Author: Tobie

Vital Organs

TobieLeave a comment

God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. 1 Corinthians 12:23-25

Some time ago I was sipping hot coffee at a great restaurant in Johannesburg, when I found myself staring at the scene in this picture. I was amused and took a photo, certain that I would be able to use it to make some or other point in a teaching or article.

Well, the opportunity has arisen. A few weeks ago I read the well known words above, from Paul’s first letter to the believers in Corinth, and it ministered to me in an incredible way. It was clearer than ever, a perfect answer to a question that everybody (believers and non-believers alike) have been asking for at least seventeen centuries: Why are Christians so divided?

The passage above, I believe, provides the key.

But before we get there, consider for a moment the implications of this sentence: “God has … that there may be no division in the body…” That’s quite a statement. God has done something to prevent disunity in the body. There is a “secret” to Christian unity, and the verse above fills in the blanks and reveals exactly what it is.

Paul begins his argument in the preceding verses. We treat our “unpresentable parts” with “greater modesty”, he says. That is where my picture comes in. We buy clothes to hide our bulging waistlines. We colour our greying hair. We are attracted to the services offered in the picture, and the reason is obvious: We spend time, energy and money on our unattractive parts, not the attractive parts. In short: We adore the unadorable.

In the same way, Paul says, God gives “greater honour” to the parts that lack it, and so makes them indispensable to the body.

Before we speak about the body of Christ, which is what Paul has in mind here, let us pause for a moment and consider how true this principle is in the human body. I have never seen a pair of kidneys on the cover of Cosmopolitan magazine, and I certainly do not ever expect to. Kidneys are not exactly… attractive. However, to compensate for this fact they have been given a function that is so incredibly essential to the health of your body that it has earned them the proud title of “vital organs.” And so that magnificent face of yours simply cannot expel them from the body, or look down on them, or say to them “I don’t need you.” In fact, one of the things that causes a healthy complexion is a well functioning pair of kidneys.

Which brings us to the body of Christ. The very same principle applies here. Note that God has “chosen the poor in this world to be rich in faith” (James 2:5). Also not that the “lowly brother” must “boast in his exaltation” (James 1:9). As Paul said to these Corinthians earlier on in the same letter, God chooses the foolish, weak, low and despised in this world.

Hmm. I am reminded of Kierkegaard who said that God always creates out of nothing, and that he can only use something after he has reduced it to nothing. This explains why Jesus Christ made himself nothing before he could be used by God. It also explains why things went terribly wrong for the great visionaries of the Bible before their so-called “sense of destiny” could find fulfillment. Think of Joseph, Moses and Peter, to mention a few. All of them were aware of a calling, and all of them had to lose it in order to find it.

Most of us are more or less aware of the Biblical pattern in this regard. Most of us know that the way to the promised land lies through the wilderness, that the cross precedes the glory, that brokenness is a prerequisite for service. But the verse above adds an important dimension to this principle. God empowers the weak for another reason besides the obvious ones that we are so aware of.

HE DOES IT TO MAKE THEM INDISPENSABLE TO THE BODY.

People who are insignificant according to the standards of the world are indispensable in the ekklesia of Jesus Christ. Their extraordinary gifts are crucial for the church’s health. She needs to be aware of this, protect them and care for them. The foolish, weak, low and despised in this world are the vital organs of Christ’s body. It is as simple as that.

I say this to my shame, but there was a time in my life when I turned my back on my brothers and sisters in Christ who did not see things the way I did. I became sick of their theological shallowness, their constant emphasis on experience and emotions, their hyped-up gatherings. At least that is how I experienced it. And so I turned my back on them and searched out likeminded spirits with whom I could discuss the books, authors and issues that interested me. It did not take long to find them, and when I did I rejoiced. We could be deep together. Really, really deep. So deep, in fact, that no else could find us. Except of course those gifted souls who were just as deep as we were…

