love and in justice and in truth and in commitment to others, so that we can make of this old world a new world.”

It is my prayer that the desire in all of us to be the “drum major,” out front leading the parade, be properly directed by the Holy Spirit for Christ’s honor and glory.

Personal Update

One of the things I have resolved to do for 2012 is to post more on my blog. As a consequence, I am taking the time today to post a new personal update regarding my life and ministry. The year 2011 was an eventful one with both triumph and tragedy.

In November our daughter-in-law Raina was suddenly taken from us as a result of a rare myocardia virus. She entered the hospital,with what was thought to be pneumonia, on the evening of October 31 and suddenly went into cardiac arrest a few hours later. She was placed on life supports immediately and never regained consciousness. She was eventually taken off life supports after three days, and passed into the arms of our Lord. The last couple of years of Raina's life was a period of tremendous spiritual growth. She had entered into a closer walk with the Lord and had experienced a freedom from many of the things that had hindered her for so long.

My son, Eric, has been left alone to father the two girls, Alicia (14) and Haley (6). But God's grace has been evident in many ways. We have been able to see how God in His providence had been preparing the way for this event. My son is part of a very supportive church and this event has drawn us all closer. This is only a "tragedy" from the earthly perspective and the pain that we have all felt at the temporary loss of Raina. But because of Christ even this is a triumphant event.

This past year was also one of continuing fruitfulness with the prison ministry. I found myself unexpectedly receiving a good deal of recogition for what has been a major focus of my life for the past three years. I was given a national award by the Corrections Corporation of America and flown to Nashville to the corporate headquaters. As a result, the newspapers locally, and Christian radio nationally, called attention to my ministry to prison inmates. Prison Fellowship also did an interview with me about my work.

I teach, at this time, seven or eight Bible studies a week. These include my ministry in the prisons, churches, and home groups. I ministered at a conference in Costa Rica last year with my friend, Ted Sandquist, and spoke at a conference in Kentucky as well. I am not traveling like I did a few years ago, but the reality is I'm grateful to be free from all the air travel.

I "re-engaged" my relationship with Kingdom Ministries International a couple of years ago. This has been an additional blessing of God's grace toward me. I am most thankful to our Lord for the various ways He has demonstrated His mercy toward me. June and I remain involved here in Leavenworth with an Evangelical Free church, where we feel God has placed us. But we also have our house church in Raytown, Missouri, that I would describe as our "covenant family." It is there that we meet on the Lord's day for the breaking of bread, prayer, fellowship, and the study of God's Word.

Yesterday, January 1st, June and I celebrated 36 years of marriage. Without exaggerating June is my best friend and I am grateful to have her as my wife. All of of children, and sons-in-law, are walking with the Lord. Our relationship with each other continues to grow. In addition, our relationship with June's side of the family is closer than it has ever been.

I am looking forward to what God has in store for 2012.

God's Megaphone

[This was the first "Arrows of Truth" - a weekly e-mail column I wrote for about five years. The message, though written almost 10 years ago is still true today. Read it and pray for our nation.]

The events of September 11, 2001 remain very much in our thoughts as a nation. It appears, at least for the moment, God has gotten our attention. As C.S. Lewis remarked, "Pain is God's megaphone." Prayer, Bible reading, and even theological discussion has found its way into the public arena once again. At the same time a new wave of patriotism has swept over our nation, as we unite together against the "forces of evil" embodied in Islamic terrorism.

In the midst of this I have sought to find Heaven’s perspective. I want to see the events of the day not from a loyal American perspective, but from the perspective of one whose primary citizenship is in Christ's Kingdom. To this end, the Old Testament prophets have come to my aid. Habakkuk, in particular, has been most helpful. I would encourage you to read the book of Habakkuk, and see the prophetic perspective God gave him regarding the Chaldean invasion of the Southern Kingdom (Judah). The Chaldeans who were a wicked, violent people were God’s instrument to judge His people. Could God being doing a similar thing through Osama bin Laden?

Billy Graham has been quoted as saying many years ago; “If God does not judge the United States, He will have to resurrect Sodom and Gomorrah and apologize.” Could this latest incident be a sign of His judgment? One thing is for certain; this event did not take our sovereign God by surprise. It is difficult to envision the God who has so richly blessed and protected our nation setting His face against our land for judgment. If we think it couldn’t happen, we need only to look at God’s dealings with Israel, His chosen nation, who suffered some of His most severe discipline. I believe that our inability to face the reality of God’s harsh dealings with us is born out of our loyalty, love, and patriotism toward our country. In addition, we have been told that “love” means tolerance and acceptance of ungodly behavior, which the “God of love” must overlook. Yet, the Bible teaches, “whom the Lord loves He disciplines” (Heb.12:6; Rev. 3:19).

