Romans 9 – 11 and the Nation State of Israel

 

Romans 9 – 11 and the Nation State of Israel[1]

Historical Background

Before I launch into this discussion it is critical to say a word about the historical context to the who Letter of Paul to the Romans.  You will see how important this is as I move through my argument. We know from Acts 18:1-2 that the church in Rome had existed for some time and was made up of both Jewish and non-Jewish followers. The crisis for this church began when the Roman emperor Claudius expelled all of the Jewish people from Rome. About five years later, all those Jews, including many who followed Jesus, were allowed to return. When they did, they found a church that had become non-Jewish in its customs and practice. This culture clash created lots of tension, and by Paul’s day, the Roman church was divided.[2]

The Church in Rome had a racial problem. Does God treat the Jew differently than the Greek? Those who have studied the previous chapters in Romans see that Paul systematically shows there is no difference between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians.  Both face the same plight, and both have the same Saviour. Behind Romans 9-11 exists an unspoken question, “Does God save Jews in the same way?”  Or stated more succinctly: “Don’t the Jews have national promises that Gentiles don’t have?”  “Is there a redemptive future for the nation state of Israel?”

The Purpose

This article is intended to show that Romans 9-11 does not support the popular notion that at the end of time, God will show His faithfulness to the nation state of Israel (Israel according to the flesh) and bring to pass a mass revival thus showing that “all Israel will be saved.”  In whatever way one may arrive at such a conclusion, I contend that it cannot be supported by Romans 9-11.  Here is an example of such an interpretation:

“He plans to remove the hardening of unbelief and renew His covenant with Israel. This will occur as many Jewish people come to faith in Christ at some future time. Israel remains deeply loved by God because of His irrevocable promises and calling for the patriarchs.”[3]

Supported mostly by a system of theology known as Dispensationalism, this interpretation is questionable. The statement is intended to summarize Paul’s words in Romans 11:26a (ESV): “And in this way all Israel will be saved.”  But you will note in your reading that most conservative scholars do not take that literally (A tenet of Dispensationalism!) but rather qualify it as “many Jewish people”.  It must also be admitted by those who embrace a future salvation of all Israel (and their various interpretations of such) that “all” does not mean to them as “all”.  In fact, by their own conclusions, they are speaking of a massive redemptive work of God upon the nation state of Israel that serves the salvic benefit of one generation of Jews.  However, that is not my main argument in this article.

My limited scope is to simply show that the internal evidence of Romans 9-11 does not support the notion of any end-time event analogous to a massive redemption of the nation state of Israel.  I wish to prove my thesis in 5 points.

#1. The foundation of Romans 9-11 does not support such a notion.

This foundation is the opening verses, Romans 9:6–11 (ESV):

“⁶ But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, ⁷ and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, . . . but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. . .. —in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls.”

The argument starts in Romans 8:39b, “nothing can separate us from the love of God.”  But what about Israel?  Has God’s word failed regarding Israel? No! The Israel that Paul weeps for and wishes to be accursed for is not the Israel of promise. “Not all Israel belong to Israel.”  The point that undergirds these important chapters is that God never intended to “save all Israel”.  The promise was always for a remnant chosen (elected) by grace. This principle must shape our thinking of Romans 11:26. Paul is clearly setting the parameters here.  If Romans 9:1-11 is affirming that God’s eternal plan was to save a chosen remnant from within the nation state of Israel, we must assume that to be true throughout the remaining two chapters.  God never foreknew, sovereignly elected all of the nation state of ethnic Israel.

#2. The proof of God’s faithfulness to His plan for Israel is not an end-time restoration.

Paul’s answer to the question in Romans 9:6, “Has the Word of God failed” regarding Israel is not, “No it is not failed, just wait until I tell you about the national restoration that will occur before the end of time.”  It is the saving of a remnant that responds to the question of God’s faithfulness.  And Paul will make himself as a prime example.  Note Romans 11:1–5 (ESV):

“¹¹ I ask, then, has God rejected his people?  By no means! For I myself am an Israelite . . . ⁵ So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.”

As Paul is writing this Letter, he not only proves God’s fidelity through the individual salvation of God’s elect Jews, but through that very means refutes the idea of a national ethnic restoration. The nation is in fact, not all going to be saved.  Thus, Paul writes in Romans 11:14 that it is his driving mission “in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.” (Emphasis mine).

#3. The internal evidence proves that “partial” means not “all”.

Proponents of this end-time revival of the Jewish nation take the word partial and apply it to time. Noting Romans 11:25 (ESV), we read:

“²⁵ Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.”

