Lesson 9 The State: Whose Law?

As you might recall last week I mentioned that Dr. Dell Tackett would be speaking this morning at the Idaho State Prayer Breakfast in Boise.  Drue, Meredith and I attended the breakfast and really enjoyed listening to Dr. Tackett speak in person.  Some of the personalities who were present at the breakfast were Governor Otter and former Governors Batt, Andrus and Kempthorn.  There were also a lot of other legislators in attendance. 

Interestingly, Dr. Tackett’s talk focused around much of the content of our last lesson (lesson 9). So as he spoke it was easy to get where he was coming from. As in the lesson we saw, he spoke about social spheres and the state, to which God grants the power of the sword for the punishment of evil and the preservation of the good.  He noted that because of the power of the state it had a great potential to go off course and overstep its authority. He noted (again as he did in our lesson) that Government must always remember his place under the sovereignty of God.  He included in his discussion information about our forefathers and how they sought God for guidance (something that if we see today is often only lip service). It was nice to hear him speak about the law of God as the rule, foundation and governing principle over the laws enacted by men.

Of the folks at my table (Drue & Meredith sat at a different table than me), I was one of three who had facilitated the “Truth Project” at their church.  I suspect that if a survey might have been taken as to who had gone through the Truth Project program, many of the over 1000 people there would have stood up.  

I do need to admit my naiveté in thinking there was some way that Dr. Tackett might have received and actually considered my email invitation to visit our church tomorrow.  I couldn’t even make it to the front of the room to get a hand shake and tell him how much I and all of you have enjoyed his work.  But that was okay.  I did learn that he is originally from the Blackfoot Idaho area and that he is speaking tonight and tomorrow at the Donnelly Bible Church in Donnelly Idaho.  He noted that his sister and her husband were in the audience and so I suspect that they are members of the church in Donnelly.  I also learned that he is an ordained elder in the Presbyterian Church of America and is working on additional Christian Worldview productions.  He is with no longer with Focus on the Family and is now with “Coral Ridge Ministries” which was founded by the late Dr. D James Kennedy.

Although there was a little misapplication of Scripture by using 2 Chronicles 7:14 to suggest that God is promising to America in general what he actually promised to Israel (read it in context), the prayers offered at the breakfast were appropriate and offered by actual Christian ministers.  I presume this because their prayers were quite orthodox sounding. This was great and I pleased with this because I really expected some sort of conglomeration of religious folks who would offer up their particular form of ecumenical and inclusivistic prayer so as to make everyone and everything seem to be the same; but that didn’t happen.  

Frankly, the only downer to the whole thing was Governor Otter’s closing response to Dr. Tackett’s talk. As I listened to him talk about the power of man’s free will and his powerful ability to do what was right and then as an afterthought he threw in the idea that our Creator is who gave us these great abilities (I guess the fall was just a technical set back), I just shook my head and wondered if he had really heard anything Dr. Tackett was saying.  He then spoke about being Roman Catholic and stuff that Benjamin Franklin said.  I must say, it would have been so much better to just end it with the thoughts Dr. Tackett had given to us to consider.   But all in all, it was a great experience.

Prior to all this I received some comments from Melvin which I would like to share.  Melvin wrote:

Mike, 

The role of the State.

I have a difficult time trying to accept God’s statement that we are to be subject to the State when the State is wrong. Where does one draw the line between obeying the State and probably giving up ones goods versus resisting the State? 

Melvin

Good question Melvin.  Tough to answer without considering a specific scenario, but  I think the simple answer is that we can resist the state through conventional means when we believe a law is unjust.  Then through conventional means, enact just laws.  If however the state commands us to be unjust or immoral, our resistance can and must be militant in the sense that we resist the command to be immoral. For to do that is to act against God; which is no possible for those who love Him.

See you all tomorrow,

In Christ,

Michael         

Lesson 8 Unio Mystica

Lesson 8 was called Unio Mystica -Am I alone? Unio Mystica is Latin for "Mysterious Union." This lesson considered what is means to be united with God in Christ and indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

It looked at the Universal Church and asked both believers and non-believers what they believed about church.  This made me think about some of the material I've read on this subject. So I wanted to share just an excerpt of what Dr. Wayne Grudem has to say about about the Church.