Are there nations much more wicked than the U.S.? In comparison with the heathen, paganistic nations that govern much of the world, we look pretty good. We abort babies, but not as many as China or Russia. We restrain sexual immorality from being broadcast over television, more than the Europeans. We still “tip our hat” toward God on occasion and have churches on almost “every street corner.” If God grades on the curve, we’re at the top of the class. We need to understand, however, that the standard by which God judges men and nations is not always the same. To whom much is given, much is required.

The origin of the U.S. is that of a Covenant nation. Our founding fathers, which were in reality the Puritans, understood the unique purpose for which God had chosen this nation. They envisioned that this nation was to be a “city set on a hill” and thus covenanted with God to see His purposes fulfilled. The earliest governmental document in our heritage, the Mayflower compact states:

“Having undertaken, for the glory of God and advancement of the Christian Faith, and honor of our King and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic.”

The Lord has blessed our nation with unbelievable wealth in natural and human resources. He has blessed us with the highest standard of living in the world. Throughout our history, He has protected our nation because of the covenant entered into by our founding fathers. But sadly, we have over the years moved further, and further from the covenant. The sanctions of the covenant appear to be coming upon us.

At whose doorstep does the responsibility for this departure lie? Is it the homosexuals, the feminists, the pornographers, and the abortionists who are to blame?  No— it lies at the doorstep of the Church, who has failed our nation. We have failed to be the salt and light God has called us to be. We have failed to function as the ekklesia (those who are “called out to rule”) and be servants to the people of our nation. We have been more concerned with getting out of here (and not being “left behind”), than we have been about God’s purposes. We have failed to fulfill our role as prophet and priest to our country. Sadly, there is little fear of God in the Church, so how can we expect any in the world?

George Barna recently completed a poll entitled, “A Look at Morality and the Church.” Its findings are quite revealing. For instance, 45% of those in mainline Christian churches said abortion was morally acceptable. (The general population figure is 36%). In addition, 20% of born again Christians agreed.

In response to the question “Is homosexuality an acceptable lifestyle?” 49% of mainline Christian answered yes, and 27% of born again believers agreed. Premarital sex was seen as fine by 54% of mainliners and by 36% of the born-againers. If I’m not mistaken we have a problem here.

The “wake up” call, which sounded in our nation on September 11^th, must first be heard in the Church. The Bible tells us that, “judgment begins in the household of God” (I Peter 4:17). II Chronicles 7:14 declares that “If My people who are called by name will humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and heal their land.” It is my prayer that God will grant to us the grace to repent and return to Him, lest what we saw at the World Trade Center be only a beginning. It is a serious hour for the Church in America.

What Ticks God Off?

“Behold then the kindness and severity of God” (Rom. 11:22)

 

Our tendency is to read with the Bible with a certain personal bias that chooses to remember the things that the Bible says “for” me, and ignoring those things that the Bible speaks “against” me. Dietrich Bonhoeffer addressed this tendency in 1932 at a conference in Switzerland, where in reference to the Bible, he made the following observation:

“ . . . the great concern which has been bearing down on me with growing heaviness throughout the whole conference; has it not become terrifyingly clear again and again, in everything that we have said here to one another, that we are no longer obedient to the Bible? We are more fond of our own thoughts than the thoughts of the Bible. We no longer read the Bible seriously, we no longer read the Bible against ourselves, but for ourselves. If the whole of our conference here is to have great significance, it may be perhaps that of showing us that we must read the Bible in quite a different way, until we find ourselves again.”

Paul tells us to “behold” (Greek meaning “fix your gaze”) on both the “kindness” (KJV –goodness) and the severity (Greek meaning “against severely”) of God. Both are to be given our attention. While we recognize the importance of understanding God’s kindness toward us, we must equally affirm the truth that God does become angry. A.W. Pink in his book, The Attributes of God, points out that; “A study of the concordance will show that there are more references in Scripture to the anger, fury and wrath of God, than there are to His love and tenderness.” 

