Dietrich Bonhoeffer is an Enemy of Christ

Throughout my life as a Christian I would see Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s books, and books about him, in Christian bookstores. Everyone can easily observe how popular he is. I wondered why, but never read any of his writings. He is considered one of the most popular teachers of our age, even among evangelicals.

It is amazing to realize just how much Bonhoeffer has influenced Evangelical Christians, particularly regarding discipleship. Bonhoeffer’s book The Cost of Discipleship is counted his most widely read book.

I am amazed that so many evangelicals love this man. I am amazed because when I thought I would have look at this man’s teaching I found within only half an hour that he advocated doctrines that are clearly against Evangelical Christianity. Some evangelicals are beginning to admit that this is the case. Nevertheless, his impact upon bible believing Christians has had lasting harmful effects. While some may ignore his denial of a literal creation, of the inerrancy of Scripture, and of personal conversion, they love what he has to say about the cost of discipleship.

Bonhoeffer is complicated in his arguments and this helps him to disguise his false position.

Jesus said to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees [Matt 16:6,11,12]. If there was ever anyone to whom we should apply Jesus’ warning, it is Bonhoeffer.  Sure enough, many men like Bonhoeffer have had a harmful influence upon Evangelical Christians, but few as many as Bonhoeffer. As his writing is academic, it is particularly his influence upon Evangelical Christian leaders that his errors have had the most impact, which unfortunately has necessarily impacted those under their ministry.

Of particular importance is the costly impact of his book The Cost of Discipleship, in which he advocates a works-orientated view of Jesus’ teaching that we must deny ourselves and take up our cross.

Underlying Bonhoeffer’s approach to discipleship is the fundamental denial of the conversion experience among Evagelical Christians. He loathed the idea that by faith in the gospel message a person could have a conversion experience that then made that person a disciple of Christ.

There is constantly repeated in The Cost of Discipleship a different way of being a disciple, in contrast to a conversion by faith in Jesus Christ.

Some Quotes from Bonhoeffer’s The Cost of Discipleship

  • The response of the disciples is an act of obedience, not a confession of faith in Jesus. [p. 57]
  • It is only the call of Jesus which makes it a situation where faith is possible. [p. 63]
  • …only he who believes is obedient, and only he who is obedient believes. [p. 63]
  • For faith is only real when there is obedience, never without it, and faith only becomes faith in the act of obedience.  [p. 64]
  • In the one case faith is the condition of obedience, and in the other obedience the condition of faith. In exactly the same way in which obedience is called the consequence of faith, it must also be called the presupposition of faith. Only the obedient believe. [p. 64]
  • …we must boldly assert that the step of obedience must be taken before faith can be possible. Unless he obeys, a man cannot believe. [p. 66]
  • The gracious call of Jesus now becomes a stern command: Do this! Give up that! Leave the ship and come to me! When a man says he cannot obey the call of Jesus because he believes, or because he does not believe, Jesus says: “First obey, perform the external work, renounce your attachments, give up the obstacles which separate you from the will of God. Do not say you have not got faith. You will not have it so long as you persist in disobedience and refuse to take the first step. [p. 67]
  • No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word. [p. 67]
  • The actual call of Jesus and the response of single-minded obedience have an irrevocable significance. By means of them Jesus calls people into an actual situation where faith is possible….it is only through actual obedience that a man can become liberated to believe. [p. 83]
  • If our exegesis is truly evangelical, we shall realise that we cannot identify ourselves altogether with those whom Jesus called, for they themselves are part and parcel of the Word of God in the Scriptures, and therefore part of the message….It would be a false exegesis if we tried to behave in our discipleship as though we were the immediate contempories of the men whom Jesus called….It is neither possible nor right for us to try to get behind the Word of the Scriptures to the events as they actually occurred. [p. 84]
  • We must not do violence to the Scriptures by interpreting them in terms of an abstract principle, even if that principle be a doctrine of grace. [p. 84]

Bonhoeffer advocates a discipleship based upon a mystical call that creates a situation in which faith becomes possible. He says that we are not to obtain our own discipleship from the Word of God, not from a principle according to a doctrine of grace, but only through some unique experience of our own, as we are obedient to that call.  In order to be counted a true disciple we must be obedient to our unique call. It is a perfection based upon a faith in response to circumstances in our lives, rather than a perfection based solely upon faith in Jesus.