I see things differently nowadays. Besides being obviously embarrassed by the pharisaical snobbishness that I had made myself guilty of, I have come to realise how incredibly shallow my so-called depth has been. Whilst my new friends and I had a roaring time debating things like supralapsarianism, we were missing out on a vitality that could only be provided by certain … organs. We simply did not have the fervour to save the lost that I had seen in that tent evangelist who could hardly spell his name. We did not have the compassion on the poor that I had seen in the theologian with the “mystical” tendencies. And so on.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not arguing for some happy ecumenism at the expense of Biblical truth. I am merely saying that different parts of the body have different functions, and that all of us run the risk of becoming severely deformed without the restraint provided by the unity of the body. We need one another. The thinkers need the doers who need the feelers who need the thinkers…

John Ruskin once said “When a man is wrapped up in himself, he makes a pretty small package.” I wish to edit that statement somewhat: When a man wraps up Jesus Christ with himself, he ends up with a pretty small Jesus.

The body is not an eye, or a collection of eyes. It is a body. One body with many parts, as Paul said to the Corinthians. One body with all its parts, for God has clothed the dishonourable parts with greater honour so as to make them indispensable.

The key to Christian unity is diversity. Ironically, we have allowed our differences to drive us apart instead of bringing us together.

(A shortened version of this article appeared in Bloemnews.)

Love Story

TobieLeave a comment

I have this against you, that you have abandoned your first love. Revelation 2:4

The above sentence is best understood when read in the light of Revelation’s last few chapters. There the church is revealed as “a bride adorned for her husband” who has made herself ready for “the marriage supper of the Lamb”.

The Bible is a story about a Bridegroom and his bride.

The imagery of this divine union is found early in Genesis, and it reaches its climax in the last chapters of Revelation. In Genesis we read about the union of the first Adam and his bride, in Revelation we read about the union of the Last Adam and his bride.

Everything in between is a commentary on this divine romance, a glorious love story of love lost and found.

Humans are obsessed with this story, even if they won’t acknowledge it. Our movies and books are filled with it: Boy meets girl, fall in love, split up and reunite. And then they live happily ever after. This is the grand narrative of the ages. This gospel is written on our hearts, and it is a tragedy if we fail to make the link between this deep intuition, this overriding passion, and our “Christian theology.”

I always marvel how easy it is for new believers to grasp the above. Their love affair with their Lord is plain to see. They are dizzy with joy and oblivious to the call of all other lovers. For them, Jesus Christ is all.

Unfortunately, the passion of the heart tends to become the knowledge of the head after a while, and then “first love” fades away like morning mist.

Love for God was never intended to be temporary. It is freely given at first, but it requires careful cultivation to become permanent.

The Root of Desire (II)

Tobie1 Comment

The Law: God’s Instrument to Reveal the Universal Problem of Desire

As most of us know, the real purpose behind the law is to show us that we are sinners: “For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin” (Romans 3:20).

In the final analysis, the law was not given to be kept but broken, showing us that we are in need of a savior. “Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin”, Paul says (Romans 7:7). In this sense the law was the “schoolmaster” that led us to Christ (Galatians 2:24). Of course this does not reveal any deficiency on the law’s part. The deficiency is with us, as we shall promptly see.

The problem is that this phenomenal truth of Scripture is usually proclaimed up to the point that I have just made, and then left for all kinds of conclusions to be drawn. And so it is assumed that the “knowledge of sin” brought about by the law is a “knowledge of sins”, that is, a revelation of all the wrong deeds that we are prohibited to do: As we struggle to live up to all these moral commandments we eventually become despondent, and so we are led to Christ who will then save us and empower us to live up to God’s holy commands.

This is not the teaching of the Bible, and our understanding of Christianity is sadly lacking if that is the way we understand the law, sin and redemption.

The Man in Romans 7

Two paragraphs earlier I quoted the apostle Paul as saying “Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin.” This statement comes from Romans 7, a chapter that is devoted in its entirety to illustrating that those who are “in the flesh” cannot live up to the law’s righteous requirements.

Paul’s famous statement “For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing” comes from this chapter. Paul does not speak here about his Christian experience, as is oftentimes assumed, but about the experience of a man in the flesh who tries to keep the law but cannot. The result is that he cries out at the end of the chapter “Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?”