    

One Body in Christ: We are not simply in Christ as isolated individual persons. Since Christ is the head of the body, which is the church (Eph. 5:23), all who are in union with Christ are also related to one another in his body. This joining together makes us "one body in Christ, and individually members one of another" (Rom. 12:5; 1 Cor. 10:17; 12:12-27). Thus, "If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together" (1 Cor. 12:26). The ties of fellowship are so strong that Christians may only marry "in the Lord" (1 Cor. 7:39). In this body of Christ old hostilities disappear, sinful divisions among people are broken down, and worldly criteria of status no longer apply, for "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:28; cf. Eph. 2:13-22).

Because we are one body in Christ, entire churches can be "in Christ" (Gal. 1:22; 1 Thess. 2:14). And the church universal, the church made up of all true believers, is collectively united to Christ as a husband is united to his wife (Eph. 5:31-32; 1 Cor. 6:17). Christ's purpose is to perfect and cleanse and purify the church, so that it might more completely reflect what he is like and thereby bring glory to him (Eph. 5:25-27).

Yet another metaphor is used in 1 Peter 2:4-5, where believers, in coming to Christ, are said to be like living stones, built into a spiritual house (see also Eph. 2:20-22). Thus, they are unified and forever dependent on one another, just as the stones of a building are united to each other and depend upon each other.

But the boldest analogy of all is used by Jesus, who prays for believers "that they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us" (John 17:21). Here Jesus prays that our unity would be like the perfect unity between the Father and the Son in the Trinity. This is a reminder to us that our unity should be eternal and perfectly harmonious (as God's unity is).

But this analogy with the members of the Trinity is very important for another reason: it warns us against thinking that union with Christ will ever swallow up our individual personalities. Even though the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have perfect and eternal unity, yet they remain distinct persons. In the same way, even though we shall someday attain perfect unity with other believers and with Christ, yet we shall forever remain distinct persons as well, with our own individual gifts, abilities, interests, responsibilities, circles of personal relationships, preferences, and desires.

cf cf.-compare

Grudem, Wayne A.: Systematic Theology : An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, Mich. : Inter-Varsity Press; Zondervan Pub. House, 1994, S. 844

 

What did you think of this lesson?  If someone said to you that they are Christian but don't believe that attending Church is a necessary aspect of the Christian life, how would you respond? What about professing believers who are able to attend regularly but attend only occasionally?  Strange-that... don't you think? 

 

I once invited a secular friend of mine to Church and his response to me was that he didn't believe in organized religion.  So I said to him, "Oh we're not all that organized, sometimes we don't even start or stop on time." After we laughed about that I asked him what he meant by "organized religion?"  I learned that he really didn't know what he meant and that this was simply a slogan he had picked up and used to explain away the idea of church and anything (Like the God of Scripture) associated with church. His problem wasn't with an organization, it was with God and the idea of being morally accountable to his creator.  I'm still working on him and trusting that God uses such discussions as a means for His purposes. As His people, we are a means he uses to build His Church.

 

See you Sunday,

 

Michael  

Lesson 7 Sociology: The Divine Imprint

Lesson 7 was one of the best.  I know, I've say that about all of them...but it really was.

 

Dr. Tackett began by looking at the chicken egg and explaining how intricate and well designed it is.  Then by means of subtle sarcasm he noted that the chicken egg has a problem (if it's really a product of evolution) because it suffers from "ORDER." This is because random, purposeless, mindless forces should produce a random, purposeless, mindless cosmos.  But the egg shows that this is not what we have. We have order, structure and lost of stuff that seems to have a purpose.

 

Dr. T quoted several Scripture's which were very applicable. These are from the NIV.  

Job 25:2 "Dominion and awe belong to God; He establishes order in the heights of heaven."   

1 Cor. 14:33 "For God is not a God of disorder..."  

James 3:16 "For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice." 

 

The point is that God is a God of order and disorder and confusion are not in His nature.

 

Dr. Del said that Order is seen in the systems God created which are countless and incredible because of the perfect harmony, order & relationship both within the system itself and in relationship to the systems around it. Examples are The Atom, Cellular system, Skeletal system, Circulatory system, Photosynthesis, Coral reefs, Metamorphosis, Pollination, Water cycle, Lunar tides, the Solar system and on and on... He then drew our attention to God's social order which is found in Family, Church, Law, Politics, Economics, Art, Music, Literature and so on. These are not the results of chance but of a God who sets them in motion and maintains His creation.