In short, Bonhoeffer teaches that one is a Christian because of how good we practice our discipleship. He rejects a conversion that then becomes the only basis of being a disciple.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer is an enemy of Christ.

In another work Bonhoeffer said, ‘It is not the religious act that makes the Christian, but participation in the sufferings of God in the secular life.’ He wrote this in his Letters and Papers from Prison.  He was contrasting mere high church ritual to what he saw as a matter of practice upon the field of this world. Yes, it is true that religious acts do not make us Christians, but neither does participation in suffering.

So where does Bonhoeffer go wrong with Jesus’ teaching on taking up our cross and how has this adversely impacted Evangelical Christians?

Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.”

Bonhoeffer is fundamentally and seriously wrong regarding what Jesus meant by our denial and by our taking up of our cross and this has significantly influenced Evangelical Christians.

Bonhoeffer on Denial

He wrote, ‘To deny oneself is to be aware only of Christ and no more of self, to see only him who goes before and no more the road which is too hard for us.’

There is a reason why Bonhoeffer is so popular. There is a delusion or a spell he crafts upon the reader. One must be careful and discerning in reading Bonhoeffer. Evangelicals do not usually read Roman Catholics and Lutherans who write beautiful images of spiritual devotion that are nothing more than beautiful gardens of death. It all sounds so spiritual and on the surface seems to be something that could not possibly have anything wrong with it.

The problem with Bonhoeffer’s teaching about denial is that it fails to deny what needs to be denied. Ironically, Bonhoeffer is actually promoting a view that is the very thing that we should be denying. Notice that it is impossible to not see our self as he says. It is an imaginary concept of self-denial that is vague and mystical.

Satan would have everyone imbibe this “self-denial” in which we conveniently fail to focus on what we are to deny about ourselves. Again, it sounds so spiritual to ‘be aware only of Christ’ and to not see ourself or to not be aware of self. Bonhoeffer is putting a delusion upon evangelicals (though he has another target audience). Never are we to have some sort of out-of-body experience in which we are no longer aware of self. On the contrary, we are to deny a self that we have a clear and full view of.

In order to fulfill Jesus’ teaching what is required is not a lack of awareness of self, but rather, a profound awareness of self and what we are to deny.

Paul the apostle teaches us a denial that is specific and concrete. Paul is very clear about what he is denying.

Philippians 3:7-9 But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith….

Paul understood Jesus to be saying that if we wish to come after Him we must have this denial of self. A profound denial of any trust in ourselves as that which gives us a basis of a right standing before God. Paul was once like Bonhoeffer, trusting in a perfect discipleship according to the flesh, but then Paul renounced all of that as loss for the sake of his conversion in Christ and a resting alone in the righteous standing that he obtained by being in Christ.

Like Paul we need a denial that is a biblical view of ourselves, as being without any merit, so that we can by faith rightly take hold of a true discipleship. The very thing we need to specifically deny is what is according to the flesh, a salvation by works, and all that is mere self-righteousness.

On the one hand, Bonhoeffer would have us merely become oblivious of the self that we are to deny. He wrote, ‘Only when we have become completely oblivious of self are we ready to bear the cross for his sake.’ This is not only impossible, but unbiblical. Consider that the Lord commanded us to love our neighbor as we love ourselves [Lev 19:18]. We are to love others with the awareness of how we love ourselves, not with a lack of awareness of how we love ourselves.

On the other hand, Bonhoeffer’s spiritualized denial of self, by means of an assumed ability to be oblivious of self, is the blindness of hypocrisy. This supra spiritual state that Bonhoeffer promotes is really an infatuation with a sense of merit that comes from making such a “denial” of self. “Oh, how spiritual my self is because I am oblivious of self and am aware only of Christ.”