It is this cry of despair that ultimately causes Paul to look away from himself and to Jesus Christ for deliverance. And so Romans 8 introduces us to the “life in the Spirit”, a life that transcends the limitations of the law brought about by the weakness of the flesh.

Whilst the key to Romans 7 is “I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh” (verse 18) and “Those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (8:8), the key to Romans 8 is “but you are not in the flesh; you are in the Spirit” (8:9) and “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.”

Wow. What a teaching. These two classic chapters are foundational to any discussion of the deeper Christian life. And so they should be. Yet our understanding of them is sadly lacking if we stop here.

The Meaning of Romans 7:7

Go back to Romans 7:7: “Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin.” Now read the rest of the verse and further: “I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” But sin, seizing an opportunity in the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness.”

Wait a minute… Romans 7 is not about the whole of the law. It is only about one, single commandment: “You shall not covet.” Paul never struggled with adultery, or murder, or lying, or theft. In fact, he wrote to the Philippians that Saul the Pharisee was “faultless” as far as legalistic righteousness was concerned.

So what happened in Romans 7? The answer is simple: Here Paul tells us about the one commandment that he could not keep: The tenth. Covetousness is not a word we use often, and is better translated today as “eagerly desirous”. Romans 7 is the biographical account of a Pharisee who kept the whole of the law, but could not curb “all kinds of covetousness”. And so, he says, he would not have “known sin” if it were not for this commandment.

Whilst the first nine commandments prohibit certain actions, the final commandmend prohibits an intention. As we saw in the previous post, desire is the root and sinful deeds the fruit. The first nine commandments addresses the fruit, the tenth addresses the root. We always break the tenth before we break one of the first nine. You first covet your neighbour’s wife (Tenth command) before committing adultery with her (Seventh command). Likewise, you first covet your neighbour’s possessions (Tenth command) before you steal from your neighbour (Eighth command). In fact, every time you break one of the first nine commandments, you end up breaking two commandments: The one in question, as well as the tenth!

Whilst it is possible to refrain from external sins, it is impossible to refrain from the motive underlying it.

As I have written elsewhere:

The real origin of sin, in other words, can be traced back to the problem of covetousness. In fact, as Jesus pointed out in the Sermon on the Mount, where covetousness is present sin has already been committed (Matt. 5:27-28), and the carrying out of covetous intentions is mere coincidence and formality. In this sense we can say that the command not to covet is really a summary of the Ten Commandments, for where coveting is no longer present sin would no longer follow.

The problem of sin, therefore, is an inward one, and it is the purpose of the tenth commandment to illustrate this. To put it another way: The problem of sin is a spiritual problem, and this can only be pointed out by a spiritual commandment. When the tenth commandment confronted Paul, he acknowledged it as ‘spiritual’, but in failing to keep it he had to acknowledge himself as ‘unspiritual, a slave to sin’ (v. 14). While the first nine commandments revealed to Paul his ability to meet the external demands of the law, the tenth commandment revealed to him his inability to live up to the law’s spiritual requirements. In this sense sin was ‘recognised as sin’ in his life (v. 13).

Paul’s despair, culminating in his ‘wretched man that I am’, came about solely as a result of the one commandment that he found impossible to keep. It is this experience, more than anything else, that revealed to him his need of salvation, and that prepared him for the conviction that something needed to be done about his ‘un-spirituality’.

Romans 7 is the Bible’s greatest exposition of the problem of desire, and its conclusion is clear: The most righteous Pharisee in all of history, who could boast more “in his flesh” than any other (Philippians 3:4), could not overcome desire. And so the great Saul was revealed to be a lawbreaker, for “whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it.” Of course this does not only apply to Saul the Pharisee, but also to you and I.

It would appear that the law is much more “spiritual” than what we have been led to believe. Its aim is not legal conformance to external requirements, but the revelation that we are in need of a Savior who can transform our desirous Adamic nature.

More about that in the next posts.

When Men Create Gods

TobieLeave a comment

Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man… “ Romans 1:22-23

Man is certainly stark mad; he cannot make a maggot, and yet he makes gods by the dozens. – Michel de Montaigne

The term “idol worship” oftentimes conjures up images of scantily dressed jungle dwellers with bones through their noses bowing before some crudely shaped god carved out of wood or stone. And so, frequently, the degree to which people see themselves as “civilised” happens to be the very degree to which they think they are immune to idolatry.