The common Dispensationalism view assumes that God has placed a judicial hardening on the nation state of Israel and is lifted at some point in time.  For example: “The time is coming, after the right amount of the Gentiles have believed in Christ, when God will remove the hardening from the unbelieving Jews. They will turn to faith in Christ and, as a people, be grafted back onto God's symbolic olive tree.”

The problem with that is that God never uses the idea of a partial hardening of Israel in terms of time. The idea of hardening is juxtaposed with election.  In describing God’s purpose for Pharaoh, God inspires Paul to write: “So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.” (Romans 9:18).  The partial hardening again supports Paul’s instruction: Some of Israel has been hardened and some of Israel has been shown mercy (elected by grace); or stated otherwise, not all Israel is Israel.

The phrase “all Israel” is again compared with “the fullness of the Gentiles”.  Other than Universalists, no conservative, evangelical scholar would equate Gentile fullness to all of the Gentiles will be saved.  No, we would say that God has determined by electing grace to save a certain number of Gentiles. Likewise, the term “all Israel” corresponds by teaching us that God has determined to save a certain number of elect Jews.

#4. Paul does reveal a sequence of time that refutes an en-time Jewish revival.

Note Romans 11:11–15 (ESV):

“¹¹ So I ask, did they stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather, through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. ¹² Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean! ¹³ Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry ¹⁴ in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.  ¹⁵ For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead.”

Paul identifies a sequence. Jewish trespass leads to salvation to the Gentiles. Stated otherwise: Jewish trespass means riches for the Gentiles.  So, question: “How much more of a blessing will it be to the Gentiles when all of the elect Jews are saved.  Dispensationalists anticipate that when “all Israel is saved” the end shall come, and all the elect Gentiles are already saved. But the verse implies that when the “fullness of the Jews is complete, there is yet to be a blessing (“how much more will their full inclusion mean”).

Stated succinctly the text anticipates increasing blessing to the Gentiles by the salvation of Jews, but a Dispensational reading of this teaches that once the Jews are saved the end will come.

#5. Paul is describing a “way” not a “when”.

“And in this way all Israel will be saved.” (Romans 11:26).  As stated above, Paul is showing the faithfulness of God and His Word to Israel, not by promising an end-time revival before Christ’s return, but in fact showing that God is faithful to His Word in that not all Israel is chosen by grace through faith (Chapter 10) to be saved but that those Jews who are the elect according to grace are being saved through the Gospel — and that is HOW all Israel according to promise will be saved.

Summary

These chapters could be bookended this way:

Romans 9:6–11 (ESV): ⁶ But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel . . . —in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls . . ..”

Romans 11:26 (ESV): “²⁶And in this way all Israel will be saved . . ..”

All Israel, all Israel according to promise, will be saved by God’s sovereign electing grace through faith in Jesus Christ. That is the “way” all of Israel that God had fore known in eternity will be saved. And in keeping with the historical context of Romans, that is the exact same way the Gentiles will come into their fullness.

Conclusion.

I have given 5 integral arguments that exist within the text of Romans 9-11 that refute any notion that God has a plan to save the nation state of Israel in a future and final display of His redemptive plan.  If someone is to suggest the reality of such an event, they will find no support within the pages of Romans 9-11.   If they find it elsewhere, they would need to deal with an apparent contradiction in Scripture that is fatal if such existed. 

---

[1] I owe a debt in this article by the good work of Dr. Sam Storms.

[2] The Bible Project

[3] https://www.bibleref.com/biblepassage/Printer?section=Romans_11:25&lang=en

Is God’s Presence in Hell?

 

Doctrine

The question of whether God is in hell must begin doctrine that God is everywhere.  He is omnipresent. The doctrine of God’s omnipresence states that God is everywhere, at once and absolutely.  There are no parts of Him in one place and part in another.  One must also hold to the doctrine of Divine Simplicity This is the idea that God does not exist in parts but is one unified entity.  