Philippians 3:18-19 For many walk, of whom I often told you, and now tell you even weeping, that they are enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction, whose god is their appetite, and whose glory is in their shame, who set their minds on earthly things.

Paul is talking about men like Bonhoeffer. Men who walk in the name of Christ but promote doctrines that are against Him. As Paul said at the beginning of Philippians 3, ‘Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision; for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh….’

The word ‘appetite’ is literally belly. Meaning, that these men are fleshly in their doctrine. The same word is used in the passage just below.

Romans 16:17-18 Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them. For such men are slaves, not of our Lord Christ but of their own appetites; and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting.

Bonhoeffer on Taking Up Our Cross

How then is Bonhoeffer an enemy of Christ regarding Jesus’ teaching that we are to take up our cross?

Bonhoeffer wrote,’The cross means sharing the suffering of Christ to the last and to the fullest. Only a man thus totally committed in discipleship can experience the meaning of the cross.’

How can any evangelical read this and not be alarmed? Are those who promote Bonhoeffer without any sense at all?

Any true Christian knows that it is not our experiences that make us Christians, but Jesus Christ alone. Bonhoeffer would have us esteem the pitiful experiences of our life as that which transports us into true discipleship.

Bonhoeffer goes on, ‘The cross is laid on every Christian. The first Christ-suffering which every man must experience is the call to abandon the attachments of this world. It is that dying of the old man which is the result of his encounter with Christ. As we embark upon discipleship we surrender ourselves to Christ in union with his death–we give over our lives to death. Thus it begins; the cross is not the terrible end to an otherwise godfearing and happy life, but it meets us at the beginning of our communion with Christ. When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.’

If this doesn’t sound like error to you, then please let me explain. He is saying that by means of a discipleship under Christ, in which we continually experience various crosses, we fulfill Jesus’ words. By means of discipleship we become saved. By means of repeating over and over again all those little crosses in our life can we say that we have begun in our discipleship and in the same we maintain our discipleship. This is works righteousness and will necessarily burden us. When will we ever fulfill a sufficient taking up of our cross to say that we are truly disciples of Christ under this sort of teaching?

Galatians 6:14 But may it never be that I would boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.

Paul has only one cross in which he boasts, not lots of little insignificant crosses that Bonhoeffer would have us boast in. It is no wonder that Bonhoeffer denies personal conversion for this sort of Christianity. It is about a way of being a Christian that is built upon our own man made cross. Paul provides for us the true means of being separated from the world and its ways. Paul boasts only in the cross of Christ!

The serious error of Bonhoeffer is that he takes Jesus’ teaching and makes it a way to be counted a Christian by equating suffering in our life to taking up our cross. He writes, ‘But how is the disciple to know what kind of cross is meant for him? He will find out as soon as he begins to follow his Lord to share his life. Suffering, then, is the badge of true discipleship.’

Where does it say that suffering is the badge of true discipelship anywhere in the bible?

Dwight L. Moody wrote, ‘Love is the badge that Christ gave His disciples. Some put on one sort of badge and some another. Some put on a strange kind of dress, that they may be known as Christians, and some put on a crucifix, or something else, that they may be known as Christians. But Love is the only badge by which the disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ are known. “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another” (John 13:35).’

Bonhoeffer does put on a strange dress. He then wrote, ‘If we refuse to take up our cross and submit to suffering and rejection at the hands of men, we forfeit our fellowship with Christ and have ceased to follow him.’ While it most certainly true that our profession of faith will result in suffering at the hands of those who reject Jesus, what Bonhoeffer is doing is to equate ‘taking up our cross’ to our experience of suffering. He is saying that we can say we are taking up our cross as we experience suffering. This creates bondage and confusion. His vague application of what this means necessarily burdens the people of God.

