stillhaventfound.org

I wrote the below dialogue in 1997. I was a Reformed Christian then and struggling with what the true gospel was. Was it a hard gospel that demanded our all if we want to receive the benefits of Christ’s sacrifice? Or was it a gospel of free grace that merely required our faith in Christ and His finished work?

I was initially influenced by Walter Chantry’s Today’s Gospel - Authentic or Synthetic, which called for repentance and forsaking of sins as a condition for salvation. These three quotes below were taken from an earlier article of mine on New Creation Church and represent this hard gospel that is very common in evangelicalism today:

Without obedience, you shall not see life! Unless you bow to Christ’s sceptre, you will not receive the benefits of Christ’s sacrifice. (Walter Chantry, Today’s Gospel: Authentic or Synthetic?)

In common honesty, we must not conceal the fact that free forgiveness in one sense will cost everything. (JI Packer, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God)

Salvation is for those who are willing to forsake everything. (John MacArthur Jr., The Gospel According to Jesus)

Such beliefs attracted me because God had recently changed my life and I wondered why there were so many “nominal” Christians in church. The conclusion I came to through reading from Christians such as the above was that the gospel being presented was a false gospel. “Cheap grace” was being presented. It was a gospel that didn’t demand our all. And that’s why there were so many people in the church who claimed to be Christians but did not show much or any fruit. The truth, I believed then, was that these people were probably not Christians in the first place because they were not presented with the true gospel message which called people to forsake sins and give all their lives for Christ in exchange for forgiveness of sins.

However, I changed my mind after encountering a grace-centered gospel through the people from the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals (ACE) (then called CURE), White Horse Inn (WHI) and Modern Reformation (MR) magazine - basically from Michael Horton and gang. It was during this period, when I read a lot and had lengthy theological email discussions with many Christians throughout the world about issues relating to grace, the gospel, the Lordship Salvation controversy, etc., that I came to my stance about the gospel of Jesus Christ - years before I heard about New Creation Church. It was probably around 1997, the same year Pastor Prince embraced the grace message.

It started when I realized how the Reformed and Lutheran Christians from ACE, WHI and MR were presenting the gospel so differently from other Reformed and Puritan Christians I read. I emailed some of Michael Horton’s colleagues. We exchanged pretty lengthy emails (I still have many of them today). They helped me tremendously in coming to my conviction about the gospel and the below dialogue was a summary of my thoughts which I asked one of them to comment on. I don’t have the email of his response, but the person was basically in agreement to what is written below (although, I have made minor changes to the original dialogue).

My point in recounting the above is twofold. Firstly, for those who think New Creation’s gospel of grace (as, for example, presented below) is some false gospel that is “cheap grace”, try reading writings (or listening to podcasts) from ACE, WHI and MR. Read Michael Horton’s books and articles. I came to embrace a free gospel of grace as presented below from these people and their writings/podcasts, not from Joseph Prince. Secondly, for Reformed Christians who think that Reformed theology and tradition are ONE regarding the gospel and what people need to do to be saved, think again. Paul Washer, a modern-day hero among many young Reformed Christians and one who preaches a really hard gospel, would respond to the Jailer’s question in Acts 16:30, “What must I do to be saved?” very differently from Michael Horton - and I would say from Paul and Silas too (Acts 16:31). Not just Paul Washer, but many Puritans too, and those influenced by some Puritan writings, would also answer the Jailer’s question quite differently from Horton and gang. Whoever is right on the gospel (or should I say whoever is right on what the proper and saving response to the gospel is) is an important question worthy of many blog posts. Suffice to say here that there is a division among Reformed Christians about this important question.

Anyway, enough of appetizer and on to the main course…

Peter : John, I don’t think I can ever make it.

John : What do you mean?

Peter : I don’t think I can ever become a Christian.

John : Why not ? It’s simple. All you have to do is realize you’re a sinner and accept what Jesus did on the cross for yourself. Trusting and calling upon His name will save you Peter. God promises that.

Peter : But I went to an evangelistic meeting the other day.

John : What did they tell you?

Peter : They said that unless one turns from his sin, one can’t come to Christ. They said that Christ is Lord and not only Savior and because of that we must respond to Christ in both his offices. We must trust him to save you and forsake sins. He said Christ can’t be divided. We can’t be saved by Christ unless we forsake sins. He says there are too many people who claim to be Christians nowadays, yet don’t show any fruits of being a Christian.

