Articles

The Passion of the Christ Updates

Scouring the news sites I came up with some interesting links in regards to Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ.

Hollywood Jesus has a review. You may want to turn down your speakers because the movie’s trailer plays automatically when you go to the site. Scroll down to the bottom of the page for the review.

The Washington Times has an article about Christian leaders as well as some Jewish leaders who saw the movie. The Christians loved it while the Jewish people found it to be anti-semitic.

Lifeway writes about a showing for many Christian leaders. Those who saw it confirm it was Biblical and powerful. One of them comments specifically on the Protestant view of the movie saying “As Protestants, we may think there’s a little bit greater emphasis on Mary,” referring to settings in the movie, such as the scourging of Jesus, in which Mary is depicted as being present when Scripture does not confirm her participation. But Denison said it did not raise an overarching concern about the film.

Misc Reviews of The Passion of the Christ

The Rules of Freedom

I wrote this article a few weeks ago, but have decided to repost it as part of the Blogger Idol competition being held by a fellow blogger. This week’s theme has to do with freedom and I thought this article fit the bill. Enjoy!

There is a misconception about Christianity whereby non-Christians seem to think that Christians live their lives burdened by myriads of unfair and outdated rules. Though some of these rules are perceived to be admirable and praiseworthy, many others, they think, are simply burdensome and unnecessary. Few would argue that the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" is a bad one. But when it comes to the commandments regarding adultery and sexual relations people no longer consider them praiseworthy. Many people look at Christians and scoff that we would allow ourselves to be ruled by Biblical precepts which demand that sex is to be enjoyed only by a husband and wife within a marriage relationship. I would like to take just a short time to look at the relationship of rules to freedom.

America is a nation of freedom. Why is it that this nation is the "land of the free?" Quite simply, it is because the country is governed by a set of laws that guarantee freedom. America is not a nation that is unburdened by rules. Rather, it is a nation bound by strict rules which protect its citizen's rights and freedoms. Consider a nation that had absolutely no laws; no governance; no constitution. Would that be a land where people would have true freedom? No! There would be terrible chaos and bloodshed and that nation would undoubtedly be a terrible place to live.

I am a Web designer by trade, and as such I need to be able to create. To be a successful Web designer and to create Web sites that are functional and attractive I need to operate within a set of rules. There is a governing body, the World Wide Web Consortium www.w3.org that oversees standards and governance for the Internet. These standards guarantee that every Web page that adheres to them will be visible by every Internet user. They ensure that a novice computer user operating a 4-year old computer will see a Web site identically to an expert using a brand-new computer.

For example, the rules dictate that every Web page needs to have a piece of code at the beginning that looks like this:

<body>

That small piece of code tells a Web browser that everything after that tag is HTML code (HTML is the programming language Web pages are written in) and should be displayed as such. Without that piece of code, the page would display only as a list of programming code. Similarly, at the end of the document there must be a piece of code that looks like this:

</body>

That "tag" tells the browser that the page has completed. Anything beyond that code will not be displayed in HTML formatting. There are hundreds of similar rules governing HTML coding. As a designer, I have the freedom to ignore those standards and write a Web page however I see fit. The problem, though, is that ignoring the rules will lead to any number of problems. The page may be formatted in a way that makes it very difficult to read. It may display as a combination of properly-formatted text and HTML code. It is even possible that the Web page will not display in any Web browser.

Imagine the headaches if every designer designed his sites to a different set of standards. One designer might create his sites to work only with a specific browser while another might make his work only if a computer is of a certain speed. Needless to say, browsing Web pages would be, at best, burdensome, and in many cases, impossible.

The alternative to operating outside the rules is to create Web pages within the necessary boundaries. When I learn of the rules and operate within the framework of those rules, I have total freedom to create a site that is functional, artistic and useful. I do not think anyone would consider that to be burdensome! On the contrary, it is necessary to have the Internet function with some semblance of order.

