So If We Are The Body...

But if we are the Body
Why aren't His arms reaching
Why aren't His hands healing
Why aren't His words teaching
And if we are the Body
Why aren't His feet going
Why is His love not showing them there is a way
(Casting Crowns)

Good question. What is the problem with “The Body of Christ”? Why does it not seem to be doing a very good job of what its Head, Jesus, left it here to do?

Is there a problem with the Head?

Is this whole Christian thing just a bunch of nonsense and what we see is merely a reflection of what happens when people make up a religion?

No, the problem is most certainly with people!

I think a good question to ask ourselves is what exactly makes the body the body anyway? And who is part of it? Is it possible that what is being described in the song is largely not the body at all, and that is why is it is not functioning?

The body is another metaphor that Paul used to describe the church – both local and universal. It is a telling and helpful metaphor because it is very descriptive of what the people of God are supposed to be doing with Jesus physically absent.

I believe it was our dear Anglican brother John Stott who was discussing God’s problem of invisibility: God, in a sense, does have this problem. He cannot be seen or touched or detected by the five senses, as He is a spirit. How did He solve this problem? By becoming human – God in the flesh – Jesus Christ. Jesus himself said, “He who has seen me, has seen the Father.” (John 14:7).

But wait – there’s still a problem. Jesus was visible and could be touched and heard, but He left almost 2000 years ago, so we are back to the same situation.

Simply, God solved the problem with the church – it is the physical, visible, touchable body of Christ in the world.

But, you protest, look at the church! Hypocrites! Judgers! Lazy, good-for-nothing gluttons and materialists who mimic the culture around them! In defense of the church, we are at our best redeemed sinners who are in the sanctification process. But still, anyone who is paying attention to the church (in the West at least) has to admit the situation is far from ideal. What can explain the sad lyrics I posted?

I hinted at above, and let me share with you, loyal blog readers, my theory: Much of what we are calling “the body” is in fact not part of Christ at all. Like a prosthesis, it looks something like a real limb, but is dead. Its function is limited at best and detrimental at worst.

I know, I am so harsh…

I believe that the pathetic dumbing down of the gospel over the last several generations, primarily by Evangelicals (the supposed guardians of sound doctrine) has produced churches full of lost people who think they’re saved because they prayed a prayer to keep out of hell. Or to have a more fulfilling life.

Lest you think I’m picking merely on Evangelicals and/or conservative Protestants, theological moderates of the Mainline Protestant persuasion, not to mention theological liberals, have done even worse. They tend to define “body” as anyone who was ever baptized or in any way associates themselves with Christianity. Their “gospel” tends to be much more about temporal social change than about God’s wrath being satisfied by the sacrifice of Christ so that sinners could be reconciled to their creator and truly, fully redeemed.

So, what exactly makes a person part of the body?

Are Catholics part of the Body of Christ? What about Methodists? What about theological liberals? What about Baptists? They’re all part of the body, right?

Wrong.

Let’s take a look at Scripture…

“You were all baptized by one Spirit into one body, whether Jew or Greek, slave or free.” (1 Corinthians 12:13)

Who was Paul talking to? The Corinthian church – far from a model body of believers. He describes them this way, however: “To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ…” (I Cor. 1:2 ESV). THEY were baptized by the Spirit into the Body.

So there’s our first clue… in order to be part of the body, one must be baptized by the Spirit into it. The Spirit immerses us into the body of Christ (which does not involve water, with all due respect to my Lutheran brothers and blogging buddies). This is called regeneration. In order to be in the body, one must be regenerated, or made alive in Christ. Also known as being Born Again or Born from Above. If one is not regenerated, one is not part of the body.

So are Catholics part of the body? The ones who are regenerated are.

Are Baptists part of the body? Ditto.

What about Lutherans? Every regenerated Lutheran is part of the body, as is every regenerated Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Nazarene, Anglican, Methodist, Wesleyan, Anabaptist, Mennonite, non-denominational Christian or whatever. Heck, even Emergent guys who are regenerated are part of the body! Denomination was not a criterion when God invented regeneration! It does not determine our body status.

