Love Truth Blog

“You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain” (Exod. 20:4-6). This passage is often cited as some sort of prohibition against speaking some explicative. I suppose that can be an application in a roundabout way from the point Moses thought to make, but that was never the heart of the issue. The third command had to do with verbal representations or better yet misrepresentations of God. In other words, “the people were to exercise the greatest caution when talking about him or invoking his name. They were to say nothing which might detract from a true appreciation of his nature and character” [1]. God revealed His name to the Hebrew people through the prophet Moses (Exod. 3:13-15). The name given was YHWH, which is translated “I AM.” Inasmuch as the giving of one’s name was something deep and personal, God gave the second commandment to warn against saying something that would drag the name of the ...

I was recently thinking about the temptation of Jesus Christ. What an epic battle between cosmic forces—the incarnate Son of God in one corner and Satan the prince of darkness on the other. The three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) include the account of Jesus Christ’s temptation in the wilderness (Matt. 4:1-11; Mk. 1:12-13; Lk. 4:1-13). What is the significance of this event? Why was Jesus tempted? All three Synoptic Gospels indicate the Holy Spirit led Jesus Christ out into the wilderness, and there the Lord fasted for forty days, being tempted by Satan, i.e. the tempter and the Devil (Matt. 4:1-2; Mk. 1:12-13; Lk. 4:1-2). Craig Keener notes that “it was commonly believed that demons were especially attracted to places like bathhouses, graveyards and deserts. Readers would thus sense the suspense as Jesus battled with Satan on Satan’s own turf” [1].  Still, it was on account of the Spirit’s leading that the Lord would go into the wilderness for a season of fasting ...

Someone asked me about a very cherished item and wondered whether or not God would allow her to take it to heaven. I wondered for a moment. Then I remembered something Chuck Swindoll once said. It went as follows... Shortly before her death, Corrie ten Boom attended our church in Southern California. Following the worship service, I met briefly with her, anxious to express my wife's and my love and respect for her faithful example. She inquired about my family . . . how many children, their ages—that sort of thing. She detected my great love for each one and very tenderly admonished me to be careful not to hold on to them too tightly. Cupping her wrinkled hands in front of me, she passed on a statement of advice I'll never forget. I can still recall that strong Dutch accent: "Pastor Svendahl, you must learn to hold everyting loosely . . . everyting. Even your dear family. Why? Because da Fater may vish to take vun of tem back to Himself, und ven He does, it vill h...

Suppose for a moment one could actually dangle a person over hell fire and brimstone. The body secured with just a thin chord, which could easily be severed, sending the poor soul into the unquenchable flames. Would that put the fear of God in anyone? No way. I doubt God would use any kind of scare tactic just to bring a person into relationship with Him. This is never to say hell is irrelevant or even non-existent, but scaring someone would never work, at least for the person who sincerely wants to be changed and rearranged to be fit for heavenly life. The scoundrel in the midst of a raging battle may call out to God for deliverance inside the foxhole; however, once the danger has passed, he simply carries without giving thought to the Creator and how his very life rests in His hands. No, scaring in never enough to bring wayward souls into the temple of the Lord to learn at the feet of the Messiah. What God does is He sends the Son into this world to be incarnated as a man, ...

July 14, 2013, I was kicking back at home when the news flash came on that George Zimmerman was found not guilty for the second degree murder of Trayvon Martin. Backtrack to February 26, 2012, when George was on the neighborhood watch, saw Trayvon, perceived the lad was acting suspiciously, through a course of events the two got into a scuffle, with Trayvon dying of a fatal gunshot to the chest. Befuddlement is what I felt after hearing the verdict, as I was certain the accused was facing a guilty verdict. Yet, it is still surreal that this incident has sparked a national debate, with two sides calling the greater populace being defined by a story. Truth is really secondary to the whole debate. What the debaters are speaking about never really touches upon cardinal issues of American jurisprudence, such as a speedy trial by jury of one’s own peers, the principle of being innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, and the like. These ideas are important, but the nationa...

I flipped on the television last Wednesday, June 26, 2013, and watched the news on the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which essentially kept same-sex couples from receiving tax, health and retirement benefits from the government. At that moment I thought, “Wow, whatever might come out of this, however this decision might shape each person in America, the world I lived in would never be the same.” Yet, inasmuch as the decision was monumental, as a Christ follower in covenant relationship to the God of the Universe, there is a bit of personal uneasiness over the whole situation. It would be naive to think the Supreme Court decision about DOMA is simply about the money $$$. (Who would object to a gay couple formulating contractual agreements for inheritance, hospital visitations, or property?) Rather, the decision set a legal precedence about marriage, particularly who can be married, and who can reap the benefits of being in a marit...

Jesus Christ’s cleansing of the temple has been on my mind of late. Matthew informs us that “ Jesus entered the temple and drove out all those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves. And He said to them, “It is written, ‘ My house shall be called a house of prayer ’; but you are making it a robbers ’ den ” (Matt. 21:12-13). Mark adds that Christ “would not permit anyone to carry merchandise through the temple” (Mark. 11:16). John informs us that the Jesus “made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple” (John 2:15), and said, “Take these things away; stop making My Father’s house a place of business” (John 2:16). The disciples who witnessed this incident “remembered that it was written, ‘ Zeal for Your House will consume me ’ ” (John 2:17). [1] This incident would have occurred in the Temple’s Court of the Gentiles. In that place, there were money changers offering pure...