John : Well Peter, If turning from sins is the condition to be saved, I can’t make it myself.

Peter : But you’re so good. You pray, you read the bible and you evangelize. I can’t be like you. You’re one who turns from sins and believes in Christ. I can’t do that.

John : Peter, I don’t turn from sins because that will save me. I do so because I’ve already been saved. What saves me is Christ. I believe His work for me, that He died for me on that cross 2000 years ago. Peter, turning from sins does not save you. It’s a true result of trusting in Christ, but it’s not some condition for salvation. We’re justified and saved by faith alone. I’m not saved by forsaking my sins or making Jesus Lord.

Peter : This is quite a different message from what the evangelist said, John. Are you sure you’re right? In all the messages I’ve heard, I keep on hearing that Jesus is Lord and one must submit to Him by turning from sins or else one can’t be saved. You’re telling me a different story. You’re saying that Jesus Christ will save me here and now. You’re saying I don’t have to start forsaking sins but can be saved this moment.

John : That’s true Peter. It’s not our forsaking of sins that makes us more acceptable in Christ’s sight. It doesn’t prepare us to be accepted in Christ. Yes Peter, I’m telling you that you can be saved right now. Call upon the name of the Lord. Trust in Him this second and the Bible promises that you’ll be saved.

Peter : That’s really a blessing to hear. I thought I had to go through the loopholes of forsaking sins and submitting to Christ’s Lordship before I can be saved. You mean I don’t have to forsake sins and trust in Christ to be saved? All I have to do is trust in Christ?

John : Yes Peter, your salvation and assurance isn’t grounded in what you do, but grounded in what Christ did. Peter, do you remember what I told you last week? I was grieved and sad I became angry at my teacher last week. Remember that?

Peter : Yes, why?

John : Well, Peter, you may think I’m some saint and some holy guy, and that I never sin. But did I not sin then by being angry and swearing?

Peter : Yes, I guess you did.

John : Peter, if the evangelist says that one has to forsake sins and trust in Christ to be saved, do you think I was saved then when I sinned? I failed to forsake sins right?

Peter : Yes, but it was only a small sin!

John : There are no small sins. A sin is a sin!

Peter : Oh well, but I’m sure God will forgive you.

John : You’re absolutely right. But forgive me - why? Because I had been good previously in forsaking sins and surrendering to Christ’s Lordship. And this was only a small blunder for me. Is that the reason why He’ll forgive me?

Peter : No, because you’ve accepted His forgiveness.

John : But i thought you believed the evangelist who said that no one can come to Christ unless he forsake sins?

Peter : Well…errr. I see what you mean.

John : I hope you do. You’re saved not by what you do, but what Christ did.

Peter : Ya, I guess you’re right. But I’ve heard some who say that you must at least be “willing to forsake sins” or willing to obey Christ to be saved.

John : Well, this is also wrong. Let me tell you why. If I were to have that kind of theology (that one must believe in Christ, and in addition to that, be willing to forsake sins, to be saved) then let’s see how that applies to your life.

Peter : OK, how?

John : OK, I’m going to ask you now. Do you want to be saved?

Peter : Yes I do.

John : What do you have to do? Well, because I’m going to present that kind of theology as mentioned above, I’ll tell you that to be saved you have to be willing to forsake sins and to trust in Christ. Will you do that Peter? Are you willing right now to forsake sins and trust in Christ? You don’t have to forsake sins, just be willing only to forsake sins. And also trust in Christ.

Peter : Ok, I’ll accept that. I am willing to forsake sins and trust in Christ.

John : Then I’ll tell you that you’re saved.

Peter : Oh, is that all?

John : Well, you may think so now. You may feel assured now, but later on say that you meet a previous enemy of yours who used to beat you up and who raped your girlfriend. You confront him and try your best to love him. After all, you know that it’s not right to sin. But somehow, you got so overwhelmed by your emotions that you hit him hard. But it came so quickly. Immediately you run away. You’re sorry for your actions. But soon, you remember where you trust is in when you were told you were saved. Isn’t it a two-fold trust - 1) you trust in Christ 2) you have this willingness to forsake sins. Horrors, you think to yourself, ” Yes, I do trust in Christ to forgive me, and i was willing initially to forsake sins and not beat up that guy but instead love him. But all of a sudden, it just came all of a sudden. This shows that i was never really willing in the first place to forsake sins was I?” And Peter, if this happens, you’ll start to question your salvation, because your trust isn’t in Jesus Christ alone but in Jesus plus your willingness to forsake sins.