Nothing could be further from the truth. An idol is best defined as a “God substitute”, that is, an image that is derived from a human understanding of God instead of a divine revelation from God. Such an image may indeed be carved out of wood or stone, but mostly it is constructed in the mind.

God created human beings in his image. Idolatry takes place when human beings create a god in their image. Idolatry, therefore, is nothing but a reversal of God’s natural order of creation, as is evident from the verse above. True Christianity is when we resemble God. Idolatry is when he resembles us.

This means that all of us are candidates for idol worship. We merely need to use our human understanding as a basis for our god-ideas to qualify. We then become like the triangles who concluded that they cannot say much about God accept that he’s obviously got three sides.

There is no need for such idolatrous speculation. The lost image of God is restored through Jesus Chris. He is “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation” (Colossians 1:15), and so we can know God through him.

The Root of Desire (I)

TobieLeave a comment

You may have noticed that there is a common theme running through the last few posts on this blog: Desire. That is no coincidence. I have been digging in my archives to find some old Bloemnews columns related to the topic, and there are quite a few. I will post the rest as time allows.

But before I do so, let me explain my interest in this little word.

It is my firm conviction that all of Christianity revolves around it, and that it depicts the single motivator behind all of human conduct, both moral and immoral. As such, it depicts the greatest force known to humanity, a force so strong that it cannot be resisted by human will. And so, if understood correctly, this little word will even solve some of the mystery surrounding determinism and free will. But that’s a story for another day. In the posts to follow I simply wish to introduce you to the central role of “desire” in the Bible.

Desire: The Problem Underlying Our Sins

If you read the New Testament you will notice that the word desire is everywhere. Sometimes it appears to be mentioned along with other sins, such as in Colossians 3:5-8, where we read the following:

Put to death, therefore, whatever in you is earthly: fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed (which is idolatry). On account of these the wrath of God is coming on those who are disobedient. These are the ways you also once followed, when you were living that life. But now you must get rid of all such things—anger, wrath, malice, slander, and abusive language from your mouth.

However, a careful reading of the New Testament reveals that desire is not simply a sin amongst other sins, but the driving force behind all sins. To sin is to give in to desire. Whilst Tom may be addicted to Internet porn, and Dick to alcohol, and Harry to money, the common denominator in their lives is their slavery to desire. They may choose to serve their master in different ways, but it is the same master.

The classic New Testament chapter on sin, Romans 1, provides us with a long list of typical “sins”: Envy, Murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness, gossip, slander and so on (see verses 29-31). But note the origin behind all of these: “God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts… “ (verse24) and “God gave them up to dishonorable passions … “ (verse 26). The “sins” were simply manifestations of the power of “sin”, namely desire, also called “passion” or “lust”. The “giving up” has to do with the way in which desire becomes more and more determined when adhered to. Desire has a profound effect on the human will. The will is determined to desire and cannot resist this determination, but it is free when considering its object of desire. However, once it has chosen it loses that freedom rapidly. But more about that later, as mentioned above.

Along the same lines as the teaching of Romans 1, Paul tells the Ephesians that the “old self” is corrupt through “deceitful desires” (Ephesians 4:22). The only solution to the problem of our Adamic natures, as we know, is crucifixion. And so we read in the letter to the Galatians that “those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” (Galatians 5:24). Similarly, Peter says that to become partakers of the divine nature is to escape from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire.

This is but a small sample of a teaching that runs throughout the entire Bible and that is oftentimes sadly missed by those who preach against sin. It is not our “sins” that constitute the problem, it is our “sin”. Desire is the root of the tree. “Bad deeds” are the fruit. To preach against bad deeds is like trimming your weeds. You may create the impression that your garden is weed free, but such an impression won’t last long.