The analogy should be clear. God does not give us a list of rules so we can suffer and practice self-denial. God provides rules so that we can live within a good and necessary framework. Within this framework we can find true freedom to live as we were created to live. We see that rules and freedom are not mutually exclusive. As a matter of fact, the opposite is true. Rules provide freedom.

blogger_idol-1.gif

Sunday Reflection: Take Back Your Sabbath

The following article, entitled Take Back Your Sabbath is taken from Christianity Today.

NORTH AMERICA’S largest purveyor of Christian merchandise recently began opening its 315 stores on Sunday afternoons. Family Christian Stores touted its decision as a way to expand ministry opportunity. According to a press release, the firm sees it as a way of fulfilling its “calling to provide … Bibles, books and other Christian resources to meet their [customers’] needs—when their needs arise” (italics supplied). That sense of urgency makes them sound more like a crisis hotline than a retail store.

The media were quick to make comparisons with other Christian-owned businesses that do not open on Sundays: Lifeway Christian Stores, Mardel Christian and Educational Supplies, Hobby Lobby stores, and Chik-fil-A restaurants. Family Christian Stores did not see the parallels. “No one is going to hell if they don’t eat a chicken sandwich on a Sunday,” FCS president David Browne told The Dallas Morning News—as if souls hang in the balance because they can’t buy Max Lucado or John Eldredge between noon and five on Sunday.

Hardly anybody thinks people are going to hell anymore if they do buy a chicken sandwich or go shopping on a Sunday. But The Charlotte Observer’s Ken Garfield thinks that maybe U.S. culture is going to hell because of its surrender to the rat race. He called the FCS announcement “another sign of the culture turning Sunday into one more day in the rat race—that no matter what your faith, or even if you have no faith, life is too demanding to allow anyone to take a step back and a day off.”

Garfield hinted at the spiritual dimension of a weekly day of rest: Faith is what allows people to emulate God and rest from their works. “Life is too demanding” for those of little faith, because the inability to rest is the incapacity to let go of the illusion of control. The constant need to work, shop, and meet demands can be a practical denial that God is in control. Conversely, a spiritual discipline of regular rest from the constant drive to check items off a to-do list can be a powerful symbol of our trust in God’s sufficiency.

From Labor Law to Worship Day

The biblical Sabbath was a blend of the practical and the spiritual—a labor law for the protection of workers and a symbolic participation in the life of God. In Exodus 20, the Sabbath commandment is addressed to people who have both servants and animals working for them so that all who labor will be given needed rest. Workers do this by imitating God, who rested.

In Deuteronomy 5, the Sabbath is connected to God’s delivering his people from bondage in Egypt. Work is good. Bondage is bad. But work easily becomes a form of bondage. The Sabbath is a sign that our work is not coerced, and regular rest allows us to experience our work as free people rather than as bondslaves.

Christians today tend to connect the Sabbath with corporate worship, although the Hebrew Bible did not treat the Sabbath that way. In the Christian church, the history of Sabbath (and Sunday) is complex, but eventually the principal Christian day of worship and the principle of Sabbath rest coalesced in the church’s thinking.

That was not without wisdom. As the 20th century Christian philosopher Josef Pieper argued, true rest is not possible apart from worship. The heart of divine worship is sacrifice, and sacrifice is the ultimate antithesis of utility. “The act of worship creates a store of real wealth which cannot be consumed by the workaday world. It sets up an area where calculation is thrown to the winds and goods are deliberately squandered, where usefulness is forgotten and generosity reigns.”

Sabbath Protest

Our churches and families need to return to a Sabbath consciousness that can provide a platform for countercultural witness. Without being legalistic about it, Christians have a duty to protest the oppressive tyranny of time and productivity and an economic order that tries to squeeze inordinate productivity out of people’s energies.

Such a witness will take varied shapes, but along with church worship it should be characterized by a cessation from paid employment, a respite from commercial activity, an investment in relationships, a receptivity to divine wisdom, a celebration of creation, and intentional acts of kindness.

Churches and small groups should experiment with mutual covenants to take back their Sabbath time. And in the course of experimentation and mutual feedback, they will find a blessing.