Jesus said that in order to be saved we must take up our cross. So in order to be saved, according to Bonhoeffer, we must suffer. If you are not suffering you are not taking up your cross and cannot be counted a disciple of Jesus. Again, he is rejecting the conversion experience in which a person becomes a Christian because of faith in Jesus. Bonhoeffer is wrong. When a person believes in Jesus they are born again. They have become saved and now they are to walk by the same means in which they became a Christian [Gal. 5:25; Col. 2:6]. They are not to see their discipleship as something that saves them, but rather, that because they are saved they now have a discipleship that can be lived out, in the power that is in Jesus.

Bonhoeffer has made the common experience of Christians, namely suffering, to be a thing that determines whether or not we are a disciple of Jesus Christ. This is serious error and is to be absolutely rejected. Many suffer because of doing wrong [2 Peter 2:13]. Others wrongly think that because they suffer persecution that this proves that they are God’s chosen people, such as the Mormons and other cults. Furthermore, what then can we say of ourselves if we are not suffering at some particular time? Christians go through all sorts of experiences and yet we must understand that our experiences, whether good or bad, do not in themselves say if we are truly saved.

Instead of Bonhoeffer’s view of a vague denial of self and a never fulfilled taking up of our cross, we should hear Paul the apostle. Paul understood that Jesus’ teaching about denying ourselves and taking up our cross was about our conversion, not our ongoing discipleship. In other words, it is about denying what Bonhoeffer would have us make an idol of, ourselves, and it is about being crucified with Christ, which alone puts to death our sinful self.

If you would like more information about what Jesus meant when He taught that we must deny ourselves and take up our cross in order to be saved, then please read my book: Take Up Your Cross: Our Only Power to Live and Walk by the Spirit,

It’s About Conversion, Not a Journey

There is a prevalent emphasis among Evangelical churches about the journey a person may be on. It is a way of speaking about where a person is in relationship to God without saying anything negative. Churches are adopting this approach as a less confrontational way of getting people to attend. The thought is that hopefully they will become converted eventually after being inculcated into the fellowship of the church.

Is this obedience to our Lord Jesus Christ or is it another example of the world making its way into the fold of the Lord’s people?

John 10:1 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter by the door into the fold of the sheep, but climbs up some other way, he is a thief and a robber.”

Churches that use the word Journey in their church name are making this idea of a journey central to their identity. Their brief introduction about what they mean is alarming. Here are some examples of what is being said:

  • wherever you are on your journey with Christ we are here to walk it along with you
  • a church for the spiritually curious
  • Regardless of where you are along your spiritual journey, you are welcome at Journey Church!
  • Committed To Helping Everyone Take The Next Step On Their Journey With God. No Matter Where…

This is a very serious error.

It is one thing to say that everyone is welcome, it is another thing to say that people are welcome to make of their own journey whatever they like.

The ministry of bible believing churches should be and must be about the present conversion of its hearers. Ours must only be a message that calls upon every hearer to become saved, which is to be born again. Regarding those saved, the ministry must always be a “preaching to the converted,” so as to present every man complete in Christ [Colossians 1:28,29]. Paul desired to know nothing among the Corinthians but ‘Jesus Christ and Him crucified’ [1 Corinthians 2:2]. Understanding how the cross of Christ impacts our daily lives is not something to be underestimated, as the Galatians had failed to understand its significance [Galatians 3:1].

If it is a matter of a truly saved man being accommodated in his time of rebellion, then is this obedience to Christ? What would a true ministry of the Word have for a back slidden Christian? The answer is always to speak the truth in love.

Ephesians 4:11-16 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love.

A true ministry cannot wait upon an unbiblical “journey”, which is nothing less than a path of destruction, simply because to do so is to allow for what is harmful. To not speak the truth is to not love.

1 Corinthians 13:6 [love] does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth…

Psalm 119:104 From Your precepts I get understanding; therefore I hate every false way.

Proverbs 14:12 There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.

We must reject this demonic substitution of a “journey” and bring back the biblical emphasis upon conversions. It is not the teaching of the Scriptures that people are saved by means of a journey. People are saved from darkness to light by means of faith in the gospel, which is preached to sinners who are at enmity with their Creator. Salvation occurs upon a conversion that is founded upon the call to faith and repentance.