I submit to you that the reason the “body” tends to function so poorly is because many people call themselves Christians who are not, at least not by any biblical definition of the word. They are “dead in their sins and trespasses” (Eph 2:1) and try as they might, cannot do the works God requires (John 6:29; Eph. 2:10). They are not attached to the vine and so can bear no fruit.

Let us then go back to preaching the whole, hard and beautiful message of the cross. Apart from the true gospel is no power to save, and people become false converts. If we preach the whole message of the cross, we might be surprised at what happens…

The Intersection of Theology and Experience

I was recently chided for using my personal testimony to help make a theological point: "Here you go, using personal experience to define truth."

Now I'm the last person who wants to do that. One could have had a great experience with divorce or cohabitation or some dream that came true and use that to build a theological argument on. Very dangerous. Lots of trouble has been started that way!

But what if you have, say, this ongoing and amazingly transformational experience as a consequence of trusting in Jesus to save you? And what if you find out only later that that is what the Bible says happens to people who are born again and become new creations by faith in Jesus (e.g. 2 Corinthians 5:17)?

Then experience corroborates good theology. In other words, if some Holy Book says we can fly, but we aren't able to, then that might indicate a problem with either the Holy Book or one's understanding of it, which is part and parcel to theology. But if the Holy Book says we can fly and I jump off the roof and fly, then my experience is confirming what the book says. That alone perhaps is not enough to certify the theology as sound, but it's a good start.

I read a piece by Al Mohler relating to pastors and the theology they should be preaching that helps with the understanding of this intersection:

"Of course, the experiential nature of the pastor's confession does not imply that the authority for theology is in personal experience. To the contrary, the authority must always remain the Word of God. The experiential character of the pastor's theological calling underlines the fact that the preacher is speaking from within the circle of faith as a believer, not from a position of detachment as a mere teacher."

In other words, this thing I say I believe has actually impacted me and is a reality in my life.

Truth spoken from the platform of a life lived with integrity to professed belief is much more likely to be heard.

On Abortion

Nov. 5, 2008

By now, I have heard a number of Christians justify their support for Obama despite his strong stand for abortion rights.

Their support falls along two lines of thought:

1) The supposedly pro-life Republicans have done nothing to stem the tide of abortions anyway, and their policies may even increase the number of abortions
2) Obama has a heart for social justice, and being pro-life has to involve more than just pre-birth and end-of-life issues; it has to encompass all of life. A social justice stand is really pro-life for those who are already born. Besides, it is not reasonable to be a single-issue voter.

While there are some legitimate ideas expressed in those lines of thought, I believe both are fatally flawed, and while all this was on my mind, I thought it would be good to engage these ideas and sort of unpack some of the problems they present for Christians.

Before I do that, let me say four things:

First, I celebrate with all my heart the election of an African-American president! There is so much unqualified good in that. It fulfills the dreams and hopes of so many Americans and needs to be celebrated for what it is. Last night was truly historical, and regardless of Obama’s current ideology or future performance, it must be remembered as a great night in American history.

Second, I do not owe my allegiance nor put my faith in any political party or platform. My politics are increasingly informed by my theology, based in Scripture, which puts me at odds with various aspects of all parties and in agreement with aspects of most parties.

Third, I believe with my whole heart that there were no great choices for president this election. Nobody who ran really is facing the deepest problems of our country, which are materialism, greed, and humanism. I don’t know how much any man could even adequately address those issues. We have such a poverty of spirit in America that goes back first to our inherent depravity, but more recently to our prosperity after WWII. It ignores social, political and economic differences and pervades every level of our culture, and indeed has taken root in the church. If I did not trust a sovereign God, I would be in despair.

Fourth, I love you no matter who you voted for! I am certain God’s people almost always vote their consciences, and God knows our hearts. I am a little concerned about our heads, however.

But Christians supporting Obama specifically grieves me. I mean, I think we must all support him in his office as president, as far as Scripture commands us to be honoring our leaders. I respect the man to an extent, and I respect the office. My earnest prayer is that Obama will be a wise and discerning leader in a volatile world. Nonetheless, it is the starry-eyed infatuation with this man and the implicit sanctioning of his policies by voting for him on the part of people who believe the Bible that has me so very saddened. So let me answer the issues I posted above.