 

Here are some good comments by Melvin in an email and my thought back to him:

 

Mike,

 

I found the comparison of the 3s interesting. God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  Husband, wife, and children.  Church, leaders, and members.  They all have the same relationships, privileges, and responsibilities. Take the relationships of any of these spheres and compare them to either of the other 2 spheres and they are pretty much the same.

 

Since the God head sphere is so intimate and unique it models a very unique relationship for the family and church. Neat.

 

Yet it also models a very significant amount of responsibility. We must “play our role” properly in both of the spheres in which we live and associate. Challenging.

 

Melvin

 

My Response:

 

Well said Melvin.

 

I agree, it is very neat. The idea of unity within diversity is certainly a Trinitarian theme. Seeing this in a variety of relationship is one of those wonderful theological quirks we can enjoy as we make sense of God's creation and rightly see His creative hand weaving all things together. 

 

I suppose we would want to be careful about thinking this way about every relationship in that the pattern analogy can go too far, but I do think that there are very many things which God has made to reflect who He is.  It seems to be one way he communicates important principles.  Typology, I think, is this sort of deep indirect communication to us; one where we can look back at what God has done and have that "Ah...ha!" experience. But also one where we can look at what God is doing in the present and be assured that his purposes are being sovereignly worked out.    

 

Michael 

 

By the way, I invited Dr. Tackett to our church for March 13th. I sent the invitation through Focus on the Family and here is their response: 

 

Dear Michael:

 

Warm greetings, and many thanks for your recent e-mail to Focus on the Family’s The Truth Project®.  We’re encouraged to learn of your participation in this endeavor, and you can be sure we will forward your kind invitation to Dr. Tackett’s office for follow-up.  Grace and peace to you!

 

Kathryn Lisle
Focus on the Family

 

Who knows, maybe he will make appearance.  I'll certainly see if I can remind him at the prayer breakfast on March 12th.

Lesson 6 History - Whose Story?

Lesson 6 was quite thought provoking considering how much historical revisionism we deal with in America today.

 

I received an email from Melvin and I want to share his insightful comments:

 

Mike,

This was an interesting presentation as all have been.  Lots of discussion matter.

One section I hadn't heard about was the fact the Pilgrims considered their colonization to be a stepping stone for the advancement of the Gospel in North America.  Wasn't stated exactly that way, but as Dr. Tackett presented what he did, they didn't come to America just to escape persecution but to further the Gospel.  They were willing to die to see that happen.  

 

The question is how willing are we to be part of God's Story even when it isn't comfortable?  Do we feel God owes us a comfortable existence or are we just as willing to give up some comfort to further His plan?  We probably all would say we're here to do His bidding, but may be very reluctant to give up our wants and desires when He asks us to follow Him through the rough spots.  Not an easy decision in reality.

 

Melvin

While thinking through lesson 6 this week I found this interesting comment regarding revisionism that I think connects well with this lesson.  This is from Probe ministries.  I don't know a lot about the ministry or the director Kirby Anderson but I think he did a good job of answering a question on his web site regarding historical revisionism. His comments are certainly applicable to what we heard from Dr. Tackett.

 

In Christ,

 

Michael

 

Dear Kerby,

I have heard you discuss the topic of historical revisionism on radio. I told my son about this, and he doesn't believe it. Do you have some examples of how our history has been revised from the original?

Many historians have wanted to secularize our founders. Take this quote from W.E. Woodward. He wrote that "The name of Jesus Christ is not mentioned even once in the vast collection of Washington's published letters." (1)

Anyone who has read some of Washington's writing knows he mentions God and divine providence. But it isn't too difficult to also find times in which he mentions Jesus Christ. For example, when George Washington wrote to the Delaware Indian Chiefs (June 12, 1779) he said: "You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are. Congress will do every thing they can to assist you in this wise intention." (2)

Other examples are also available. For example, a well-worn, handwritten prayer book found among Washington's personal writings after his death had the name "Jesus Christ" used sixteen times. (3)

Often historical revisionism is done by selective omission. Consider this famous quote from a book on American history by Kenneth Davis.(4) In 1775, Patrick Henry asked, "Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" Davis then picks up the quote again with the final statement by Patrick Henry: "I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death."