Some contend that there is a difference between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New. They say in essence that. “The God of the old covenant was characterized by wrath and judgment, while Jesus is the “expressed image” of God and characterized by love and mercy. This of course, creates a dichotomy between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New. It actually creates two different “Gods.” On the contrary, the God of the Old and the God of the New are one in being, nature, and personality. Although God did inaugurate a new “administration” (Ephes. 1:10) with the coming of His Son, God Himself remains unchanged (Mal. 3:6). In pre-Christian times God was angry with those who rejected His revealed will. This did not change with the advent of Christ. “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (John 3:36). Jesus actually said more about God’s wrath than did any other New Testament person. God’s displeasure with the Pharisees is seen in Jesus’ denunciation recounted in Matthew 23. “You serpents, you brood of vipers, how shall you escape the sentence of hell?” (Matt. 23:33).

John the Baptist warned the Pharisees and the Saducees of the “wrath to come” (Matt. 3:7) and this was not necessarily solely in reference to the final judgment. I believe he was speaking of the destruction that was to come upon Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Concerning this judgment, Jesus warned, “there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people” (Luke 21:23). Paul, referring to this judgment on that generation of ethnic Israel declared, “wrath has come upon them to the utmost” (I Thess. 2:16).

Paul speaks clearly about the wrath of God throughout his epistles (Ephes. 2:3, 5:6; Col. 3:6; I Thess. 1:10, 5:9). There are approximately 500 references to God’s anger in the Bible. All of the New Testament writers refer to the judgments rendered in the Old Testament as recurring in the New for similar offenses. These New Testament references should be sufficient scriptural evidence to demonstrate the unchanging character of God and that the wrath of God is a reality in the New Covenant era.

With that as my introduction, allow me to address the question posed by my title: What Ticks God Off? In answering that question I could be overly general, or I could be overly specific, in which case I could attempt to comment on all 500 references to God’s anger. Instead, I will speak to the major reasons for His anger, recognizing that they are same in both old and new economies. Paul establishes this principle in his letter to the Corinthians (See I Cor. 10:1-11).

Paul shows in this passage that the exodus under Moses was typical of the deliverance of the Christian community by Christ (Heb. 3:14-16; Acts 7:37-38). We can not help but see the parallel between these two great historical redemptive acts. But immediately following Paul’s comparison of the two; he writes something that is quite solemn in its message. He says, “But with many [The Amplified Version says “the great majority”] God was not well pleased; for they were laid low in the wilderness” (I Cor. 10:5). Heb. 3:11 speaks of this episode with God saying, “I swore in My wrath.” In Psalm 106 we are told by the psalmist that, “They provoked Him to anger with their deeds . . . Therefore the anger of the Lord was kindled against His people” (Ps. 106:29,40).

This is not Paul simply drawing an object lesson from history, because he then makes the direct analogy to the Corinthians by stating: “Now these things happened as examples for us, so that we would not crave evil things, as they also craved.” He then lists four things that “tick God off.” These things are idolatry, immorality, impatience with God, and grumbling (I Cor. 10:7-9). These are obviously four things God doesn’t like. I don’t necessarily believe that this list is all-inclusive of God’s dislikes, but Paul does present us with a good start.

The writer to the Hebrews uses the same illustration of Israel’s disobedience to warn his readers. He quotes the psalmist’s account of God’s punishment of the rebellious and disobedient nation (Heb. 3:7-11; Ps. 95:8-11). Then follows a warning to the Christian community that they not follow the same path (Heb. 3:12). The warning is clear, God’s anger can be manifested toward the new covenant community as well as it was toward the old – and we must take seriously the issue of disobedience. Both God’s anger and His love and mercy should motivate and monitor our attitudes and actions.

Was it God, Satan, or Man?

[I wrote almost 10 years ago (October 14, 2001) when I was publishing an e-mail teaching letter entitled "Arrows of Truth." But the message concerning the providence of God is timeless.| 

When we find ourselves stricken with a tragedy of the magnitude which occurred on September 11^th, the inevitable question which arises in the minds of believers is: Was it God, Satan, or Man?

I have heard this question answered in recent weeks by theologians, preachers, philosophers, and the “man on the street.”  Some have said it was the Devil, others have said it was God, while others have ascribed it to “an act of wicked men.” Well, which is it? How should we, as Bible believing Christians, respond to this question?