The fact that sin is preceded by desire is clear from the Scriptures. Eve “saw that the tree was good for fruit, pleasing to the eyes and desirable for gaining wisdom”, before she ate from it. In James 1 we read that every man is tempted when he is dragged away by his own evil desire, and that desire, when conceived, gives birth to sin. We do things for one reason only: Because we want to do them. Our wants is just another word for our desires. Our deeds manifest what is in our hearts. It is as simple as that.

If this is true, then it means that for salvation to be salvation (in the true sense of the word) the problem of desire must be addressed. Believe it or not, this is exactly what Jesus set out to do when he came to dwell amongst us. How exactly we will see in the posts to follow.

Eros: The Love that Seeks a Reward

TobieLeave a comment

A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. John 13:34

The ancient world was no stranger to the idea of love. Love for friends, women and God were the great themes that inspired the early poets and orators. Particularly the Greeks made much of love, and many regard Plato as the all-time greatest expositor of the love theme.

In the midst of this world Jesus Christ comes along and speaks of the ‘new command’ to love. What on earth could he have meant?

We merely need to compare the love of Plato with the love of Christ to find the answer. Plato chose the Greek word Eros for his definition of love. The word implies sensual love. Eros is the enchanting experience of being drawn to a person or object that holds the promise of fulfilling or satisfying you in some way. Eros is always motivated by reward, and as such always egocentric. It is the desire, urge and impulse to actualise and authenticate the self, and its excitement is derived from the people, instruments and gods who can assist with the journey. Eros is equally at home in worlds as far apart as romance, business, politics and religion. Indeed, it can be said that Eros provides the fuel for the rat race.

Christ chose another Greek word for love: Agape. Agape is the love of God, which means it is a love which seeks nothing, because it already has all things. Agape springs forth from a position of utter contentment, and so it seeks no compensation or reward. It is free and unconditional, and seeks to create value instead of demanding it.

Clearly, only those who find all their satisfaction in Christ can love in this way.

How to Conquer Desire

Tobie2 Comments

My feet had almost stumbled, my steps had nearly slipped. For I was envious of the arrogant when I saw the prosperity of the wicked… Whom have I in heaven but you? And there is nothing on earth that I desire besides you. Psalm 73:2-3, 25

In The Hidden Persuaders author and social critic Vance Packard quotes an American advertising executive as saying ‘What makes this country great is the creation of wants and desires, the creation of dissatisfaction with the old and outmoded’. In the same paragraph Packard says that merchandisers of products are being urged to become ‘merchants of discontent’.

That was 1957. Packard’s book, which was a critique of consumer motivational research and manipulative techniques used by advertisers to create desire for products, became a bestseller and proved itself prophetic in many aspects.

More than two millennia earlier Asaph wrote a Psalm in which he tells of his own temptation to become discontented with his lot and desirous of others’ possessions. Dissatisfaction and envy, it seems, are as old as the human race. The wise Solomon once said that ‘all toil and all skill in work come from a man’s envy of his neighbor.’

How does a Christian overcome this universal temptation to break the tenth commandment? One could remove the object of temptation as they did in the Himalayan Kingdom of Bhutan, where the Buddhist authorities banned advertising. If you remove the source of envy, they say, you also remove unhappy and resentful feelings about others’ possessions.

Aspah, however, overcame his temptation in another way. At the end of the Psalm he tells us that he found his satisfaction in God and, as a result, no longer desired the things on earth. This is the Biblical way: Not obliterating desire, but changing the object of desire.

Broken Windows and Mimetic Desire

TobieLeave a comment

You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s. Exodus 20:17

A fascinating study done by Dutch scholar and author Kees Keizer was widely reported on in the media recently. Keizer’s experiments confirmed the basic thesis of the so-called “Broken Windows Theory”, namely that petty crime and lawlessness are encouraged by urban disorder such as graffiti, broken windows and rubbish in the streets.

In one of Keizer’s studies 33 percent of bicycle riders littered an alley with flyers they found on their bicycles handlebars. However, after the alley wall was covered with graffiti, 69 percent of riders littered the alley with the flyers. As Keizer points out: Trespassing, littering and petty theft increase where there is visible evidence that others are ignoring the rules. The incentive to act in the appropriate way is drastically reduced when others behave inappropriately, which is why some have dubbed the theory “Monkey See Monkey Do”.