Such efforts will take mutual support and planning, because our lives are swept along by the currents of modern culture. Our culture fosters an ethic of accumulation, which teaches us to value ourselves primarily in economic terms. It even teaches us to rate our leisure by the number and the quality of our toys rather than by the restorative quality of our play. We are also shaped by a utilitarian ethos that teaches us to justify every activity in terms of its usefulness to us and others.

There is a gratuitous quality to Sabbath rest. It is antithetical to utility. The celebration of the goodness of God and of his creation needs no further justification.

The Charlotte Observer’s Garfield suggests that, “in a twist,” the largest Christian retail chain opening on Sundays may “stir some of us to take a stand against the routine of everyday life.”

Sunday is ours,” he says. “You can’t have it.”

Rest and leisure are God’s, we say. And the world can’t take them away.

My Concerns With The Passion of the Christ

The Passion of the Christ goes against everything I believe in. Or more accurately, it goes against everything I was raised to believe in. In the tradition I was raised (Canadian Reformed Church) movies were generally regarded as a sinful form of entertainment. Going to a theatre was to bring oneself into the "playground of the ungodly." Portraying Christ in any way, even in a picture in a child's story Bible was considered wrong. And of course Catholicism and Ecumenicism were wrong. It seems to me that The Passion of the Christ contains all of those elements.

Movies are bad. I occasionally go to the movies and enjoy doing so. I try to be discerning with what I watch, but do not regard movies as a medium as evil. Similarly I do not consider theatres a bad place to go. So this does not concern me much. A movie with a Christian theme and message can be edifying.

Portraying Christ is wrong. I am undecided about this. Though I do find it very difficult to watch someone portray Jesus, I do understand that there can be value in this and that the Bible does not seem to specifically say it is wrong. Provided that He is portrayed accurately and respectfully I think I can live with this.

Catholicism is wrong. I believe strongly that Catholicism represents a false gospel - a gospel that conflicts with the "5 solas" that Protestantism traditionally holds so dear and that many Protestants died defending. Mel Gibson is Catholic and holds to Catholic teachings and doctrine. During filming a priest attended the location every morning to hold mass and celebrate the Eucharist. There is no doubt that Gibson is making this movie as an expression of his beliefs. It is a necessary conclusion, then, that his beliefs could come into conflict with Protestant beliefs.

Despite that, the Catholic view of the last twelve hours of Jesus' life is based on the same texts as the Protestant view. If the movie holds very closely to the account as presented in the gospels, there is little reason to think it will showcase Catholic teachings. If the Biblical account is followed with accuracy, it should not matter much whether the movie-maker is Protestant, Catholic or any other religion. The prominent concern I have in this regard is how they present and portray Mary. In the gospel account she receives very little attention and plays only a small role. In this regard a reviewer has said "It truly is a great depiction of the passion of Christ with the theological emphasis on Mary’s role in the Church, the wickedness of Satan, and the Eucharist in connection with the crucifixion itself." Reviews that include such information do little to increase my confidence. It is possible, of course, that the reviewer is interpreting what he has seen through his theological presuppositions and that a Protestant viewer would see things far differently. Still, it seems obvious that this movie will do nothing to show where Catholic doctrine is wrong and Protestant doctrine is right.

Ecumenicism is wrong. I take a strong stand against Catholicism, not because I dislike Catholics, but because to ally Protestantism and Catholicism is to ally ourselves with a false gospel and to deny the principles that led to the Reformation. This movie has already crossed denominational boundaries. The Passion Outreach site lists quotes from many church leaders, all of whom endorse this movie. The list begins with Protestants such as Billy Graham, Rick Warren and James Dobson, but then turns to Catholic Archbishops and professors. Interestingly, the bulk of the Protestants listed have in the past made it obvious that they lean towards ecumenicism. I wonder if they showed the movie to Reformed Christians like MacArthur, Sproul and Piper. I wonder what their view of it would be.

Probably my greatest concern is that there is no distinction made between denominations. If this movie is to become the outreach opportunity that many are saying it will be, it seems there is likely to be as many people being evangelized by Catholics and Protestants. Even more alarming is that no one seems to care.