Revelation 14:10

Jesus taught that God’s ultimate punishment is banishment from the Lord's presence (see Matthew 7:23; 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; and Luke 13:27).  However, as we read Revelation 14:10 (ESV), speaking of those who worship the beast: “he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.”  That passage tends to reveal that Christ and the angels are present in Hell with the damned.  Dr. Beale writes, “That the torment takes place not only ‘before the Lamb’ but also the before ‘holy angels’ suggests that the angels are not merely present when the judgment occurs but also take part in the execution of it, though their presence may only be intended to call attention to the Lamb.”^[1] The presence of Christ isn’t stated categorically that He is in Hell.  It may be saying that Christ and the angels are observing the very results of their judgment. “In Revelation 14:10, "presence" is a literal translation of the Greek ἐνώπιον, which means "in the presence of, before." This is a spatial word, suggesting proximity and literal, measurable distances.”[2]

2 Thessalonians 1:9

2 Thessalonians 1:9 gives us the clearest of answers.  “They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might,” (2 Thessalonians 1:9, ESV). Let me unpack this by identifying several important points.

Point 1.

The clause, “away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” leans back to Isaiah 2:10, 19, and 21, where the wicked are called to hide from the “presence of the fear of the Lord and from the glory of His might.^[3]  This should cause us to immediately think that the presence of God they are experiencing is His wrath and is manifested by His terror and majestic power.  The redeemed of the Lord do not experience this aspect of God’s presence. “. . . In your presence there is fullness of joy; at your right hand are pleasures forevermore.” (Psalm 16:11b, ESV)

Point 2.

Another point to be made about this phrase, “away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” is that this is synonymous parallelism in Greek, meaning that the “presence of the Lord is stated otherwise and similar to, “the glory of His might.” “Since these two prepositional phrases are in synonymous parallelism with each other (see also vv8b and 10), it would be wrong to distinguish their meaning too sharply.”^[4]  All that is to say that the punishment meted out on the unrepentant is state away from the presence of God; or stated otherwise, away from the glory of His might. These phrases could be used interchangeably.  I’ll write more of that later.

Point 3.

The most compelling point for me is the word “presence”.  This word in the Greek text is “πρόσωπον prosōpon; from 4314 and ὤψ ōps (an eye, face); the face.”^[5] That Biblical notion of being before, or seeking God’s face is an important reality in the Scriptures. The greatest blessing is to have God’s face turned to you, not away from you. This leads me to conclude that God’s presence in Hell is His face is turned away.  He is present with an ever-turned face.  Many years ago, I head the late Dr. R.C. Sproul, Senior, speak on the topic of cursing and blessing[6].  He took his text from the Aaronic blessing of Numbers 6.

“The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you; the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.” (Numbers 6:24–26, ESV)

Dr. Sproul noted that cursing someone is the opposite of blessing.  For example, we could read the text as a curse in this way: “The LORD curse you and abandon you; the LORD turn His face and leave you in darkness removing all grace to you; the LORD remove His countenance[7] from you and give you calamity.” 

So, in 2 Thessalonians 1:9 we might see the Apostle saying that the reprobate experience the turned away face of God. That experience includes eternal darkness, devoid of all grace and peace, lacking all approval or acceptability from God.  “And God, who is present everywhere at all times, will be forever present in hell as the judge . . . Whatever the exact nature of this everlasting judgment, it is horrible ultimately for one reason only: God is present.” – Michael Horton[8]  For God to be present with His face turned away would be horror devoid description.  It is what Christ experienced on the Cross in a moment of time but infinite in measure when He cried, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”^[9]  The ever-present God was there with face turned away.  That is Hell.

As to the parallel phrase “the glory of His might”, how does it reflect a synonymous idea?   If we turn to Psalm 106:8 (ESV) we get a clue.  There we read, “Yet he saved them for his name’s sake, that he might make known his mighty power.” The salvation of God’s people is accomplished through His “mighty power”, His “glorious might”.  Just as God’s “turned-away-face” reflects His curse, so does His removal of His mighty power in salvation becomes His curse.   

Conclusion

One commentator puts it this way, “According to 2 Thessalonians 1:9, the punishment of unbelievers in hell will consist not only of suffering in the "fires," but also banishment from the presence of the Lord. The word translated "presence" is literally "face." Whereas believers will see the Lord face to face (1 Corinthians 13:12), unbelievers will be driven from the face of the Lord and will never know the joy of being in His presence and the delight of observing the splendor of His power.”[10]

Is God present in Hell?  Yes.  God is present with face turned away and the possibility of salvation removed – forever.  This is unimaginable horror.

 

---

^[1] Beale, G. K. (1999). The book of Revelation: a commentary on the Greek text (p. 760). W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press.

[2] https://www.gotquestions.org/God-in-hell.html

^[3] Weima, J. A. D. (2014). Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: 1–2 Thessalonians (R. W. Yarbrough & R. H. Stein, Eds.; p. 474). Baker Academic.