I find the book of Job helpful in addressing this perplexing issue. In the very beginning of the book, we find the blameless and upright Job stricken with a tragedy of staggering proportions. Satan, eager to attack Job’s integrity, manages to wreck havoc upon all of Job’s possessions, ruining all that he owns, driving the Chaldeans to steal his flocks, even killing his children. In the midst of this crisis, which suddenly “slammed” into Job’s life, he makes a surprising statement.   Job’s response was one of faith in a sovereign God, and his instinctive declaration is one of worship and adoration. He exclaimed, "The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away. Blessed be the name of the Lord” (Job 1:21).

It would be hard to find a more striking affirmation of trust in the utter sovereignty of Almighty God than this – especially in a moment of such extreme devastating loss. John Calvin, commenting on this incident, asked the question: How may we attribute this same work to God, to Satan, and to man as author, without excusing Satan as associated with God, or making God the author of evil?” Calvin’s answer to this question is quite simple.
Calvin points out that there are three different purposes involved in Job’s trial. God’s purpose was to exercise Job’s patience; Satan’s purpose was to cause Job to curse God and cast away his faith; and the Chaldeans were simply out for Job’s property.

Calvin also noted that there is a difference in the manner of the actors in this drama. The Lord sovereignly allowed Satan to afflict His servant, demonstrating that believers are not exempt from Satan’s attacks. God then handed over the Chaldeans to be driven by Satan, having chosen them as his instrument to accomplish this task. Satan then stirred the wicked minds of the Chaldeans, who went forth to commit the criminal deed. They therefore are fully responsible for their evil actions, and come under God’s judgment. In another sense, we can see how Satan acted in the minds of the Chaldeans, and he bears eternal responsibility for his actions
.

God, on the other hand, is also said to act in His own way. Satan, who is the unwilling instrument of God, is used to test Job according to God’s eternal purpose. As John Calvin stated, “We see no inconsistency in attributing the same act to God, Satan, and man; but the distinction in purpose and manner causes God’s righteousness to shine forth blamelessly, while the wickedness of Satan and man betrays itself by its own disgrace.”

Calvin made the observation that “certainty about God’s providence helps us in all adversities.” It has been said that, “God’s providence is our confidence.” Remember the example of Joseph, who was betrayed and sold into slavery by his brothers, but saw the hand of God in this event and all that followed. He remarked to his brothers, “You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good” (Gen. 50:20). Likewise, Job recognized the providential work of God in the acts of the Chaldeans. In same manner, we must look beyond the terrorists and their dastardly deeds, to see the God of eternal purposes.

Benjamin B. Warfield, a premier theologian of the 19^th century, wrote in his classic Biblical and Theological Studies: “In the infinite wisdom of our Lord of all the earth, each event falls with exact precision into its proper place in the unfolding of His eternal plan; nothing, however small, however strange, occurs without His ordering, or without its peculiar fitness in the working out of His purpose; and the end of all shall be the manifestation of His glory, and the accumulation of His praise.”

If we look only at the acts of men, or ascribe to the Devil the ability to operate outside of God’s control, we may easily give into despair. But if we keep in mind that even the worst acts of sinful men are completely under our sovereign, loving God, we will never give into despair. Even the worst sin ever committed against God in human history was done entirely according to God’s predetermined plan (Acts 2:23)

May God enable us, amidst all the acts of sinful men, and all the frustrations of life, to keep our confidence in His providence. Remember that nothing touches your life, or my life, unless it passes through the hand of God.

Partakers of His Divine Nature

“For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, so that by them you may become the partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust.” (II Peter 1:4)

Theologians since the time of the early Church fathers have attempted to explain the nature of the believer’s relationship with God. Through the centuries this issue has produced a broad spectrum of ideas. In our attempt to define and bring depth of understanding to God’s revealed truth we must take care to remain within the biblical boundaries. Some have taken the extreme position that believers are, by partaking of the divine nature, brought into a position of virtual equality with God. This view fails to adequately see the scriptural distinction between their union with God, in the divine life and nature, and the unique status of the Godhead possessed by the Trinity alone. They erroneously portray believers as in some way co-equal with God, assuming on some level His divine headship and authority. This appears to be the view of at least some in the “Word of Faith” movement. Their overreaching imprecise statements imply that “union with God” suggests equality with God, an absolute parity with God, and thus, some manner of participation in the Godhead and in those attributes of God which are incommunicable. [In fairness to these brothers, I do not believe they are trying to actually lay claim to a co-equal status with God. These men are not trained theologically and thus in “stretching” to express a truth that they believe they see in the Scriptures; they appear to violate orthodox theological boundaries. They do not place sufficient “fences” around some of their statements. In addition to that, they seem to lack a clear understanding of the sovereignty of God.]