I am not ashamed to say that this movie makes me nervous. I see the potential for this to be a wonderful opportunity for evangelism. There is little doubt that many people will see this movie and be stirred by it. They will be stirred emotionally and perhaps spiritually. Is it not the job of the church to reach out to these people and to provide them answers to the questions they are sure to have? Or is this just another example of Christian pragmatism where we feel that the end justifies the means? Could it be that we care less about what is Biblical than what brings results? I continue to have more questions than answers at the moment.

Mel Gibson Spreads Passion

The following article is taken from E Online.

Mel Gibson wants moviegoers to get their fill of The Passion of the Christ.

The Hollywood star’s Icon Productions has announced plans, along with indie distributor Newmarket Films, to release his controversial movie about the last 12 hours in the life of Jesus Christ on 2,000 screens in theaters nationwide on February 25, Ash Wednesday.

The distribution strategy marks the biggest bow ever for a subtitled picture as well as for a movie featuring dialogue in dead languages—Latin and Aramaic.

It was originally thought that The Passion would unspool in a few cities and spread from there via art-houses. But apparently the controversy surrounding its purported anti-Semitism compelled Gibson to go wider. He’s also decided to debut it at multiplexes in the Bible Belt.

In fact, The Passion is scheduled to play on more screens than last month’s Christmas comedy Bad Santa and other major Hollywood releases such as Big Fish.

Icon and Newmarket reps were not available to comment on the distribution plan.

But according to Industry observers, the bold plan hedges on the ability of Gibson & Co. to get the word out at the grassroots level to church groups and other Christian organizations so they can mobilize their members to go out and see it.

There’s more of a risk of going platform and facing a negative backlash in the big cities,” one anonymous distribution exec told Daily Variety.

The $25 million flick, which was financed, cowritten and directed by Gibson, has come under attack for allegedly reviving the controversial notion that Jews were responsible for Christ’s death, as well as its graphic portrayal of the Crucifixion.

Gibson has repeatedly denied that the film is anti-Semitic and said that it’s his intention “to inspire, not to offend.” He’s also attempted to stem such talk by holding sneak peeks for leaders of both Christian and Jewish faiths as well as religious scholars and fellow industry players, many of whom defended the film.

Pope John Paul II also gave his thumbs up in a well-publicized five-word review, reportedly telling his secretary after watching it on DVD, “It is as it was.”

For Newmarket, The Passion will be the company’s biggest roll-out ever, easily surpassing the 556 screens it had for last summer’s sleeper hit Whale Rider.

Newmarket president Bob Berney told the New York Times that theaters have told him demand to see the film is heating up.

People call and say, ‘I want 10,000 tickets,’” Berney said.

The Times also reports that one multiplex in Dallas is setting aside all 20 of its screens for Passion and Passion alone.

The trailer for the film is due to hit theaters this Friday.

Gibson evidently knows where his market is, opening the movie across the Bible belt. It is amazing that tens of thousands of tickets are being ordered at once, obviously with large churches placing orders either for their congregations or as outreach opportunities.

I believe almost every article ever written about this movie quotes the Pope as saying “it is as it was.” Interestingly, it has recently been reported by sources within the Vatican that though the Pope saw the movie, he made no comment.

The Passion of the Christ

Mel Gibson’s movie The Passion of the Christ is due to hit theatres on February 25, 2004. This movie has received universal acclaim from Christians who have seen it with reviews ranging from positive to ecstatic. Many are saying that this movie represents the greatest opportunity for evangelism and outreach that they have seen in their lifetimes. As a matter of fact, the movie is proclaiming itself the greatest outreach opportunity in the past 2000 years!

Because of the attention this film is garnering in the Christian world, I have decided that I am going to expend some effort covering it on this site. I will post news stories and reviews about the movie. I have created a category specifically for this movie on the main menu on the left.

Our Role In Evangelism

I have been seeking to understand how God works in the conversion of souls. The more research I do, the more I realize that many standard evangelistic practices must be flawed, for it seems we often try to do the work that God tells us He needs to do. Here is a list of some of the things we can and cannot do in evangelizing.

Things we cannot do.