Peter : I see what you mean. It’s Jesus alone isn’t it? Oh dear, it’s Jesus alone that saves. How foolish I was to think that forsaking sins or being willing to forsake sins could save me. How foolish I was.

John : Peter, it’s OK. Man is inclined to think that works can help him. But it’s Jesus alone. Respond to Christ in faith alone and you’ll be saved. You’ll be saved where you are. You can be saved right now and here. This second, Peter, you can be saved. No need for preparation, just this second.

Peter : One last question. Does that mean that I can live a life of sinfulness after i trust in Christ and still be saved?

John : This is a wonderful question Peter. You know, this question is anticipated by Paul in Romans 6:1. This has always been the opposition against the free grace and gospel of Christ. Peter, one more reason why you can trust my gospel presentation and not that evangelist who called you to turn from sins (or at least be willing to do so) in order to be saved. It’s because my gospel presentation is exactly like the Bible’s. If Paul told his audience that they had to forsake sins in order to be saved or be willing to forsake sins, would Paul have faced such a question in Romans 6:1? You see, if we try to say that somehow the forsaking of sins is some condition for being saved, who in the world would ask whether they could continue in sin? After all, if forsaking sin is already a condition to become a Christian, nobody would ask if they could continue to sin as a Christian! Listen to what Martyn Lloyd-Jones, known as The Last of the Preachers, wrote:

It is true that where sin abounded grace has much more abounded; well then, “Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound yet further?” The true preaching of the gospel of salvation by grace alone always leads to the possibility of this charge being brought against it. There is no better test as to whether a man is really preaching the New Testament gospel than this, that some people might misunderstand it and mis-interpret it that it really amounts to this: that because you are saved by grace alone, it does not really matter at all WHAT you do, you can go on sinning all you like because it will redound all the more to the glory of grace. That is a very good test of gospel preaching. If my preaching of the gospel does not expose it to that misunderstanding, then it is not the gospel. Let me show you what I mean. If a man preaches justification by works, no one would ever raise the question. If he says, “If you want to go to heaven, you must stop committing sins, live a life filled with good works, and keep this up regularly and constantly until the end, then you will be a Christian and go to heaven when you die.” Obviously, no one will accuse a man who preached like this of saying, “Let us continue in sin that grace may abound.” But every preacher who preached the gospel has been accused of this! They have all been accused of “antinomianism.” I would say to all preachers: If your preaching of salvation has not been misunderstood in that way, then you had better examine your sermons again, and you had better make sure that you really are preaching the salvation that is proclaimed in the New Testament to the ungodly, the sinner, to those who are dead in trespasses and sins, to those who are the enemies of God. There is a kind of dangerous element about the true presentation of the doctrine of salvation.

John : I can tell you this. A person who trusts in Christ will still sin. No doubt about that. But a person who trusts in Christ will gradually start to love God more and more. And gradually, he’ll start to sin less and less. Whom God justifies, He also starts the process of sanctifying. The change may be big, the change may hardly be seen at all and recognized by humans, but there will be a change inside. But we have to be clear that this change in us for the better doesn’t save. It’s Christ that saves.

Peter : But I keep on hearing preachers preaching about , “By their fruits you shall know them”. I’m totally frightened when I hear this kind of preaching, John. It causes me to look into myself to see if I have enough fruits in me. If I don’t, I may not be saved. I heard from a famous preacher that “A Christian is one that loves the Lord with their whole heart, mind and soul”.

John : I believe that’s the problem we have today. In a way, there’s been too much focus inward. We are to look to Christ and outside ourselves to be saved. It’s Christ’s work, not our work. It’s Christ’s life, not our life. We’re not saved by our fruits. Fruits are legitimate results of faith, but to be sure, one needs to carefully speak about this issue. Definitely there will be fruits, but sometimes it may be such that others may not see the fruits. Let’s not be fruit hunters. And as for that last quote, I understand what he means. But one should be careful how he expresses things. Peter, do you think I love the Lord with my whole heart, mind and soul?

Peter : Well, you’re one of the most loving Christians I have ever met. I’m sure you do.