The tenth commandment is famous for its prohibition of covetousness, but implicit in it is another prohibition: Thou shalt not let your neighbour set the standard for your life. Think about it: Coveting your neighbours’ goods is in essence nothing but a mimicking act, a subtle admission that you do not have a life of your own. It is symptomatic of the herd mentality that characterises the broad road of life and in sharp contrast with the requirements for true discipleship, namely to go against the tide in obedience to Christ.

The narrow road, I once heard a preacher say, is the white line in the middle of a traffic-filled broad road that runs in one direction only. This thin white line, however, runs the other way.

The Violence of Desire

Tobie2 Comments

What causes quarrels and what causes fights among you? Is it not this, that your passions are at war within you? You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. James 4:1

Scholars have long debated why human beings are so predisposed to violence. The history of humanity and the history of war is the same thing, people often say. Why? What lies behind the conflict that has plagued humanity since their expulsion from Eden?

Whilst words like aggression, exploitation and poverty are often used when discussing the roots of violence, some scholars see these factors as part of the problem and not part of the cause. One of them is the French philosopher René Girard. According to Girard much of human behavior is based on imitation and rivalry. Put simply: We think other people are happier than us and conclude this is so because they have things that we do not have. We then want these things and so a process of imitation or “mimicry” is initiated, aptly called “mimetic desire” by Girard (definitely worth Googling). Ultimately, when there are more people than objects of desire the only way to get what we want (and become happy in the process) is to be first in line. That, of course, is when the violence breaks out.

I think Girard is spot-on. I have witnessed a violent fist fight at a clothing sale. I have seen the riot police in downtown Pretoria restraining a huge, mad crowd who were trying to force themselves into a small shop that offered crazy bargains to the first few customers. I have seen these and countless similar displays of Girard’s theory in action.

The answer to all the craziness? According to the rest of the passage in James: Simple, selfless prayer.

Faith in Faith

TobieLeave a comment

A friend… said, “You were healed by faith.” “Oh, no,” I said, “I was healed by Christ.” What is the difference? There is a great difference. There came a time when even faith seemed to come between me and Jesus. I thought I should have to work up the faith, so I laboured to get the faith. At last I thought I had it; that if I put my whole weight upon it, it would hold. I said, when I thought I had got the faith, “Heal me.” I was trusting in myself, in my own heart, in my own faith. I was asking the Lord to do something for me because of something in me, not because of something in Him. A. B. Simpson (Canadian preacher, theologian, author, and founder of The Christian and Missionary Alliance)

Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. Hebrews 11:1

I have yet to meet a Christian who does not agree with the above verse. It is, in fact, the archetypical and classic Biblical definition of faith, and Christians right across the globe regard it as such.

Sadly, not everyone agrees on the meaning of these words. I was recently reminded of this when told of a well meaning Christian who blamed the cause of an elderly person’s sickness on her lack of faith. She did not understand the formula of faith, it seems. If only she could be certain of her unseen healing, if only she could be sure of the healing she hoped for, God would raise her up.

It seems we have to choose between a ‘faith in faith’ and a ‘faith in God’ approach when reading Hebrews 11.

Having faith in faith could be described as having faith in one’s own ability to believe, in the potential unleashed thereby, and in the outcome of your wishes. Faith, according to this thinking, is an impersonal force operating in line with universal principles quite independent of the practitioner’s religious beliefs. For this reason, religious systems as diverse as Shamanism, New Thought metaphysics, various branches of Occultism and certain streams of modern Christianity, as well as much contemporary motivational theory, are characterized by it.

Having faith in God is quite different. According to this view, the ‘unseen’ refers to the sovereign God Himself, and ‘what we hope for’ to an eternal reward, or ‘heavenly country’ (verse16). This is confirmed by the fact that none of the faith-heroes of Hebrews 11 ‘received what had been promised’ whilst on earth (verse 39), and neither shall we (verse 40). The focus is clearly on God’s ability, God’s wishes and God’s kingdom, not ours.

These two types of faith are so far apart that they cannot be reconciled. I think I shall settle for the latter interpretation. How about you?