^[4] Weima, J. A. D. (2014). Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: 1–2 Thessalonians (R. W. Yarbrough & R. H. Stein, Eds.; p. 475). Baker Academic.

^[5] Thomas, R. L. (1998). In New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek dictionaries : updated edition. Foundation Publications, Inc.

[6] https://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/cross-of-christ/blessing-or-curse

[7] Remove His acceptance of you.

[8] https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/hell-not-separation-god/

^[9] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Mt 27:46). (2016). Crossway Bibles.

[10] https://www.bibleref.com/2-Thessalonians/1/2-Thessalonians-1-9.html

John Stott - The Place of Israel

 

The Place of Israel

by John Stott [1]

Rector Emeritus,  All Souls Church, London, England

Our topic has been announced as “The Place of Israel,” and the topic that has been set for us is an object lesson in biblical hermeneutics as it’s usually called in the principles of interpreting the Bible.  But I would like to remind you right at the beginning that there are at least four ways in which the word “Israel,” whose place we are to investigate, can be used.

One:     Israel was that devious scoundrel, the second son of Isaac, whose first name was Jacob – meaning “he who deceived or he who struggles,” who amply lived up to his name – but whom God renames “Israel,” because having struggled with men all his life, he at last came to struggle with God for the blessing he needed (a blessing to which he was not entitled).

Two:     Israel is the chosen people of the Old Testament days – the 12 tribes descended from the 12 sons of Jacob called the children of Israel, because Israel (or Jacob) was a common ancestor.

Three:   Israel is the messianic community – the people of Jesus – the true descendents of Abraham because they share Abraham’s faith.  This includes Gentiles like most of us if we believe in Jesus, but excludes Jews who don’t.  When Paul ended his letter to the Galatians, “Peace and mercy upon the Israel of God,” he was referring to believers in Jesus, whatever their ethnic origin.  So Israel is the messianic community.

Four:    Israel today, for many people if you read the newspapers, is the Israeli nation, promised a national home by the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and given it in 1948.

So Israel has four meaning.  It means Jacob.  It means Jews.  It means Christians.  And it means Israelis.  And that is just the problem when you are asked who you are talking about.

To read further click HERE.

_________________________________________________________

1. John Stott was ordained into the ministry of the Church of England in 1945. He served as the senior pastor (rector) of All Souls Church in London from 1950-1975. He became Rector Emeritus in 1975 and devoted his life to a ministry of teaching worldwide, and writing.  Stott has written over 40 books. His best known, “Basic Christianity”, has been translated into more than 50 languages. Other titles include “The Cross of Christ,” The Contemporary Christian,”  “ Evangelical Truth,” “New Issues Facing Christians Today,” and eight New Testament expositions.

BEHOLD THE DAYS ARE COMING

 

The prophecy of Jeremiah, written about 600 years B.C., is foretelling the eventual judgment of southern Israel, Judah.  The Northern tribes had already been sent into captivity.  Babylon's assault was pending.

Throughout the prophecy, Jeremiah includes phrases of hope -- hope of a restoration.  But none is as clear as is recorded in Jeremiah 23:5–6 (ESV)

⁵ “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. ⁶ In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely. And this is the name by which he will be called: ‘The Lord is our righteousness.’

There are some expositors that choose to leave the time of the prophecy's fulfillment as open. "The expression days are coming is very general and has no particular time reference." [1] There are others who are adamant that this prophecy will be fulfilled in a physical, temporal Millennial reign. For example: This is referring to "Israel’s regathering and the righteous Branch will occur during the millennial reign following the Great Tribulation." [2]

I believe "the days" refer to the time between Christ's advent and His Second Coming. I also believe that the time stamp is clear.  I hold to that belief for 3 reasons:

#1. The formula "Behold the days".

In this chapter, Jeremiah uses that phrase twice (v5 and v7).  He will use it again in the well-known chapter on the New Covenant. ““Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord.” (Jeremiah 31:31–32, ESV)

The writer to the Hebrews in chapters 8:8bff and 10:15 clearly applies that formula to the Christian Church. In classic Biblical hermeneutics, we interpret the Old by the New.  The author to the book of Hebrews would view Jeremiah's prophecy as applying to the Church, the true offspring of Abraham, all those who have faith in Jesus Christ.  Just as the New Covenant was inaugurated by Jesus, so the Messianic reign was inaugurated at His advent.

#2. The Branch of David.

