J.D. Greear: WHY GOD DOESN’T REMOVE OUR SINFUL CRAVINGS IMMEDIATELY?

WHY GOD DOESN’T REMOVE OUR SINFUL CRAVINGS IMMEDIATELY

Posted by Pastor J.D. on March 17, 2015

Every Christian I know has had the experience of coming up against the same sin—again—and wondering, “Will this struggle ever end? Why doesn’t God just remove this?” (If you haven’t had that experience, just give it time.) This seems to be a frustration common to all believers, and not just with sin, either. When we experience any prolonged suffering or pain or discomfort, we have to ask, Why?

This isn’t the question of a skeptic trying to prove that God doesn’t exist—the famous apologetic “problem of evil.” No, this is the personal question of a believer trying to discern what in the world God is doing with the continued struggles in his life. It is the question of someone who reads, “For those who love God, all things work together for good,” and trying to reconcile that theological truth with her present circumstances.

One of the most surprising insights into this question comes from Judges 3. Tucked in between the stories of Othniel and Ehud is a statement that most Christians skip right over. But if we took this truth to heart, we’d have a renewed courage to face our struggles: “Now these are the nations that the LORD left, to test Israel by them, that is, all in Israel who had not experienced all the wars in Canaan. It was in order that the generations of the people of Israel might know war, to teach war to those who had not known it before.”(Judges 3:1-2)

Why did God leave struggles for his people, Israel? Israel’s struggle was tangible and obvious: it came in the form of enemy nations and their armies. So why didn’t God drive them out?

In one sense, as the book of Judges pounds into our heads over and over, the enemy nations are there because Israel didn’t believe God enough to drive them out. But that’s not what Judges 3 says. No, here we see that God left them thereto test Israel so that they might learn to fight wars.

You can read the rest here.

Comments

John Stott on the "old man" and the "body ruled by sin" in Rom 6 v 6

There are, in fact, two quite distinct ways in which the New Testament speaks of crucifixion in relation to holiness. The first is our death to sin through identification with Christ; the second is our death to self through imitation of Christ. On the one hand, we have been crucified with Christ. But on the other we have crucified (decisively repudiated) our sinful nature with all its desires, so that every day we renew this attitude by taking up our cross and following Christ to crucifixion. The first is a legal death, a death to the penalty of sin; the second is a moral death, a death to the power of sin. The first belongs to the past, and is unique and unrepeatable; the second belongs to the present, and is repeatable, even continuous. I died to sin (in Christ) once; I die to self (like Christ) daily. It is with the first of these two deaths that Romans 6 is chiefly concerned, although the first is with a view to the second, and the second cannot take place w...

Boice: “... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated. ”

Adam had been appointed by God to be the representative of the race so that if he stood, we too would stand, and if he fell, we would fall with him. Adam did fall, as we know. So death passed upon everyone. “But isn’t that terribly unfair?” someone protests. “Isn’t it cruel for God to act in this fashion?” ... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated. Besides, it was the only way it would later be possible for God to save us once we had sinned. In other words, federalism is actually a proof of God’s grace, which is the point the passage comes to (vv. 15 ff.). It was gracious to Adam first of all. Why? Because it was a deterrent to his sin. God must have explained to Adam that he was to represent his posterity. That might have restrained him from sinning. A father who might be tempted to steal his employer’s funds (and would if only he himself were involved), might well decide not to do it if he kne...

Repackaging the gospel? It's more like obscuring the gospel!

Preface : I recognize this post may make me unpopular with some, but I think it is an important issue to blog about here. I’ve had time to reflect on this video and in my opinion, I think what is in this video raises some questions. This gentleman featured below is slotted to speak at the SBC's 2020 Pastors' Conference and it prompted me to think more about this illustration. I want to note that I don't know him and I have no personal issue with him. I assume he is a brother in the LORD. Having said that, I see some significant issues here that relate to this type of preaching being clear on the gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, it appears to be obscuring it in my observation. Concern: Should the SBC or churches, in general, be in the habit of holding this up as a good and healthy example? Let's think about it some together. (Watch this clip below here first.) Context: The clip was posted to stand on its own a...

Search This Blog