Regarding the charge that Republicans have accomplished nothing anyway:

I would argue that there has been progress in the effort against abortion under certain sincere conservative politicians (not all of them Republican) who have taken up the fight. South Dakota’s attempt at a ban would be a real-time example. But this is not even the central issue for me. To merely look at the body count and be dissatisfied with the lack of progress seems a bit pragmatic. I think the real issue is the moral viability of a society that tolerates killing babies in the womb at all. Voting for someone who tolerates abortion is bad enough, since it perpetuates the status quo at best. It makes peace with an abomination. However, voting for someone who is an outspoken advocate of abortion amounts to complicity. I know, that sounds harsh. I also know that there are many other issues relating to justice and life that are profoundly important, and I want to unpack that in my next point, but if one cannot get this one right, does he or she even have a legitimate voice in the rest? Killing babies is huge.

So, yes, I think that voting for people who oppose abortion, even if there is NEVER an impact on the actual number of abortions, remains a prophetic statement – a pebble in the shoe, so to speak – to a culture that blithely ignores the most fundamental expression of human life and dignity. I believe Christians should continue to vote pro-life no matter the outcome.

As for Republican policies actually increasing abortions… the last thing I want to do here is get into a messy partisan argument, so let me just say this: This is an illegitimate charge. It assumes that: a) Republican policies cause poverty and b) poverty causes abortion. In order for that to be true, the person considering an abortion has to have a thought process something like this: “My goodness, I’m pregnant! If only I could afford to raise this baby and give it a decent life, then I would keep it, but because of oppressive economic policies I’m stuck in poverty, so I must abort.” This of course reduces the most weighty decision most women will ever make to simple economic calculus. Do you really think that is what happens? What about WIC? What about Welfare, Medicare, Kid Care, and adoption? Women most often choose to abort because of the overwhelming thought of responsibility, shame, selfishness or pressure from the father, family, etc. I have no doubt that out of the tens of thousands of abortions, some are driven by economics, but I’m not sure that Republican fiscal policy is driving up poverty, and even if it is, I’m not sure that poverty is the driving force behind abortions.

Regarding the idea that Obama is for social justice, so his compassion on other issues outweighs his support of abortion:

If I said I was passionate about social justice, except when it comes to racial issues, would you believe me? Would that have an impact on my credibility? Of course it would. Why, then does Obama get a pass from Christians when it comes to abortion? Is not abortion a social justice issue? Isn’t it the biggest social justice issue of all? I would argue it is. So here’s my thesis: If you are for social justice, but not justice for the most vulnerable of all, then you are NOT for social justice.

Now I do agree that being pro-life has to mean all of life. And I do believe that Evangelicals and other conservatives have egg on our faces, because it seems that many of us care about people only before they’re born and after they die. Many of us (but not all, thankfully) at least seem to be able to stand by and let kids grow up with no hope of a decent school, or decent healthcare, or decent neighborhoods. We tend to turn a blind eye to the issues of justice that are still alive and well, especially in the cities. As a result, we have lost credibility, and so the power of our words weighs considerably less than it ought to.

People who are pro-life and care about other justice issues often vote for candidates like Obama because they see them as more balanced… as more caring for the larger number of important issues. But I would say that failing at the point of abortion disqualifies a given candidate completely. This is not to say that we should not be passionate about all issues relating to justice, but it is to say that abortion is huge. Just huge.

I think we can all agree on this: It would be nice to be able to vote for someone who truly reflects Kingdom values. That day may come (I’m not holding my breath), but until it does, voting will always be a contradiction and a paradox and a tension for Christians who wish to be biblical. But personally, I will never knowingly vote for a supporter of abortion, and I am loathe to vote for anyone who is ambivalent. And if the political process never delivers any results favorable to the pro-life movement, it does not matter. I believe it is an outrage to even appear to cheer someone on who will actively perpetuate our culture of death.

At What Point Do We Call This Guy a Heretic?

We live in a free country, so I suppose Brian is free to come up with any belief system he likes. He is free to revert to some warmed over form of Pelagianism or Neo-Orthodoxy or even a spiritualized turn-of-the-century theological Liberalism.

But please, Brian, don't call it new and don't call it Christianity...