On the other end of the spectrum we have those who only recognize the believer’s judicial relationship with God. This view holds that believers primarily imitate God’s divine communicable attributes rather than partake of them. They deny or dismiss any organic relationship between the Triune God and His redeemed. This teaching minimizes the relationship of the believer to the Father to mere legal status of adoption, wherein the adopted child imitates the adoptive parent’s behavior. I believe that this position is an over-reaction to the apparently extreme view they see as being perpetuated by the Word of Faith teachers. I believe that the Biblical truth lies between these two extremes, embracing the judicial aspect of the believer’s relationship to God and at the same time affirming his union with God in Christ. The Bible never elevates man to the status of equality with God. Even prior to the fall Adam was under God’s direction and authority. God is man’s Creator, and the Potter has non-negotiable power over the clay (Rom. 9:20-21).

A number of authors, in reaction to the exaggeration, confusion, and the error of the Word of Faith teachers, end up throwing out the proverbial baby with the bath water. These authors have also rejected a number of essential biblical truths concerning the believer’s vital union and identification with God in life and nature. The believer’s relationship with God is more than legal, forensic, and outward. It is more than “union of fellowship,” as one author has called it. This is a limited view of our salvation. The Bible stresses that we are regenerated. According to I Corinthians 6:17: “He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.” It is more than an “adoptive” status. God Himself indwells us (Rom. 8:9; Ephes. 4:6; Col. 1:27). Jesus told His disciples to expect the Spirit of the Father to be in them (Matt. 10:20). He declared that both He and the Father would be in His believers (John 17:21). It is true that the incommunicable attributes of God are not possessed by the believer – these being self-existence, immutability, omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, eternality, and absolute sovereignty. Nevertheless, the Bible shows us that God has chosen to impart to believers His communicable attributes – these being compassion, graciousness, mercy, slowness to anger, truth, faithfulness, and forgiveness. [See Exodus 34:6-7.] It is incorrect to teach that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit indwell the believer apart from the divine life and nature; this would fragment the essence of God. God’s life and nature are received at the moment of regeneration. God brings about the transformation of believers into His image by causing His indwelling life and nature to grow and mature within them (II Cor. 3:17-18). Ultimately, at His return even the physical bodies of believers will be transformed to a glorified state reflectng the glory of Christ (II Thess. 1:10; I John 3:2).

It is scriptural to assert that believers participate in the divine nature, as long as it is made clear that we never become part of the Godhead and never evolve from creature to Creator. (This is the error of Mormonism, which teaches: “As man is, God once was; as God is, men may be.”) What did Peter mean by the statement, “You may become partakers of the divine nature” (II Peter 1:4)? Many of the early church fathers saw Peter’s statement as actual union and participation by believers in the divine nature. Origen equated this fellowship of the Spirit with our partaking of the divine nature. He stated, “What is the fellowship of the Holy Spirit? Peter describes this by calling it ‘sharing in the divine nature.’” Ambrose, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Novatian all said similar things commenting on II Peter 1:4. (See Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament Vol.11.) The Venerable Bede commented: “When God blesses us, He changes our very being so that whatever we were by nature is transformed by the gift of the Holy Spirit, so that we may truly become partakers of His nature.”

Many modern Bible scholars have asserted in their writings that partaking of the divine nature is something real and inward. For example, Kenneth S. Wuest states, “The believer is made a partaker of the divine nature (II Peter 1:4). The life of God, surging through His being, causes him to hate sin and love holiness, and produces in him both the desire and the power to do God’s will.” A.T. Robertson considers regeneration as a partaking of the divine nature, as he says concerning II Peter 1:4, “Peter is referring to the new birth as I Peter 1:23.” Henry Alford goes so far to say that the perfect divine nature abides in the believer. He writes that believers are “partakers of the divine nature (i.e. of that holiness, and truth, and love, and, in a word, perfection), which dwells in God, and in you, by God dwelling in you.” I believe that I can say with certainty that none of these men would argue that believers are equal with God, but they have clearly affirmed that God dwells in the believer, bringing His divine nature into their being. God’s purpose in salvation was never to merely grant the forgiveness of sin. God’s purpose is to live in and through His redeemed community.

The whole redemptive work of Christ, from the Incarnation to the Resurrection and Ascension, as well as the work of the Holy Spirit culminate with the believer becoming a partaker of His divine nature as the completion of our salvation.