The problem with adopting this back door approach of a “journey” is that it fails to say that I must repent and have faith. I must turn away from what is against God and turn toward God. The “journey” approach does not require obedience, because the individual determines if he is ok or not in his present situation and when obedience is necessary.

The “journey” approach for Christians of all sorts of views and levels of growth is that it fails to provide for a ministry that is intentionally helpful. Paul did not use the “journey” approach with the troubled church in Corinth. He addressed problems head on, in love.

The reason why this is such serious error is that it makes ‘man the measure of all things’, which is ungodly philosophy going back to the Sophists in 500 B.C.. Instead of it being a matter of obedience to God’s revealed Word it has become a ministry that conforms to man. It is like the rich young ruler who ran up to Jesus asking what good thing he may do to inherit eternal life only to go away sorrowful because Jesus pressed upon him a calling in which he was necessarily confronted with his need to be converted. The churches who promote this talk about a “journey” are seeking to give those who are not actually converted a place in which they can still feel like they belong. Jesus did not do this with the rich young ruler [Matthew 19:16-22].

The “journey” approach is the worst thing for those who are not converted. Instead, what the unconverted need is the message of a new life in Jesus and the necessary death of their own life. The message of a “journey” is about the old man skirting the elephant in the room! Rather, the natural man needs to die, to be done away with, and a new life in Jesus is the only thing worth having. That means that a conversion is what it is all about, not a journey.

The Truth About How to Dress for Worship

What is to be our understanding about how one should dress when we worship? It is without a doubt that our dress should be modest and clean, so as to not be a distraction to others or to unnecessarily draw attention to ourselves, but are we to make it a matter of how we worship?

I have a lot of experience as a Christian regarding this issue. As an usher at one church I was corrected for not wearing a proper white t-shirt under my white dress shirt, though I had a suit and tie!

There is no express instruction in the Scriptures to dress a certain way when it comes to doing worship. Those who wish to give command on the subject must use certain passages to argue that it is implied that we should dress a certain way. All sorts of rules may apply, from conforming to local custom to holy robes. Those who do argue that we should dress a certain way for worship argue that it is a matter of reverence. That is, that our clothing should communicate a reverence toward God.

We must stop and ask the following questions:

  • Why Do We Have Clothing at All?
  • What Did God Intend to Communicate Regarding Clothing?
  • What is the Impact of Changing the Meaning of Clothing for the People of God?

Why Do We Have Clothing at All?

Regarding the subject of clothing, if we are going to base our understanding on the Word of God, we must start at the beginning.

Genesis 3:6,7 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.

Clothing came to be because of the shame of our sinfulness. Upon our first parents rebellion, in which they died spiritually, they suddenly became profoundly aware that they were no longer clothed with the presence of God. Their sin had separated them from Him and the result was the profound awareness of being exposed, which is the sense of nakedness. The act of covering themselves was for the express purpose of covering or hiding their shame.

God Himself acknowledges that the shame of their nakedness was an important need and He then addressed it.

Genesis 3:21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.

The reason we have clothes at all is because we are guilty sinners and we are separated from God’s glorious presence because of our sin. Clothes exist because the reality of our sinfulness exists. Clothes were given to us to cover our shame.

What Did God Intend to Communicate Regarding Clothing?

When God gave us clothes it was to communicate that He was going to cover over our shame. It was a beautiful portrayal of what God would do for us in His Son the Lord Jesus Christ.

Galatians 3:27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Clothing, according to the Scriptures, is to communicate only one thing: God’s gracious provision of covering our shame, because of our sin.

There is no other Scriptural message regarding clothing, as an authoritative message from God about clothing. Those who argue that we should dress up for our worship say that clothing communicates either reverence or irreverence. While it is true that our clothing can communicate all sorts of things, even things that we should not wish to communicate, dressing up can just as easily communicate a self-righteousness.

The point is what God intended clothing to communicate. We get into all sorts of problems when we fail to understand what the Scriptures emphasize. If we say that the Scriptures teach that clothing communicates reverence when we dress up we are setting up a false authority that will fail us. It is important to acknowledge that dressing up does not ensure a message of reverence. Consequently, each worshipper is to take into account their inward motive of the heart, under the general requirement of modesty, cleanliness, and of being inoffensive.