  1. We cannot help others realize the desperation of their situation or convince them that God exists as it is the Holy Spirit who must do these things. Men are willfully ignorant of them. 2 Peter 3:5 says "For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God." (emphasis mine) The hearts of men are hard and only God can soften them.
  2. We cannot convince unbelievers of their sinfulness. It is the Spirit who convicts men of sin Before He died Jesus spoke of the Spirit and said "And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment." (John 16:8)
  3. We cannot show them the beauty, necessity and wonder of Christ. A man needs the grace of the Spirit in his heart before he can see this. Isaiah 53:2 prophecies about Christ saying "For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him" Sinful humans can neither appreciate nor desire Christ with the Spirit first working in them.
  4. We cannot produce repentance or faith. Once again, those are God's works and His alone.

To summarize this, we must not try to do the Spirit's work, for if we are likely to meet with failure. This is not to say, though, that there is nothing we can or should do to spread the gospel. Here are four things that we are required to do.

Things we must do:

  1. We must pray for the lost. God delights in using our prayers to accomplish His purposes. Pray for salvation and pray for a "heart of flesh." Pray that God would use circumstances, either specific or general, to bring people to a realization of their desperation. Pray that God would confirm what we are saying through other people or circumstances. Pray that God would remove the peace they have in their unrepentance. Pray that God would put people in our lives that we can share our faith with.
  2. We must show our faith in our lives. We need to not only speak about God and what He has done, but we also need to show in our lives that we have changed. Our day-to-day lives are our greatest testimony to unbelievers.
  3. We must share our faith. When opportunities present themselves we are to act as the messenger to deliver the message, free from our prejudices and opinions. We are to present the purity of the gospel, not our spin on it. This, of course, requires knowledge of the Bible and of God's ways. A prerequisite to sharing our faith is strengthening our faith by learning about God and growing closer to Him.
  4. We must invite others to hear the message. We are to invite people to church and other evangelistic occasions. I Corinthians 14:25 speaks of the potential of church services where it speaks of an unbeliever hearing the "secrets of his heart [being] disclosed, and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you."

God chooses to use sinful humans to be His messengers on earth. We can be most effective when we understand our roles and our responsibilities. When we do this, we can joyfully and obediently do our part to fulfill God's purposes.

The Passion of the Christ

Thousands of churches are still in the midst of Rick Warren's 40 Days of Purpose and little do they know that if they do not hurry it up, they are going to miss out on the best outreach opportunity of the past 2000 years! Yes indeed, Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of The Christ" is proclaiming itself just that. They have even created a Web site geared specifically to this purpose. I have to admit, I cannot remember the last time a movie was released that included an outreach timeline along with outreach postcards. They really know the evangelical world as Powerpoint slides are coming soon too! If you are really interested you can order any number of posters, door hangers, etc.

The support for this movie is overwhelming. The Notable Quotes section reads like a who's who of Protestant and Catholic clergy and theologians. It is interesting that all the Protestants are listed first, followed by Catholics. They even have some prominent Jews proclaiming that the movie is in no way racist. Evidently the site and the outreach program are geared mostly at evangelical churches.

You do not have to look far to find all sorts of early reviews for the movie. By and large the reviews are very positive. It seems that the reports of Jewish people being upset by a perceived negative portrayal of their forebearers were mostly media hype. I am not sure if it is a positive or a negative that neither Protestants nor Catholics are claiming the account of Jesus' death is inaccurate. Perhaps this means the movie is all story with little theology (which is probably a good thing since it spans denominations which have different views about parts of the story and its implications). The only person I know who saw the movie said it was "accurate with some artistic license." Another reviewer said “It truly is a great depiction of the passion of Christ with the theological emphasis on Mary’s role in the Church, the wickedness of Satan, and the Eucharist in connection with the crucifixion itself.” Uh oh. Of course that may be someone interpreting events through his theology rather than stating what the movie actually shows.

I look forward to seeing how this movie impacts the evangelical world. I don't doubt that it will provide a powerful portrayal of Jesus' suffering and death. I don't doubt that many people will be touched by this movie and that it will probably be instrumental in bringing some to Christ.