Technically the quote is correct, but what is missing is very important. The entire quote should read: "Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death."

Davis does the same thing when he cites the Mayflower Compact. "We whose names are under-written . . . do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God, and one another, covenant and combine our selves together into a civil body politick, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid."(5)

Some important points are omitted. The section should read: "We whose names are under-written having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith and honor of our king and country, a voyage to the first colonie in the Northern parts of Virginia do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God, and one another, covenant and combine our selves together into a civil body politick, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid."

Some of the best documented cases of historical revision were provided by the work of Paul Vitz and funded by the U.S. Department of Education. He notes that "One social studies book has thirty pages on the Pilgrims, including the first Thanksgiving. But there is not one word (or image) that referred to religion as even a part of the Pilgrims' life." (6)

Another textbook said that "Pilgrims are people who take long trips." They were described entirely without reference to religion. One reference said the Pilgrims "wanted to give thanks for all they had" but never mentioned that it was God to whom they wanted to give thanks.(7)

Historical revisionism is a sad fact of American education today. Students are not getting the whole story, and often references to religion and Christianity are left out.

Kerby Anderson
Probe Ministries

Notes

1. W.E. Woodward, George Washington: The Image and the Man (New York: Boni and Liverlight, 1926), 142.

2. George Washington, The Writings of George Washington (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1932), Vol. XV, 55.

3. Manuscript Prayer-Book Written by George Washington (Philadelphia, 1891).

4. Kenneth C. Davis, Don't Know Much About History (New York: Avon Books, 1990), 61.

5. Davis, 21.

6. Paul Vitz, Censorship: Evidence of Bias in Our Children's Textbooks (Michigan: Servant Books, 1986), 3.

7. Vitz, 18-19.

Suggested Reading

David Barton, Original Intent (Aledo, TX: WallBuilders Press, 1996), Chapter 16.

Paul Vitz, Censorship: Evidence of Bias in Our Children's Textbooks (Michigan: Servant Books, 1986

About the Author

Kerby Anderson is National Director of Probe Ministries International. He holds masters degrees from Yale University (science) and from Georgetown University (government). He is the author of several books, including Christian Ethics in Plain Language, Genetic Engineering, Origin Science, Signs of Warning, Signs of Hope and Making the Most of Your Money in Tough Times. His new series with Harvest House Publishers includes: A Biblical Point of View on Islam, A Biblical Point of View on Homosexuality, A Biblical Point of View on Intelligent Design and A Biblical Point of View on Spiritual Warfare. He is the host of "Point of View" (USA Radio Network) and regular guest on "Prime Time America" (Moody Broadcasting Network) and "Fire Away" (American Family Radio). He produces a daily syndicated radio commentary and writes editorials that have appeared in papers such as the Dallas Morning News, the Miami Herald, the San Jose Mercury, and the Houston Post.     

 

Here is a web link to the March 12th visit by Dr. Tackett. http://www.blogger.com/ It would be great if a bunch of us could attend.  Let me know what you think.

Thoughts on Lesson 5 (Parts 1&2)

I held off a bit on this post because I wanted to get through parts 1& 2 of lesson 5 before I commented so I could talk about what Dr. Tackett had to say but all I can think to say is “WOW!”  There were so many things he covered in this lesson that I’m not sure where to start. I did get a few thoughts from Melvin Isaac that I want to pass on. 

Melvin had this to say: “It is interesting in Lesson 5 how Dr. Tackett used the statements of staunch Darwin backers to show that modern science can’t support evolution.  Darwin realized that if the fossil record didn’t prove it his theory wasn’t valid.

It was almost comical some of the statements the proponents made even to the extent they realize evolution isn’t possible but they will continue to champion it because they don’t want to accept creationism. 

While it makes one chuckle it is also sobering because they continue to push their bias on those who aren’t aware of the fallacies of evolution.  They try to maintain their upper hand by bullying others; in doing so they degrade the scientific method which is supposed to be so removed from personal bias.

The power of the world has blinded their eyes.”      Those are great comments from Melvin but even better, Melvin informed me that Dr. Tackett will be speaking in Boise on March 12 the 2011 (more information on that Sunday).   