Having said that, are we to understand that God wants the men to wear a tie, put on a suit, and wear professional slacks and that the women should wear a dress in order to properly worship God reverently?

Again, are we communicating what God intended regarding our clothing or are we seeking to communicate something else?

It has been argued that just as God instructed the people of Israel to wash their clothing at Mount Sinai, before they were to appear before God, so we must understand that in order to worship God our clothes matter [Exodus 19:10-15]. Again, this fails to understand the original meaning of our clothes. They were to clean their clothes because it was to communicate that the Lord was cleaning them, not that they were offering a communication of reverence. Why were they not told to clean their bodies as well? The clothing had a symbolic meaning. Consider the following example from the minor prophet Zechariah, showing the symbolic nature of filthy clothing.

Zechariah 3:1-5 Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him. The LORD said to Satan, “The LORD rebuke you, Satan! Indeed, the LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is this not a brand plucked from the fire?” Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments and standing before the angel. He spoke and said to those who were standing before him, saying, “Remove the filthy garments from him.” Again he said to him, “See, I have taken your iniquity away from you and will clothe you with festal robes.” Then I said, “Let them put a clean turban on his head.” So they put a clean turban on his head and clothed him with garments, while the angel of the LORD was standing by.

Imagine being Joshua for a moment. As God removed your filthy clothes He tells you that He has taken away your iniquity and then He clothes you in beautiful festal robes. Would you think that this was in order that you might then show reverence toward God? Is it about you doing something that is required of you in order to worship God correctly? Would it not simply be a matter of communicating that God had wonderfully cleansed you from your sin? Should we think any differently when it comes to what our clothes communicate?

When we meet together for worship is it about communicating something of ourselves toward God or it is about communicating something that God has done for us?

It is also argued that the priests of the Lord were given special details about their robes and therefore we ought to take care to dress accordingly, but this fails to understand that this has been exclusively fulfilled by our High Priest the Lord Jesus Christ. All that was given to the Aaron and the priests of Israel was a symbol fulfilled by Jesus!

The most prevalent argument that we should dress up, in order to properly worship God, is because of norms in our culture. It is argued that if our culture says that we should wear certain clothes at certain events, like weddings and funerals, then we should also dress that way when we meet to worship. It is a logical argument, but it is not a biblical argument. The problem with thinking this way is that it fails to understand that there is a fundamental difference between meeting at a secular meeting and meeting at worship. One is done one way, the other another way entirely.

There is only one way to worship, and that is according to the Spirit. When we go to a wedding or a funeral we do not do so according to the Spirit. Even if it is a Christian wedding or funeral this is not the same as a time of corporate worship. As Christians we recognize that we cannot worship God according to the flesh and that the cultural practices of our land cannot be of equal basis with what we have as Christians.

What is the Impact of Changing the Meaning of Clothing for the People of God?

What God intended as a message of redemption, the covering of our shame, men have made into an idol. The idolatry of clothing is seen in many ways, and ironically, it is practiced very readily by many professing Christians as an instrument of worship.

Instead of our clothing communicating how God provides for us an answer for our sin, clothing has become a thing in which men boast. It has become a thing that was not intended by God. God never intended us to then think, as we wore our clothes, that we were doing something that pleased Him in our worship!

This is why God rejected Cain’s offering and why He accepted Abel’s offering [Gen. 4:3-5]. Cain offered as an act of reverence toward God what he produced. Abel offered something that seemed very odd and would be taken as irreverent by any earthly lord. Let me explain. It was not until after the flood that mankind ate animals. Cain was a farmer, producing crops to eat and Abel kept flocks for the purpose of using their skins for clothing. Cain offered his work, the best of his crops as an offering, while Abel offered what symbolized the loss of life, the fatty portions of the animals he slaughtered. The first animals to die had been sacrificed for the purpose of clothing Adam and Eve, which was of God’s provision. Abel then took up this “priestly” occupation of keeping flocks for the urgent need for clothing. He did not offer to the Lord the very best of his materials for clothing, but he offered what symbolized what was necessary for God to provide, a sacrifice, in order to cover their nakedness.