The second time stamp in this passage is the reference to the Branch of David.  Thompson comments: "The metaphor is of a shoot (ṣemaḥ) bursting forth from the Davidic tree (i.e., the dynasty), which, though cut off, is not dead. English versions have generally translated the word as Branch. In postexilic times the term became the classic technical one for the expected ideal king (Zech. 3:8; 6:12) [3].

No one disputes that the Branch, or better, the Shoot, is referring to Jesus Christ, the expected Messiah.  Jeremiah likely got that hint from Isaiah who prophesied 100 years before.  “There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch from his roots shall bear fruit. And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord.” (Isaiah 11:1–2, ESV).  Jesus Himself citing a parallel passage (“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to bring good news to the poor; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound;” (Isaiah 61:1, ESV) affirmed that this was about Him. (Luke 4:18-19).  Jesus believed that He was the One prophesied and He was currently engaged in the ministry foretold. 

#3. The Salvation of Israel.

In Romans 11:26 (ESV), Paul clearly tells us that he is thinking of the Old Testament restorative literature when he writes, "²⁶ And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, “The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”.  Certainly, when the audience read "in this way all Israel will be saved" they must have thought of: “In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely. And this is the name by which he will be called: ‘The Lord is our righteousness.’” (Jeremiah 23:6, ESV)

Paul was writing of contemporary things.  He describes how God has not rejected Israel, but in fact has a glorious plan of salvation based upon His electing mercies. "In this way all Israel" will be saved.  In other words, what is happening right now, as it happened to him, is how Israel will be saved.

Conclusion

Surely the authorial intent of the prophecy of Jeremiah 23:5-6, is to point us to the Coming of the Messiah at His birth and His ministry throughout the last days until His Second Return. “. . . Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.” (1 Corinthians 15:23–25, ESV)

So, it was with great cause and abundant joy that the father of John the Baptist would exclaim:

". . .“Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he has visited and redeemed his people and has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David, as he spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old, that we should be saved from our enemies and from the hand of all who hate us; to show the mercy promised to our fathers and to remember his holy covenant, the oath that he swore to our father Abraham, to grant us that we, being delivered from the hand of our enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him all our days.” (Luke 1:67–75, ESV)  

To God be the Glory.

___________________________________________________

1. Thompson, J. A. (1980). The Book of Jeremiah (p. 489). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

2. Hindson, E. E., & Kroll, W. M., eds. (1994). KJV Bible Commentary (p. 1466). Thomas Nelson.

3. Thompson, J. A. (1980). The Book of Jeremiah (p. 489). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

 

It’s Not Fair I Had To Go Through This Disease.

The death of Matthew Perry on October 28, 2023, was tragic and brought real grief to many.  It ought to be considered tragic not because of his popularity but because Matthew Perry was a human being created in God’s image. Although tarnished in us all, this imago Deo is what made him a person of dignity, value and honour.  His death is a tragic loss.   He starred on TV’s popular show Friends. Matthew Perry, the Emmy-nominated actor died at 54.  Perry's 10 seasons on Friends made him one of Hollywood's most recognizable actors, starring opposite Jennifer Aniston, Courteney Cox, Matt LeBlanc, Lisa Kudrow and David Schwimmer as a friend group in New York City.

On the CBC National, October 29, 2023, a video clip of Perry being interviewed by __ was shown in part.  It can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/vrZsyBhmMro?si=yUhRity3Wu3clmHC.  It was in this interview that Perry left his saddest legacy.  It was in this interview that mental health as social condition was given its greatest setback.  This is not a condemnation of Perry, for he simply parroted what our culture teaches. Much of my concerns can be heard approximately at 29:25:00 minutes in the interview.

He talks about going into Rehab and says, “I was placed in some kind of spiritual guys office and we talked a little bit and as we were done talking he turned around . . . And said ‘just remember it’s not your fault’ . . . and I said ‘what do you mean it’s not my fault, I’m the one who’s doing it what do you mean’?  And he saved my life because I then knew that it wasn’t my fault that I it was that I wasn’t weaker.  It wasn’t my will that was screwed up. It was that I have this disease  and I need to get help . . .  It’s not fair.  It’s not fair that I had to go through this disease while the other five didn’t.” (Emphasis mine.)

The most pervasive and culturally acceptable paradigm to view addiction is to view it through the lens of a disease model.  The backstory to Perry’s condition was that as a 14 year old, he and several of his friends drank excessively.  His alcoholism and drug abuse continued but theirs didn’t.  His conclusion: they didn’t have the disease.  He did.  By his own story, the disease model gave him something to hang his hat on. But here’s the problem: the disease model didn’t heal the disease.  The other problem in his story is that the disease model proves it to be unfair and ultimately created a mentality of victimhood.  He was dealt a bad hand and he got the disease.