Some additional thoughts: One thing that is important for us as Christians to understand is that when someone talks about evolution, we need to ask them what they mean by that word.  This is because there are several ways to use the word. If we say some idea or process evolved we are perhaps simply stating an obvious observation. But if we are talking about the Darwinian paradigm of macro-evolution this is very different for example from micro-evolution.  

Macro evolution (large Scale) represents the idea that living creatures went through a sort of trans-species’ migration over time (fishes to monkeys to humans) while micro-evolution simply means changes within species based on environment, adaptation, breading and other factors which respond to various demands for changes.  These micro (small scale) changes are evident not only in animals and attributes of animals, such as finch beak sizes and shapes, lions to kitties, monkey’s to apes etc, but also humans adapt in a similar way, as in very tall and very small folks, white, black and other shades of folks etc.  So Christians can say that they believe in the idea of changes within kinds (species) just not one kind changing into another kind.  

But why did Darwin and his followers want to embrace the idea of macro-evolution?   Well, as Dr. Tackett noted: “Darwinism’s theory of evolution is so influential and embraced so devoutly by people because it gives them a way to say there is no God, which is what the human heart (unregenerate) wants anyway.

If you want to read up on these sort things here are a few book suggestions: In the Beginning was Information by Werner Gitt, Intelligent Design by William A. Dembski, Signs of Intelligence edited by William Dembski & James Kushiner, Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds & Darvin on Trial by Phillip E. Johnson. For an easier read try the Case For a Creator by Lee Stroble, On Guard & Reasonable Faith by William Lane Craig and Signature in the Cell by Steven C Meyer.  There are a lot of other great books but these are good to start with.

See you Sunday,

In Christ,

Michael

Lesson 4

In lesson 4 Dr. Tackett presents the question: Who is God? He stated that as Christians we are theologians in that theology (coming from the Greek theologia) basically means the study of or a discourse on God. As Christians we are to know how to speak about God, know who He is, what He has done and will yet do. Our lives are to reflect that serve a God who is God alone. By knowing God in a real and intimate way we can glorify Him and show Him to others so they too can know and glorify Him in like manner. As Dr. Tackett put it: "What a privilege!"

  

I thought that this time, rather than review comments and perspective from lesson four, I would quote a segment of Dr. Wayne Grudem's "Systematic Theology" Chapter 10 on "The Knowability of God," Part C.

Yet We Can Know God Truly: 

Even though we cannot know God exhaustively, we can know true things about God. In fact, all that Scripture tells us about God is true. It is true to say that God is love (1 John 4:8), that God is light (1 John 1:5), that God is spirit (John 4:24), that God is just or righteous (Rom. 3:26), and so forth. To say this, does not imply or require that we know everything about God or about his love or his righteousness or any other attribute. When I say that I have three sons, that statement is entirely true, even though I do not know everything about my sons, nor even about myself. So it is in our knowledge of God: we have true knowledge of God from Scripture, even though we do not have exhaustive knowledge. We can know some of God's thoughts-even many of them-from Scripture, and when we know them, we, like David, find them to be "precious" (Ps. 139:17).

Even more significantly, it is God himself whom we know, not simply facts about him or actions he does. We make a distinction between knowing facts and knowing persons in our ordinary use of English. It would be true for me to say that I know many facts about the president of the United States, but it would not be true for me to say that I know him. To say that I know him would imply that I had met him and talked with him, and that I had developed at least to some degree a personal relationship with him.

Now some people say that we cannot know God himself, but that we can only know facts about him or know what he does. Others have said that we cannot know God as he is in himself, but we can only know him as he relates to us (and there is an implication that these two are somehow different). But Scripture does not speak that way. Several passages speak of our knowing God himself. We read God's words in Jeremiah:

Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, let not the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories glory in this, that he understands and knows me that I am the Lord who practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth; for in these things I delight, says the Lord. (Jer. 9:23-24)

Here God says that the source of our joy and sense of importance ought to come not from our own abilities or possessions, but from the fact that we know him. Similarly, in praying to his Father, Jesus could say, "And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent" (John 17:3). The promise of the new covenant is that all shall know God, "from the least of them to the greatest" (Heb. 8:11), and John's first epistle tells us that the Son of God has come and given us understanding "to know him who is true" (1 John 5:20; see also Gal. 4:9; Phil. 3:10; 1 John 2:3; 4:8). John can say, "I write to you, children, because you know the Father" (1 John 2:13).