Thought of the Day

“We have created a gospel for our own culture, tailor-made to fit smugly within the confines of the American Dream. The old-fashioned Gospel we should preach has been altered just enough to agree with our busy schedules and myriad amusements. By emphasizing certain biblical teachings and, more importantly, neglecting others, we have managed to create a whole new gospel that fits our American lifestyle…

Tragically, our rendition of Christianity makes no demands, expects no sacrifice, and yields no eternal rewards. The Lion of Judah has been anesthetized, declawed, and tamed. We have reduced the Almighty to a harmless icon we passively honor in our busy lives. The vision of a Holy God, a Consuming Fire, a Judge who will one day render unto every man his just reward has virtually vanished out of the American Church.”

Steve Gallagher Intoxicated with Babylon

Black Megachurches and the African American Reformation

Please read the following article very carefully and tell me what you think.

Megachurches, Megaphones
The Primary Issue is Theology, not Economics
© Eric C. Redmond, 2006 – 2007.
Reprint permission is granted by the author.

In the last year, much attention has been given to the phenomena of African-American megachurches. Black Enterprise presented “The Business of Faith” as its May 2006 cover article, highlighting the financial power of four megachurches. In its July-August 2006 issue, The Crisis, the magazine of the NAACP, portrayed many of the shortcomings of African-American megachurches associated with the Word of Faith movement with respect to the pursuit of civil rights for people of color. In June 2006, The National Conference and Revival for Social Justice in the Black Church, organized by Rev. Al Sharpton, brought sharp criticism of the megachurches, particularly their lack of help to the poor and disenfranchised while they seemingly promote the political agenda of the Christian Right and the Republican Party. From all sides, the megachurches are being challenged to speak loudly on behalf of God for something other than material prosperity.

At the center of these critiques are names of clerics known to American households, including T.D.Jakes, Eddie Long, Creflo Dollar and Charles Blake. Many of these men have been assisted in the growth of their memberships by preaching material success, and by being visible through name recognition associated with their books, festivals, and movies. Coupled with these large memberships have come millions of dollars for the purchase of large, multi-use facilities and people resources that help secure outside funding for church businesses. The formula has worked, providing new schools, assisted living facilities, ex-offender re-entry programs, and many other social uplift aids.

The new era of mega church pastors are not the first to be recognized for wedding the Black Church’s large coffers to the plights of poverty and joblessness of its community. Charles Adams and Mangedwa Nyathi dawned the cover of Black Enterprise thirteen years ago for similar success. But the recent attention given to Jakes and others has taken prominence because of the differences of their message and philosophy from that of the mainstream, traditional African-American church. Whereas the featured leaders of the 1990’s developments were largely Baptist, Church of God in Christ, Methodist, and Clinton democrats, the leaders of 2000’s endeavors are garden variety Charismatic or conservative Evangelicals and Bush Republicans. For all of the words of praise for these churches’ success, it is this latter relationship, which is portrayed as turning African-Americans from political issues visceral to our community, which has drawn the ire of the Black clergy establishment towards the bishops of the megachurches.

Despite the eye of skepticism cast toward the practices of the megachurches and their leaders, the above laudations and criticisms do not address the heart of the issue of their successes and deficiencies. Nor is the issue addressed by simply recognizing what appears to be a disregard for the New Testament’s cautions against greed as a corrupter of motives: “Be on your guard against all covetousness,” said Jesus himself, “for one's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions,” (Luke 12:15, ESV). Instead, the real issue is the theology (or lack thereof) that drives these churches. This truth is missed in most evaluations of the movement because megachurches are simply a microcosm of the larger African-American church. In embracing the American Dream, and in placing hopes in political parties of either persuasion, our churches have lost the counter-cultural message of Jesus.

The New Testament portrays Jesus as one who drew crowds of people, much like the megachurch heralds. Great numbers would come from far and wide to gain a touch of healing from him. Groups would cross lakes in boats to seek him out. One of the most famous of Jesus’ miracles, recorded in all four New Testament gospel accounts, is the feeding of a crowd of more than 5000 people. This crowd “was following him,” states the account in John 6:2.