John : Peter, do I have to remind you again of what I did last week when I got angry and swore?

Peter : Well, you’re right. You’ve sinned. But you still do love the Lord with all your heart, mind, soul, I believe.

John : Well, when I sinned, I failed to love the Lord with my heart, mind and soul. Let’s not make sin such a small matter. Whether I sin big or small, whether I sin less often than others or whatever, I’ve still sinned and it proves I failed to love the Lord always with my heart, mind and soul. Thus you can see that a Christian is one that still sins. He doesn’t love the Lord with his heart, mind and soul. He still sins. A Christian will gradually love the Lord more and more than a non Christian, to be sure. But we still sin and still fail the Lord.

Peter : So we go back again to Christ and the cross for assurance and our salvation don’t we?

John : Yes we do. I hope you’ve seen the danger of looking inwards or looking to one’s works.

Peter : What about those who claim to be Christian, claim to have said the Sinner’s Prayer, claim to have walked down the aisle, but yet still live the same life!

John : This is something that I’m concerned too. Firstly, let’s remember again that true Christians will show forth fruit, but let’s not be fruit hunters. Are we going to say that if so and so doesn’t come to Church once a week, or if so and so doesn’t read the bible everyday or pray 10 hours a week, etc., that it means the person isn’t a Christian?

Peter : No, I don’t think that would be good. After all, our trust is in Christ right, not our works.

John : Exactly.

Peter : So does that mean that all who claim who are Christians, we’ll have to give them the benefit of the doubt that they are saved?

John : There is a tension here Peter. I can’t give you any answers. I’m having trouble with this myself. Firstly, let’s recap that Christ is to be received by faith for one to be saved and that one’s assurance is to be in Christ alone, not our works or fruits. Why? Because it’s really hard to look inside and say, “AH HA! I have enough fruits and thus I’m saved” or “You don’t have enough fruits and thus you’re not saved”. Who knows when enough is enough? Thus, let us look to Christ. Yet, on the other hand, we need to realize that the grace of God transforms people. A person who truly trusts in Christ will be transformed. These two are hard to reconcile. If I were to face someone whom I feel isn’t saved, and I were to tell the person, “Pal, you’re not saved. Christ says that if you trust in Him, there will be fruits in your life. Where are those fruits?”, the person to whom I said that to may think that works saves him. He’ll start changing his life. Then he’ll wonder whether that is enough. He’ll wonder if he’s done enough forsaking of sins, surrendering, etc., to be saved. He’ll have a works-orientated mindset. Thus, there is a danger here. We need to be extremely cautious in the way we handle people who seem not to produce fruits. Right now, I’ll say that I offer no strict guidelines. I’m struggling on a method to approach them. What many have said and preached (about self examination) is confusing and will confuse those who hear it. We don’t want to scare people into questioning their salvation because of a lack of works. That would make them think that they have to work to get saved. It’s tricky. But I think the best way to approach such a person is to give them the benefit of the doubt for we cannot judge the heart of another.

Peter : I see, I understand you now. I understand why there needs to be caution in handling these situations.

John : Well, I hope you’ve come to understand more about the gospel.

Peter : I have really learnt a lot. Thanks for your time. You know what, I trust in Christ. I believe He died for me. And I understand that it’s not my forsaking of sins or turning from sins, surrender or obedience that saves me. Thanks so much for explaining this to me John. And I’m going to live a life that will please God. I desire to do that and forsake my sins not because that will save me. Oh, I am ALREADY SAVED! Hallelujah! My focus, my hope, my assurance is on Christ and it’s on the cross. It’s on what Christ did, not what I did or can do. And I will fail in my Christian life, but that doesn’t mean I have to start questioning my salvation. For I am saved by Christ’s death on the cross and nothing else! Hallelujah! This is so liberating!

John : You’ve understood what Christianity is about Peter. It’s not what you can or will do, but what Christ did. To be justified, one needs to accept Christ’s righteousness for oneself. Sanctification is a process of living the Christian life in gratitude to what Christ has already done when He justified you. Your sanctification and growth in holiness will always be imperfect so don’t look to yourself for proof you’re saved, look to Christ’s death for you. I’m glad that you’ve come to realize all this and that you’ve come to trust in Christ and Christ alone totally for your salvation.