The fact that we do know God himself is further demonstrated by the realization that the richness of the Christian life includes a personal relationship with God. As these passages imply, we have a far greater privilege than mere knowledge of facts about God. We speak to God in prayer, and he speaks to us through his Word. We commune with him in his presence, we sing his praise, and we are aware that he personally dwells among us and within us to bless us (John 14:23). Indeed, this personal relationship with God the Father, with God the Son, and with God the Holy Spirit may be said to be the greatest of all the blessings of the Christian life.

Grudem, Wayne A.: Systematic Theology : An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, Mich. : Inter-Varsity Press; Zondervan Pub. House, 1994, S. 151

 

 

Lesson Three

Lesson three: Who is Man? Anthropology

In lesson 3 Dr. Tackett began by asking the question: “Why is there evil in the world?” The question of evil, Tackett said, “is probably the most popular and the most difficult question that is continually thrown in the face of Christians and Christianity.” He then said (and I concur) that he has “very seldom seen anyone respond to it correctly, because the truth is, this question should really be presented back to the world [rather than to Christians]. He noted that while we (Christians) have a number of sufficient answers for evil, the world is inclined to not accept our answers even though it does not have a sufficient response.  In fact, when this question is pressed back on the world, the worldly come up empty because they have nowhere to go with it.

We then saw several film clips of people trying to answer the “what is evil” question. We saw an interesting array of responses; some which would line up with orthodox Christian belief and others which were really nothing more than rambling ideas about the oddity and the need for evil.  

The quote from Jonathan Edwards work titled “The Freedom of the Will,” was a telling insight. Edwards said: “Of all kinds of knowledge that we can ever obtain, the knowledge of God, and the knowledge of ourselves, are the most important.” Edwards, who has been touted by many as being the greatest theological and/or philosophical mind to ever emerge out of America, seems to have hit the nail on the head. These elements, the existence of God (the cause) & the origin of man, form the foundation of both Christian and non-Christian worldviews (even when men deny that knowledge of God is possible). So in a discussion of the nature of, and the reason for evil, the difference between a Christian and non-Christian response will always be tied up in: Who is God? & Who is man?  To say that there is no God is to say something about the question of God’s existence; and so to say, “God is not,” is to say that “Man is all,” even though man’s existence is ultimately purposeless in an atheistic worldview.      

Finding out how someone answers these two questions, Tackett said, gives us a good understanding of where that person’s worldview is emerging from. Those who suppose there is a god, that god is in them, that god is a force or whatever the imagination assigns god to be, reveal deep and significant facts about how they answer all other questions in life. Whatever the question is, it can never be isolated from the underlying idea of Origin & Cause.

Dr. Tackett noted that as Christians, we are to be ever cognizant of the truth of how and why God has created man and what the result of the fall means; otherwise we may be uncertain as to the question of “who is man.” He noted Galatians 5:16-17 as a reminder of our own struggle. This passage reads:  But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do.  First, all non-believers (such as were we) desire only to gratify the flesh. They do what they want with little or no internal opposition. Second, as Christians, born from above (John3:1-5), we have the desires of the Spirit who dwells within us, yet the desires of the flesh are still present. The flesh exerts influence in such a way as to oppose the Spirit to prevent us from doing that which we now desire to do more… to please God.  This also reflects the cosmic battle between the Truth (reality) and the Lie (illusion) regarding who Man is.

Dr. Tackett then used the remainder of the lesson to expose some of the most pernicious lies ever foisted upon mankind regarding his essence, his moral states and his needs.  You may recall that we looked at some aspects of mankind’s moral states as being: before the Fall, after the Fall and upon redemption. Those who are redeemed are found “in Christ” and saved by faith through grace. The unredeemed, those who have no faith, are ultimately assigned to everlasting damnation in hell.  Mankind’s essence is that God has created him and he therefore belongs to God rather than to himself. He was created in an innocent moral state, but due to his disobedience he fell and his moral state changed and became sinful. He cannot redeem himself because he has no righteousness in him whatsoever; therefore he has no ability to exercise a righteousness he does not possess. He needs a savior, who is Christ alone. 

Lesson four answers the question: Who is God?