This blog is not to be dismissive of Matthew Perry. I felt nothing but compassion for him as I learned his story. He truly was a victim — but not of drugs and alcohol.  He was a victim of a health system that views non-organic crises as diseases rather than sicknesses of the soul.  Full disclosure, I am no expert in this field of discussion and I admit that the secular literature supporting the “disease model” is enormous.  My only claim is my view that the Bible is the inerrant authority and sufficient authority of matters of the soul.  My expertise is questionable. My God is irrefutable. 

The Bible describes the soul of human beings as broken.  It is malfunctioning.  The word ‘futile’ describes its ability, meaning that it cannot do what it was intended to do. The Bible is also clear that the cause of the soul’s condition is sin or stated otherwise rebellion from God.  Where the problem is “non-organic” or “a matter of the soul” the remedy can only be found in the Creator of the human soul.  Genesis 2:7 (ESV): “. . . then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.”  That word “creature” in the ESV is from the Hebrew word translated into English to be “living being” or soul.

The Bible doesn’t avoid the matter of alcoholism or addiction.  Note:

Proverbs 23:29–32 (ESV): “Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has strife? Who has complaining? Who has wounds without cause? Who has redness of eyes? Those who tarry long over wine; those who go to try mixed wine. Do not look at wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup and goes down smoothly. In the end it bites like a serpent and stings like an adder.”

Without addressing matters of the soul it is impossible to resolve non-organic problems. Proverbial wisdom from the Scriptures remind us that issues of the soul determine vitality of life. We read in Proverbs 4:23 (ESV): “Keep your heart [= soul] with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life.”

Again, I have nothing but sadness and compassion for Matthew Perry.  His story is a stark reminder that those who are afflicted non-organic horrors should seek the only true Physician of the soul. There are specific matters of human suffering that cannot be resolved by determination, discipline, doctors or drugs.  Matters of soul-sickness can only be healed through the Great Physician, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Matthew 11:28–30 (ESV): “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. ‘Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.’”

The Half-Baked Sermon: Missing Ingredients in Much Preaching

By Jeremy Walker, Desiring God.

“What is the problem? . . . He may be delivering a lecture rather than a sermon, even if warmer rather than cooler in tone. He may offer “hot systematics” — an accurate treatment of a theological topic delivered with deep conviction. He may provide a biblical-theological survey, tracing the sweep of revelation along a particular line, but not anchored to any one part of it . . .. Sometimes fire in the pulpit masks a lack of warmth in the material, like delivering a frozen pizza in a heated bag. Often the context is provided, all the words are explained, the strict sense is given. By the end of such a sermon, the congregation might know much of what a text says. At the same time, they may know nothing of what it actually means for them.“ (Emphasis Mine)

To read more click HERE.

An excellent example as how to resolve conflict.

 

https://www.9marks.org/conversations/on-pastoral-public-tone-with-kevin-deyoung-pastors-talk-ep-245/

In this Pastors Talk episode, Jonathan Leeman (9Marks) interviews Mark Dever (Baptist) and Kevin DeYoung (Reformed) on pastoral, public tone; and the correction of brothers. This interview also gives help to disagreeing in public.

Principles:

1. The offended acted quickly when he saw/heard something that was wrong.
2. The offended got counsel from others what to do. This is not gossip.
3. The offended wrote directly in a clear, honest way. He wrote because he could articulate his concerns clearly and carefully.
4. The offended was very gracious when the offender apologized.
5. The offender know that the one taking offence. should be happy that he grow and learn by this. 
6. They knew each other well, by character thus having confidence that their concerns would be handled graciously and seriously.
7. The offender called right away after receiving the rebuke and repented.
8. The offender, when realizing his error did what he could to make it right. 
9. The effectiveness of the resolution was directly based on the good relationship of the parties and the trust that they could speak of such things confidently. There is wisdom to know how a rebuke might land. 
10. To be able to communicate in such manner is to respect the other party and assume that they will hear what they’re saying.  He is assuming that the other will not take it out of context, make light of it, be resentful toward it.

Build the kind of relationships that this level of discussion can take place. Unfortunately I have experienced several significant issues that I feel unable to address with a person because their response to conflict has been defensiveness, counter-attack, failure to really listen to my concerns, making light of it, or oppositely becoming distant and resentful.

I pray today that if I am that way, the Lord will hear my repentance and give grace.