I’ve been reading Bill Johnson’s books and I came across this quote:

By nature love does not require anything in return, or it is not love… I have heard teaching on the subject of giving to the poor and needy that emphasizes our stewardship instead of compassion. It basically means that you don’t want to give to someone who will not use what was given properly. My opinion is that there is too much concern about giving something to someone who might misuse what is given. That didn’t stop God. While we do have a responsibility for good management of what God has given us, we are not responsible for what another person does with what we’ve given them. We are responsible to love, and love requires giving. Even if a person misuses the money or gift I gave them, the message of love has been demonstrated. Giving His love away is the goal. (Bill Johnson, Face To Face With God, p. 187-188)

Because the subject of helping the poor has been a big part of my life for some time, I’ve thought a lot about the issues that Bill Johnson wrote about above. Like him, I agree that in focusing on stewardship instead of compassion when addressing the subject of giving, we could miss the essence of what love and grace is about - actions which do not “require anything in return”.

We hear so much about that famous Chinese proverb:

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

While I think there’s certainly truth and wisdom in it, I also think that pushing the implications of the above to the extreme can actually cause one to miss the essence of what grace and love is.

In 2003, while in Colombia (teaching English and learning Spanish), I was faced with the question of whether to continue to give money to a beggar and her family I met on the streets. Was it wise to continuously give them fish, or should I make sure that my money goes to teaching them how to fish? I pondered the above proverb and I reflected upon the meaning of grace. Below are my reflections taken from here:

“So I was confronted with the question of whether my helping Isabel and giving her family money was a good thing. Or perhaps, it was a good thing, but was it a wise thing? Or was it the wisest response in such a situation? In a way, it’s like when one meets a beggar. Should we give money to him/her? Giving to the beggar is just like giving to Isabel (she is after all begging for money) – in both circumstances, we would be giving a fish to the recipient rather than teaching him/her how to fish.

Should I continue giving to Isabel or somehow make sure that my giving to her would result in her working and thus earning her way to self-sufficiency? If I were to continue giving “fishes” to Isabel, rather than making sure she fishes for herself, would I thus be considered a bad steward of my money? Wouldn’t I be of better use if I were to somehow help her to get a job? Wouldn’t it be more right for her too if she were to earn her wages rather than depend on charity to survive?

Although the reasoning behind the “fish” quote is indeed true and wise, I realized that we could indeed take all this too far. What I mean is that we could start thinking that we should not give to the poor if indeed nothing comes out of it – if there is no long-term results to show for our charity. We could start thinking that we need to make them earn their wages and not rely on us for charity. In a way, we could fall into the spirit of the very famous saying (which many people think is taken from the Bible, but is in actual fact not) that “God helps those who help themselves” and thus think it wrong to help those who do not show they want to put in effort to help themselves. While all this in some sense no doubt true, I realized it is dangerous because this spirit could easily go contrary to the spirit of grace. That is, we could forget what grace means. Grace is unconditional giving. It is not conditional at all. By coming up with criteria to be fulfilled before we start giving, our giving ceases to be unconditional. Whether the criteria is imposed on the recipient or merely guides us as to whom we should be giving doesn’t really matter. As long as we don’t give freely – as long as we are being in any way conditional in our giving – we do not understand what grace really is. After all, Jesus didn’t die for the sins of certain people who fulfilled certain criteria, He died for all. When He loved us, he didn’t love only some but all. And when He called us to love others, He didn’t specify who we are to love – except that we are to love all without exception. When we give to others, we are called to give without expecting anything in return. We aren’t asked to give only to those who would use our money wisely. Rather, the only criteria, if any, which needs to be fulfilled before we give, is that those given ought to have needed it.

I came to this conclusion after much struggle within me. Initially, I had told myself that I should be giving for a good purpose. And a good purpose would be if my giving would help Isabel to get a job and thus support herself. There would thus be a long-term effect. In a sense, I would be leaving a little “legacy” of my giving. I would be proud in future to let others know that I gave to help this person who now has a job and is self-supportive. But I realized that this kind of thinking could go very much against the spirit of grace. I wanted to get something out of it – to get the satisfaction of having made a big difference to Isabel’s life. In a sense, my giving was conditional upon the fact that it would lead to something big. But I realized grace doesn’t make such conditions. Jesus loved us all and died for us all even if some would never have accepted His love. Or even if some would have accepted His love but still fail over and over again. That’s grace!

