Tuesday, May 15, 2007

'hav you dun good?

what does it mean to do good? what actually is our role in the scheme of things? to do good? to be good people? i think it might be. but not in the way that we might first think.

as you share 2wtl* with someone, if they aren't on board at box 2 and 3 (humanity's rejection of God and the ensuing consequences), then they aren't going to see the need for box 4 and 5 (Jesus' substitutionary death and his enthronement as King through his resurrection). i'm good enough aren't i? sure i have done things that i'm not proud of, but i don't really deserve all that.

so we need to define good to start with. can we put "good" next to "purpose"? micah challenge might say that purpose is to recognize
"O man, what is good; what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God” [Micah 6:8 ESV]


so is that how God would have us live? is that the summary of how we should live in this world? caring for the poor, seeking justice for the oppressed, and walking humbly with God (whatever that might mean). is this a good summary of the Law, the way in which God would have us live?

the reason why i want to put the idea of "good" next to "purpose" is because what does it matter if i am good if that isn't my purpose? or does fulfilling my purpose actually define what it means to be good?

but then is it motivation or action? is it what we do or why we do it that counts?
There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honour and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. [Romans 2:9-10 ESV]


is that the motivation for doing good? that we will receive glory and honour and peace? but we still have the problem of how do we do this good?

surely if we do not do good (or do evil), the tribulation and distress is what results because of God's reaction to that evil. the Bible shows us a history of how God interacts with people. in the old testament, he gets pretty angry. but what does he get angry at? he does get angry at injustice, but he is predominantly angry at Israel's idolatry. that word seeking to encompass the idea of not treating God as God.

1 Samuel 15: Saul is told to destroy the Amalekites fully. but instead he decides to keep some of the cattle in order to sacrifice to God (sacrifices generally considered a good thing). but Samuel tells Saul that God delights in obedience more than sacrifices (1 Samuel 15:22-23), and God then rejects Saul because of what he has done.

so God defines what is good. but i don't always do what is good. i don't always obey. so how can i be considered good?

* Two ways to live gospel presentation.

1 comment:

Matthew Frazer said...

Perhaps this trivialises the concept, but I sit here chuckling at a little parallel I've noticed.

How do we as people know what is right? Who defines what is good and right?

Somebody once told me the Customer is always right. And in a way, the customer is the one being served, as God is the one being served. The world has no problem accepting the idea that the Customer should be served utterly selflessly - if the Customer wishes to be jealous or change his mind or demand better service, then that is the Customer's prerogative and right. For the judgment of the Customer is a thing to be feared indeed...

And yet we complain that we must serve a personal God, a God with character and a God who can make decisions and requests and commands?

Hmm. :-P

[The metaphor is incomplete so if you think it an ill-fitted description of our relational status with God, it probably is!]