Part 4 of a continuing series by guest writer Lucas Ward.
 
1 Peter 4:7-10  "The end of all things is at hand; therefore be self-controlled and sober-minded for the sake of your prayers.   Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins.  Show hospitality to one another without grumbling.  As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God's varied grace."
 
            Again, note the urgency.  The end is at hand so we should do these things.  Love is described two ways: as hospitality and as something that covers sins.  Last time we looked at hospitality, so let's look at what it means to cover a multitude of sins.
            First, it is not referring to covering up sins against God.  Everything in the Bible teaches against that.  Paul declares that the impenitent sinner is to be expelled from the church (1 Cor. 5:1-8).  Clearly that is confronting sin, not covering it up.  Jesus' letter to the church in Thyatira in Rev. 2:20 mentions that the only thing He had against that church was that they tolerated a false teacher.  Obviously He had expected them to confront that sinner.  Instead of covering sins up, we are encouraged to make great efforts to bring the sinner to repentance.  Galatians 6:1 tells us to go to the sinner, 2 Thess. 3:15 tells us to admonish the sinner and James 5:19-20 speaks of converting the sinner.  None of this is covering sin.
            So, what does it mean that "love covers a multitude of sins"?  Perhaps we should look at the proverb Peter was quoting:  "Hatred stirs up strifes but love covers all transgressions" (Prov. 10:12).  From this we see that while hatred is looking for ways to cause problems, love is looking to build the relationship; to build trust.  Love overlooks, or covers, all the transgressions of the loved one against the lover.  In other words, the sins covered by love are the offenses or transgressions my brethren perpetrate against me.  If someone is rude to me it may not be sin in the evil-against-God sense, but I have still been offended.  To transgress is to cross a line, which is instructive.  If I love people, then when they cross a line with me, I overlook it. 
            Of course, sometimes the transgression is serious and needs to be addressed.  Jesus gives us the method to do this in Matt. 18:15-17: "And if thy brother sin against thee, go, show him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.  But if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may be established.  And if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the church: and if he refuse to hear the church also, let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican."  These are the rights of the offended brother with the goal always being to regain your brother.  However, notice the seriousness of the consequences.  If your brother is too stubborn to apologize and make things right, he can wind up cut off from the church.  That means there can be eternal consequences for an offense which may not have been evil to begin with.  As the offended party, were you hurt so badly as to chance that outcome, or will you allow your love for your brother to cover the transgressions?   Paul teaches us that in order to keep the peace within the church we ought to be willing to be wronged, to let love cover those wrongs:  "Nay, already it is altogether a defect in you, that ye have lawsuits one with another. Why not rather take wrong? why not rather be defrauded?" (1 Cor. 6:7) 
            Love covering a multitude of sins means forgiveness.  We aren't keeping track of the transgressions to make use of later.  Love "takes no account of evil" (1 Cor. 13:5).  That phrase is actually the exact phrase used by first century Greeks to mean bookkeeping as in business.  We forgive.  We don't store up, but forgiveness must be genuine.  If I forgive, but then refuse to speak to the offender I haven't really forgiven.  If I forgive, but speak ill of or make sure to sit on the opposite side of the building or refuse all requests from, that isn't forgiveness.  In those cases I'm not covering sins but quietly hoarding injustices to myself.  If we can, we should always choose to overlook insults, but if the offense is too bad to cover, then we must use the steps Jesus gives in Matt. 18.  These are the only two options given for Christians by God. Quietly stewing isn't an option. 
             "Love suffers long".  Most offenses we deal with from our brethren are actually quite minor in reality but very annoying personally.  If I love that brother, I put up with it.  Maybe I address it, maybe not, but either way I love my brother.  And remember, love "believes all things and hopes all things."  I'm not going to assume my brother is out to get me, but rather is just innocently annoying. 
             Finally, allow me to let you in on a secret:  we are all annoying.  None of us is perfect in everything.  YOU annoy someone greatly.  God loves us despite our annoying tendencies and teaches us to love in the same way.  One day the annoyances will be gone forever while "love never ends" (1 Cor. 13:8).
 
Lucas Ward

Today's post is by guest writer Doy Moyer.

When I make it about how I feel, what I like or don't like, how inconvenient things are to me, or how I shouldn't have to do x, y, or z because it's difficult, then I have to ask... where is the cross of Christ in a religion ordered after my preferences?

If I balk at submission, frown upon being asked to do something I don't want to, or feel like I am hampered from affirming my rights and asserting myself, then I must also ask ... where is the cross of Jesus in my thinking and in my life?

For whatever I feel, whatever I like or don't like, whatever sacrifices I must make or inconveniences I must suffer, I need to refocus on Jesus as He endured the cross for me, though He despised its shame. It wasn't easy, convenient, or self-affirming for Him as He treated others as more important than Himself. And if He, being God, can do that, who am I to assert myself over others and act as though everyone ought to bow to my preferences?

The cross is not the religion of the pursuit of personal desires and preferences. "Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves" (Phil 2:3).

I have a choice to make today. I can take up the cross and follow Jesus, or I can reject the cross in favor of my own rights and desires. That has always been the choice.
 
Doy Moyer
Doy's website is listed on the Recommended Sites page on the left sidebar.

Today's post is by guest writer Keith Ward.