Despite this, I have mixed feelings about the movie. If my wife was brutally murdered, would I want to see a movie about it? If I love Jesus more than my wife, why would I want to see a graphic, brutal portrayal of His death? Do I really need to see His death to truly understand it? What will the movie do that reading the account will not do? Might it be that all I will walk away with is an emotional reaction, but nothing that really penetrates my mind? At this time I do not have answers to all of those questions, but I do intend to think and pray about it over the next few weeks.

Belong & Believe

The church has traditionally positioned itself as a place for those who believe to find a place where they can belong. As the church changes and evolves with the times there is a trend to make the church a place where anyone can belong regardless of whether or not they believe. Having people who wish to belong without believing does not a crisis for many modern churches.

Churches that subscribe to the "belong and believe" philosophy will say that a sense of acceptance and belonging will help unbelievers overcome many of their prejudices towards the church. They will be able to experience the community that churches do (or should) have and see that Christians do not scorn or fear non-Christians. What this means is that people who want to attend the church but have not made a commitment to Christ are accepted as part of the church. They will generally be allowed and even encouraged to serve in some ministries within the church, perhaps playing an instrument in the band or serving coffee at the Sunday morning services. It is not likely that they will be allowed to lead ministries, but they will be allowed to participate in most. It is important to note that membership is not devalued to the point where anyone is allowed to be a member. Most churches continue to have reasonable, Scriptural standards for who may or may not become a member.

The alternative, of course, is what I have seen most often in churches I have attended. In those churches unbelievers are not encouraged to join in the work of running the church and may even be actively discouraged. The church's ministries are reserved for those who have made a commitment to Christ. Once a person makes a commitment he will be allowed and often required to participate in ministries.

I cannot deny that initially I am uncomfortable with the "belong and then believe" philosophy. This may be as a result of my conservative (what does that word mean anyways?) upbringing or perhaps it is just a desire to see the church guarded and protected. Despite my discomfort I do see great value in allowing those who do not believe to belong. I can attest that I have seen this work with great success. I have seen unbelievers come to the church and be welcomed with open arms. I have seen them find acceptance and community. Almost inevitably one of two things happens. If they remain with the church for any length of time they become believers. It seems that they come to realize the importance of what ties the community together. If they do not become believers, it seems they quickly tire of the church and disappear.

Perhaps churches that encourage those who do not believe to belong are more able and willing to see evidence of the Spirit's work in unbelievers. For someone to remain in a church when he is not a believer is a good indication that the Holy Spirit is working within that person and drawing him to Himself. Another alternative is that these churches are reckless and do not do enough to protect their church from outside influences.

Maybe what it comes down to is the way churches view both their members and unbelievers. Some see unbelievers as a blessing to the congregation. They see them as having value and being able not only to contribute to the church but also being able to sharpen the faith of the believers. They have faith in the members of their church to discern good from bad and to be leaders and not followers in relationships with unbelievers. Other churches see unbelievers as people to be feared, lest they infiltrate the church and attempt to draw it from the narrow path. They assume that these people are coming to church not to learn and not because the Spirit is leading them, but because they wish to disrupt or destroy the church. These churches must not trust their members to be able to stand strong in their beliefs.

In every area of my life I count relationships with unbelievers as a great blessing. Whether in the church, at work or in the neighborhood, every relationship is an opportunity to share the Good News. I am thrilled that my church views this the same way I do and does not run from any opportunity to reach out to the lost.

Protestant Confession

A Web site I visited recently which seeks to explain Catholic doctrine and beliefs to Protestants contained the statement “Protestants do not believe in confession.” The statement is incorrect insofar as Protestants do not practice auricular confession (confessing ones’ sins to a priest in order to receive forgiveness). That statement along with others I have seen shows that there is a misunderstanding about the Protestant view of confession.

That God calls us to confess our sin is clearly supported by Scripture. The Bible teaches us much about confession.