Yet the crowds did not continue to follow Jesus after hearing his claims and demands. Once the healing of the lepers and the lame ended, and the preaching of his own work on the cross was established as binding judgment on the practices and destinies of all people, the crowds left him. Once he began proclaiming that evil within all people separated them from God, he lost his popular appeal. Rather than being able to establish a church of thousands and meet the physical and economic needs of the socially disenfranchised, Jesus was rejected. His message offended the crowds. His words only appealed to a few. Even raising people from the dead on multiple occasions, and the promise to do the same for others, did not have strong enough appeals to overcome the offense people felt by being told they were morally bankrupt. In spite of being the CEO of history’s greatest religious social justice program, Jesus lost his following to his theology. In spite of losing his followers, he continued to warn people to consider their souls over gaining all of the material success in the world.

In contrast to the megachurch credo and craze, there is another hope on the horizon for our churches and community in the form of a growing movement of younger African-Americans. The members of this informal coalition identify themselves around the Reformation and Calvinism’s “doctrines of grace.” They identify themselves around theological commitments. Their commitments are based on centering core doctrines around the message of the Scriptures—the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as solution to man’s moral dilemma before the Creator (as opposed to economic empowerment).

Stated differently, this coalition’s identity rests in a message that all people are radically depraved in the sight of their Creator. The Creator has made a provision of mercy for some through the work of Christ. Christ and his work must define the belief and practice of the recipients of mercy, and the message of the mercy of the Creator through Christ is the only means of life-transformation that brings true satisfaction to individuals, families and communities. This message is for the poor, the rich, the African-American, and all people. However, the message these men preach offends.

This African-American “Reformed” network is not united by the sizes of their congregations, nor does it look at size or receipts as a measure of success. Largely united through conference speaking, published writings, and the blogsphere, this group is slowly finding home in the hearts of mainstream and traditional churches.

The preaching of these young reformers recognizes there is a sense in which the church should be separated from culture rather than totally immersed therein. This separation is not because of an Establishment Clause, or because of the need to keep the IRS from challenging a church’s tax-status. Instead, it is because the church is intended to be a spiritual and theological entity like no other—one that transforms culture rather than assimilates to it. Therefore, this group’s message is not a proclamation of economic success, but of Christ as the center of all things. In fact, these men and their churches tend to identify themselves as gospel-centered and Christ-centered. Dissimilarly, the megachurch pulpits are so immersed in the prosperity message of the American culture they cannot pull people above the ills of human nature, including ills that follow riches like greed, bribery, theft, selfishness, and exploitation of the poor.

The younger movement offers the hope of righteousness. For what is needed to bring lasting change to every community is people who deny themselves of selfish ambition and excessive living, make personal sacrifices for the good of all others, refrain from committing crimes against members of the community, submit themselves to governing authorities, and raise their children in homes characterized by love, forgiveness, joy, delayed gratification and discipline. This hope is in great contrast to the philosophy of the megachurches in question, which seem to derive their theology from utilitarian thought: It is drawing the masses, so it must be right.

If there are faces for this movement, one of them belongs to Rev. Anthony Carter, itinerant speaker and author of On Being Black and Reformed. In his “new perspective” on the Christian faith, Carter demonstrates the consistency of the Reformed Theology with the African-American experience of sorrow, suffering and oppression. But the discourse he takes to pulpits around the country does not challenge his readers to leave mental poverty in order to begin gaining their piece of the bourgeoisie pie. Neither is he naïve about the connotations of Calvinism for great-great-grandchildren of slaves. His message is that God is the only hope in whatever economic status one finds oneself.

Another face may be that of Thabiti Anyabwile, the newly appointed pastor of First Baptist Church of Grand Caymans. A former senior associate and project manager with the Center for the Study of Social Policy, Anyabwile was an elder at a Baptist church in Washington, DC, woven of Reformation woof. In his new position on the island, Anyabwile has begun to work for social reform and revival through the reformation of the souls. He has two forthcoming publications that challenge the African-American church to recover the greatness of its heritage by embracing a theology of reformation. An early preview of the first publication suggests there is nothing in print known to be like it. With the calling of Anyabwile to be pastor in Grand Caymans, the movement has reached beyond U.S. borders to proclaim hope to other lands.