I’m not saying that using our money wisely is not something we ought to do. Obviously we should do that. The parable of the talents encourages us to be responsible for the use of our money. We should use it in such a way that it blesses others and that there are results to show. If we were to go by the parable of the talents alone, then the “fish” quote would indeed be wise and right and ought to be followed. Then we should think about using our money as best as we can and not just give unconditionally, but making sure that results follow. Indeed, the parable of the talents reminds us that we should not be lazy and thus when we give money to people, we need to make sure they are not just lazy and “consume” our gifts but they will invest wisely with it – preferably to learn how to fish, not just to buy fishes! The parable of the talents has a sort of “meritorious” feel to it.

I acknowledge that God does want us to be responsible with the way we use money. We need to put it to good use. But on the other hand, there’s the notion of grace. And grace has absolutely no “meritorious” feel at all! God is a God of grace. His love for us is more of reckless abandon than a calculative sort. The parable of the talents has to be balanced with the understanding of what grace is all about. When we think about grace, we banish all notions of merits or conditions. After all, in the bible there are hints of both capitalism (in the parable of the talents and such) and communism/communalism (Acts 2:44-45, Acts 4:32-35, 2 Corinthians 8-9). And let us not forget that the idea most prominent and preeminent in the bible is that of love and grace.

My point in all of this is that I realized how easily it is for one to forget the idea of grace. And in terms of giving and development, I believe remembering about grace should cause us not to think so much about how our giving produces good long term results, but should instead remind us that even if our giving were to produce nothing in the long term, but were only to be a short term and one-time expression of grace and love, grace would compel us to do it anyway.”

I was baptised as an infant in an Anglican Church in Singapore. My parents were committed Christians and so I went to church faithfully since I was a baby. When I was in my teens - around 15 to 16 - I started to hate going to church (God soon transformed me in a Pentecostal Church). Sunday school wasn’t very interesting. I can’t say I remembered much. But I don’t think the message of Jesus dying for my sins was an emphasis throughout my Sunday School days. I don’t remember the gospel of Jesus Christ being taught then. Rather, I remembered being taught values and character and stuff like that.

I think many Sunday Schools are like that. They teach children how to be good children, using stories from the Bible. And I think that’s one reason why you get so many children from Christian families growing up and feeling the same way as I did. For me, when I was a teenager, church was just a place I went out of routine. Jesus wasn’t real and He wasn’t the focus of what I learned. If He was, it was about Him being a person I should imitate, not about how He loved me and died for my sins. After all, we all want to teach children to be good at home and in school, don’t we? And so we get a lot of Sunday School teachings that focus on being a good Christian. And hey, there are tons of Bible stories that can be used to enforce this point - the point that God wants us to be good and that we should aspire to be good children of God like so many of the heroes in the Bible.

In his book on how to interpret the Old Testament, Gospel and Kingdom, Graeme Goldsworthy talks about how a Sunday School teacher applied the story of David and Goliath:

The fellow dressed up as Goliath had progressively revealed a list of childhood sins by peeling cardboard strips off his breastplate one by one, as the speaker explained the kind of ‘Goliaths’ we all have to meet. Then a strapping young David appeared on cue, and produced his arsenal – a sling labeled ‘faith’ and five stones listed as ‘obedience’, ‘service’, ‘Bible reading’, ‘prayer’, and ‘fellowship’ (p. 8).

The above is probably similar to many typical Sunday School teaching. The above story is applied in such a way that children are exhorted to have more faith and obey, serve, read the Bible, pray and fellowship more. The Bible is used to teach good “lessons” and “principles”. The children are taught how to be good Christians. And they grow up believing that Christianity is all about being good and doing spiritual things and stuff like that.

What’s wrong with the above interpretation and application? Goldsworthy says that

we must not view these recorded events as if they were a mere succession of events from which we draw little moral lessons or example for life (p. 25).

After all,

David is the one who, immediately prior to the Goliath episode (I Samuel 17), is shown to be God’s anointed king . . .So when it comes to his slaying of Goliath it is as the unique anointed one of God that he wins the battle (p. 27-28).