Leviticus 16:21 shows that confession is an integral part of forgiveness. “Then Aaron shall lay both of his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the sons of Israel and all their transgressions in regard to all their sins; and he shall lay them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness…” Though confession is implicit in asking for forgiveness (an admission of wrong-doing is necessary before one asks for forgiveness), the Biblical model is one of explicit confession. The priest did not simply send the scapegoat into the wilderness as a sign of forgiveness. Rather, he first laid his hands on the animal and confessed the sins of the nation. The indication is that the priest would have confessed specific sins rather than simply offering a vague admission of guilt.

Psalm 32:3-5 shows the burden of unconfessed sin. “When I kept silent about my sin, my body wasted away through my groaning all day long. For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me; My vitality was drained away as with the fever heat of summer. I acknowledged my sin to You, and my iniquity I did not hide; I said, ” I will confess my transgressions to the LORD”; And You forgave the guilt of my sin.” David says that while he refused to confess his sin his bones wasted away, God’s hand was heavy upon him and his strength was sapped. The burden was psychological, spiritual and probably physical as well. Finally, after David confessed his sin before God he experienced God’s forgiveness. At the close of the psalm we see a radical transformation as Davis is glad - singing and rejoicing in song.

Most Christians have, at one time or another learned the acronym A.C.T.S. as a model for prayer. Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving and Supplication is a good and a logical way of ordering prayer. It seems, though, that little time and teaching is dedicated to how one should confess.

Giving God the adoration due Him will prepare us for confession. Focusing on God’s attributes will help us see where we have fallen short of His standards. A part of our adoration is focusing on the attributes of God that we shared with Him before our fall into sin. For example, we may give God glory for being perfect in holiness. As we do this it opens our eyes to the fact that this perfection is God’s standard for us. He demands and expects no less from us.

Once we have established who God is and what He has done we cannot help but see how our lives and character fall short of the perfection He demands. The reaction of a contrite and broken heart can be nothing other than confessing our sinfulness before Him before we begin to pour out our requests before Him.

So what does confession actually look like? Here are a few pointers:

  • Confession is specific. Like most things in life and in the Christian life in particular, speaking in specifics is superior to speaking in generalities. We commit specific sins and need to confess them specifically. Consider, for example, someone who struggles with feelings of jealousy. Praying “I confess that I am a jealous person” is less specific than praying “I confess that I am jealous of the talents You have given to someone else.”
  • Confess the consequences. True confession involves looking not just at the sin we commit but also at how this sin has affected us. It is more than an admission of guilt but is a process of soul-searching to see where sin has taken root in our lives. So we need to search our souls and then confess not only the sin but also the effects of the sin. “I confess that I am jealous of the talents you have given to someone else” is a good place to start, but praying “I confess I am jealous of the talents you have given someone else, and this makes me resentful towards You for not blessing me in this way. It also damages my relationship towards this person” shows that I have searched my soul and seen how my sin has affected me.
  • Confession precedes forgiveness. Confession leads us to ask for forgiveness. Confessing leads us to fall on our faces before God, literally or figuratively, to ask for forgiveness. A confession is not, in itself, enough. In our court system a criminal may plead guilty for a misdeed, but this does not necessarily indicate that he is sorry for what he has done. Similarly we need to ask God for His forgiveness, not just confess our sins to Him.
  • Confession before someone we have harmed. There may be times where our sin requires us to confess and ask forgiveness from someone our sin has affected. One must be careful with this because there are times when our sin should remain only between ourselves and God, especially if revealing it to others would only hurt them and damage relationships.
  • Confession before Men. At times it may be wise to confess our sins before a friend or other trusted individual. This person can then pray with us, pray for us, and help us believe in God’s assurance of forgiveness.

Having confessed and asked for forgiveness, we have God’s assurance that He has forgiven us. “As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us.” We need to believe in this promise, believing that our sins have been paid for by Christ. Naturally, our reaction should now be one of joy as we thank God for allowing Christ to take our sin upon Himself. Finally, having confessed to Him and having thanked Him for forgiveness, we can pour out our requests to Him, asking that He would help us turn from our sin and become more and more like His Son.

We see, then, that confession is an integral part of the Protestant faith and a necessary part of our Christian walk.