The neo-radicals like Carter and Anyabwile do not deny the need for institutional justice for African-Americans to achieve social justice. Instead, they place the role of the State under the hand of a good Savior. They are not the first to wield a theology of humility as the path to prosperity and justice. Boston’s Eugene Rivers, who would not identify himself with any of the aforementioned church movements, is ahead of all of us in practice, results and reputation.

The Afro-reformers do not belong on a pedestal. However, I hope they will be placed on a high mount above megachurch steeples as beacons to guide our people through the rough waters that we must come to experience economic contentment and justice.

Counter criticisms to this new movement abound, and the lasting fruit is still years in the making. But its leaders stand true to being driven by a theological impetus, despite typical unfounded denunciations of being white, Uncle Toms, sellouts, and Oreos. Yet in the face of naysayers, buds of the Reformed movement are beginning to sprout in the lives of second and third generation seedlings. Carter’s generation is successfully wedding Reformed orthodoxy and African-American orthopraxy by seeing the former as the tree and the latter as the flower. Of course, the root to this movement is the Gospel.

The Word of Faith megachurch movement will not go away, but will progress further into exurbia. It will take with it masses of enthusiasts and critics. It may overshadow the work of the fledgling Reformed movement if measured in terms of dollars, cents, franchises of 501(c)(3)’s, and congregation sizes. However, the message of the Black Reformation will not be dimmed. It has the potential to have the impact of its theological forbearers, of whom it was said, “after darkness, light.” I am hopeful that the preaching of the Reformed movement, combined with the faithfulness and integrity of the movement’s members, will bring about an African-American Great Awakening, even as did the preaching of Calvinistic Puritans for the Colonies.

Most importantly, the leaders of the new reformation are not coming into question as phonies, since they reject what is faddish and popular, and they are not driven by the pragmatic. Their message is gaining appeal as listeners discern that their gospel is all-encompassing because it seeks to reach the whole person, not just one’s wallet. May history record that the attention given to this movement will be because their preaching rang out with life-transforming impact, like megaphones for God. For, salvation for African-American church and community is found in prioritizing theology, not economics.

Rev. Eric C. Redmond is the Pastor of Hillcrest Baptist Church, Temple Hills, MD, and formerly Assistant Professor of Bible and Theology at Washington Bible College, Lanham, MD. He is the Theology Editor of the NAAF Outlook: Newsletter of the National African American Fellowship of the Southern Baptist Convention, a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, and a Trustee of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Ft. Worth, TX. He is currently working on a book about African-American men’s disenfranchisement of the African-American church. More about Eric Redmond, Anthony Carter, and Thabiti Anyabwile is available at www.reformingchurches.org (forthcoming). This article was written August, 29, 2006.

On Suffering

There is a big question that for many people remains unanswered. Or at least not answered to their satisfaction. It's the question of suffering.

Why do people suffer? And especially, why do innocent and/or God-fearing people suffer? And how can there be evil, suffering, pain and affliction if God is really good and really all-powerful and really sovereign?

I have a lot of thoughts on this subject, but for now I thougth I'd simply post some Scripture and let Jesus speak for Himself (though none of these passages are from the Gospels - but I think we know who the Author is...)

I will say this one thing, though. It is not those who suffer who should question God's love. Rather, based on what Scripture says, it is those who do not who should be asking questions.

Some Verses on Suffering (NIV)

Psalm 119:50 - My comfort in my suffering is this: Your promise preserves my life.

Psalm 119:67-68 - Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I obey your word. You are good, and what you do is good; teach me your decrees.

Psalm 119:71 - It was good for me to be afflicted so that I might learn your decrees.

Psalm 119:92 - If your law had not been my delight, I would have perished in my affliction.

Psalm 126:5 - Those who sow in tears will reap with songs of joy.

Ro. 5:3-4- -Not only so, but we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope.

2 Cor 4:7-12 & 16-18 - But we have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us. We are hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed. We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body. For we who are alive are always being given over to death for Jesus' sake, so that his life may be revealed in our mortal body. So then, death is at work in us, but life is at work in you.

Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

2 Cor 11:24-30 - Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea, I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my own countrymen, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false brothers. I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked. Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches. Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn? If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness.

2 Cor 12:7-10 - To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me. That is why, for Christ's sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.

Phil 3:10-11 - I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.

James 1:2-4 - Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.