The reason why God rejected Cain’s offering was that it communicated man’s work. The reason why God accepted Abel’s offering was that it communicated God’s work. 

We must not forget the intended meaning of clothing that God gave to us. If we change the meaning of our clothing from God covering our shame to something that conveys what we bring to our worship, are we not following the example of Cain? If we adopt the view that when we wear certain clothes we are then doing something that God requires in order to worship Him, have we not made our clothes into a holy vestment?

Many well intentioned Evangelicals have unwittingly done what Cain did, ironically, with Abel’s clothing materials! They have taken what Abel made, clothing, and made it into something to offer to God! Why then should we think that God would be pleased with an offering of “reverence” through the medium of our clothing?

anglican surplices for menImage result for joel olsteen

If we wear a tie and a suit how is that any different from wearing a holy vestment, if we are making it to communicate something toward God about us?

The impact of making clothing an instrument of worship is that it makes our worship something merely according to the flesh. It conveys the wrong message to the world.

John 4: 23,24 “But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”

Imagine if Jesus had also said to the Samaritan woman, “…and be sure to wear only clothes that show reverence as well.”

The impact of making clothing a communication of whether or not we are showing reverence to God in our worship is that the people of God will become servants of men.

  • “Look at that man over there, he is not dressed reverently!”
  • “I am afraid what the pastor will say to me if I don’t wear a tie.”

The business world does place an emphasis on how professional one looks and for certain jobs one does have to wear a tie and dress appropriately, but do we want to communicate to the world that we are like them? Do we want to adopt ‘the principles for success’ that the corporate world adopts?

I would like to see our Christian churches revived in the sort of revival that occurred away from the established churches, that took place in barns, and in homes, where people met together under such a blessing of the Holy Spirit. I tell you the truth, when such real outpourings of the Spirit were found among the people they were not noticing how they were dressed! It is only when the people are dead spiritually that they revert to such outward measures of spirituality.

Take Up Your Cross

Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.”

In 2014 the Lord showed me the right way to understand our Lord’s teaching and how it related to walking by the Spirit. After four years of testing out this new understanding I have written a book about it.

I am thrilled to share this empowering understanding of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. May the Lord bless this little book.

It is available in hardback, paperback, and soon as an e-book.

Amazon

Listen to my sermon on Matthew 16:24,25.

Other sermons found on Preaching.

What church ought to be about

There are far too many occasions when people have gone to church and they have come away without the one thing that determined whether or not there was any benefit in it at all.

They may feel good that they have done their duty or they may feel tired from all the activity, but how often do people come away from church saying, “I met with God”.

  • “Jesus was there”
  • “God spoke to me”
  • “There was a real sense of God’s presence”
  • “I have been with God’s people today”

Those leading the worship service have a solemn duty to pursue this end. In fact, a true understanding of the Christian ministry will necessarily create a situation in which those leading will necessarily consider themselves inadequate for these things. Any man can stand to entertain and to waste the time of the people of God, but a true man of God has a burdened call to speak the utterances of God.

Hence, the music, the reading of Scripture, the preaching, are all to be done under this one great purpose in meeting together.

The direct outcome of this will be…

  • The true refreshing and building up of Christians in the things of Jesus [Luke 10:38-42]
  • The most powerful witness to people who are lost in their sins [1 Corinthians 14:25]

As a Christian I am angry that so-called pastors of Christian churches use the worship time to fulfil their own egos or burden the people of God with things that do not edify.

Here are some examples of wasted church services…

  • how people are to vote on political issues
  • jokes
  • the preacher drawing attention to himself with another personal story
  • how current events fulfil prophecy

Having said these things, we need to remember that it is not about ourselves. We are poor sinners waiting upon the Lord. What is the burden of this message is that we must keep church about this purpose and to guard against those things that are not about obtaining what is that one thing necessary.

Steven