Therefore, the application shouldn’t be that we ought to be more like David so we can defeat our Goliaths. Rather, the story ought to point to Jesus, God’s greater anointed King, who would come and defeat the greater Goliath! The story points to Jesus and such an interpretation encourages awe and faith in its hearers, rather than making them feel defeated that they lack obedience, faith, etc (which we all do). Through the story of David and Goliath, we see the gospel of Jesus Christ and we become thankful and desire to live for Him. The Bible is not primarily about moral lessons and principles. It’s primarily about Jesus Christ - even in the Old Testament.

Children who grow up with Sunday School messages of how we can be better Christians or better people are totally missing the message of the Bible. And parents and Sunday School teachers are totally missing it too if they use the Bible to teach children primarily about character development. If we do that, we will end up with grown ups who are just like the elder brother in the Parable of the Prodigal Son/Father - i.e. 2nd generation Christians who think that Christianity is all about being good Christians and who have totally missed the main message of the Bible which is the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Going back to the article I mentioned in my previous post. I’m so glad it mentioned two books for children I’ve recommended to, and bought for, others before. Parents who are reading this, be sure to get them for your children! They are The Jesus Storybook Bible and The Big Picture Story Bible. The unique thing about these two books isn’t in their pictures or words. It’s in their content. The subtitle of the first book is Every Story whispers His Name. In every story, it’s clearly explained how it relates to Jesus and His finished work. Children reading it will thus understand that the Bible isn’t about helping us to be better Christians, but about Jesus and His death and resurrection.

Because I think it’s so beautiful and true, let me quote the beginning pages of The Jesus Storybook Bible:

Now, some people think the Bible is a book of rules, telling you what you should and shouldn’t do. The Bible certainly does have some rules in it. They show you how life works best. But the Bible isn’t mainly about you and what you should be doing. It’s about God and what he has done.

Other people think the Bible is a book of heroes, showing you people you should copy. The Bible does have some heroes in it, but (as you’ll soon find out) most of the people in the Bible aren’t heroes at all. They make some big mistakes (sometimes on purpose). They get afraid and run away. At times they are downright mean.

No, the Bible isn’t a book of rules, or a book of heroes. The Bible is most of all a Story. It’s an adventure story about a young Hero who comes from a far country to win back his lost treasure. It’s a love story about a brave Prince who leaves his palace, his throne - everything - to rescue the one he loves. It’s like the most wonderful of fairy tales that has come true in real life!

…There are lots of stories in the bible but all the stories are telling one Big Story. The Story of how God loves his children and comes to rescue them.

It takes the whole Bible to tell this Story. And at the center of the Story, there is a baby. Every Story in the Bible whispers his name. He is like the missing piece in a puzzle - the piece that makes all the other pieces fit together; and suddenly you can see a beautiful picture.

I’ll finish with excerpts from the book on how the stories of the tower of Babel (Gen. 11), of Abraham and Isaac (Gen. 22) and of Joseph and his brothers (Gen. 37-46) end. Notice how every story whispers Jesus’ name:

You see, God knew, however high they reached, however hard they tried, people could never get back to heaven by themselves. People didn’t need a staircase; they needed a Rescuer. Because the way back to heaven wasn’t a staircase; it was a Person.

People could never reach up to Heaven, so Heaven would have to come down to them.

And, one day, it would.

Many years later, another Son would climb another hill, carrying wood on his back. Like Isaac, he would trust his Father and do what his Father asked. He wouldn’t struggle or run away.

Who was he? God’s Son, his only Son - the Son he loved.

The Lamb of God.

One day, God would send another Prince, a young Prince whose heart would break. Like Joseph, he would leave his home and his Father. His brothers would hate him and want him dead. He would be sold for pieces of silver. He would be punished even though he had done nothing wrong.

But God would use everything that happened to this young Prince - even the bad things - to do something good: to forgive the sins of the whole world.

Isn’t it so beautiful when we read all the stories in the Old Testament as primarily pointing to the gospel of Jesus Christ? When we see these stories not primarily as instructions on what to do and what not to do in order to please God and be good Christians, but primarily as stories pointing to the Big Love Story of the Father sending His one and only Son to rescue us from us sins, our hearts cannot but be encouraged and moved. And I think if more Sunday Schools were to teach the Bible like this, more children would be established in the love of God in Christ and grow up understanding what Christianity is truly all about.

PS: Another good children’s book written from a redemptive-historical perspective (i.e. one that focuses on God’s redemption plan in Jesus Christ) like the above two mentioned books is Mighty Acts of God: A Family Bible Story Book.