With nearly 2000 years of the history of God as Father, it is difficult for us to imagine the impact the gospel had on the ancient world.  Gospel means “Good News.”  To us, it is so familiar that we cannot even comprehend why they thought of it as astoundingly good.

My purpose is that we see the gospel the same way those ancient pagans did which will help us see why the gospel of Jesus exploded across the empire.

The pagan view of god was one reasoned by the philosophers such as Plato, Zeno, Aristotle, and others not so well known.  They felt that god must be far removed from this corrupt world and indifferent to it.  As a being of pure reason, how could god care what happened to men or even be aware of it.  In fact, the philosophers held matter, and especially emotion, to be so evil in relation to the purity of reason that god himself could not have created them.  The god was unemotional, implacable, unmovable (sort of like the god of Calvinism's predestination).  An emanation thousands of descents removed from god was the actual creator and then not a participant in creation.  Inasmuch as lesser gods than even he interacted with humans at all, they were capricious at best and vicious on a whim.  The major goal of the pagan sacrificial system was to get god to leave them alone.  A pagan’s life was spent hoping the gods never noticed him or at least did not care enough to lash out at him.

Into this world burst the gospel of a God who cares, A God who is good and sends good things, A God who loves and not only loves, but loved so much that he sent his Son.  Gods coming to be among men was not new in the mythologies, but they came to satisfy their own lusts and to toy with men.  God sent his Son to rescue men and elevate them and give them hope.  When this gospel was ratified by signs from heaven and not just magical wonders, but signs that healed and helped mortals, men flocked to the truth. 

Further, the gospel offered hope: hope now and hope to come.  What could an ordinary man be? He would live and work and die and, outside his city, who would know or care? The gospel offered meaning to life, to engage in cosmic warfare in the heavenlies.  A Christian was a warrior known by name to his Captain who strengthened him and rewarded him in life.  And in place of the dismal realms of the dead found in the mythologies, the gospel offered eternal life.  To be somebody--even kings and presidents are not remembered long--but God knows your name.  Men’s monumental achievements are forgotten in a generation and who cares anyway (except for the history test), but righteousness and holiness is a victory written in the Book of Life before the Father’s throne.

That gospel is still good news to the nobodies, to the downtrodden and forgotten, to the everyday man who will never be the footnote to a footnote in history.  Is that not who heard Jesus gladly?

"“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.  " (John 3:16).

Don't you long to forever be where that love is?
 
Keith Ward

Today's post is by guest writer Matt Bassford, and was originally printed in the emagazine Pressing On edited by Mark Roberts.  Contact me (left sidebar) for subscription information.

For years, I’ve been an advocate of using quality hymns in worship. Not surprisingly, there are plenty of folks who disagree with me, particularly when I get to picking on contemporary praise songs that I don’t think are useful in congregational worship. They’ve even been known to get upset about it. It’s like I called their dog ugly or something.

One of the most common countercharges is that I don’t like the contemporary songs I don’t like because I’m stuck in the past. According to this way of thinking, I believe the only good hymns are the ones written in the 19th century, filled with “Thee” and “Thou”, and possessed of syntax so convoluted that only Yoda could love it. Oh, and the music has to sound like it was born on a pipe organ too.

There are certainly people who believe such things, but I’m not one of them. I think “Abide with Me” is a wonderful hymn, but not every hymn has to sound like “Abide with Me” to be good. Instead, my usual indictment of many modern worship songs is that 1) they lack strong Biblical content, and 2) the music is too complicated for a congregation to learn easily.

Neither one of these things is a necessary attribute of sacred songs written in the past 50 years, though such songs often fail on one or both counts. Rather, they are frequently problems because modern authors and composers generally don’t make good content and congregationality their priorities, particularly the latter.

Chris Tomlin doesn’t write music for me and my modest range. He writes music for Chris Tomlin, Chris Tomlin’s wonderful range, and Chris Tomlin’s backup band of professional musicians. Most brethren, however, have musical gifts much more like mine than like Chris Tomlin’s. Is it any wonder when they struggle with the Chris Tomlin repertoire?

However, when contemporary writers pay attention to content and the musical abilities of ordinary worshipers, they can turn out some excellent work that is eminently suitable for use in our assemblies. By now, most brethren are familiar with “In Christ Alone”, written by Stuart Townend and Keith and Kristin Getty. Together and separately, they’ve written plenty of other hymns that are comparable in quality and usefulness. The same goes for Bob Kauflin and the many writers who have been associated with Sovereign Grace through the years.

Recently, the Australian group CityAlight has attracted my attention (the tagline on their website is “Christian worship music with Biblically rich lyrics”, which is a good sign). Yes, they use drums and guitars, but brethren have been adapting denominational hymns for a-cappella use since the Restoration. We can do it here too.

Consider, for instance, the CityAlight song “Jesus Strong and Kind”, which I recently encountered for the first time. Its lyrics are:

1. Jesus said that if I thirst
I should come to Him;
No one else can satisfy;
I should come to Him.
2. Jesus said if I am weak
I should come to Him;
No one else can be my strength;
I should come to Him.
Chorus:
For the Lord is good and faithful;
He will keep us day and night;
We can always run to Jesus,
Jesus, strong and kind.
3. Jesus said that if I fear
I should come to Him;
No one else can be my shield;
I should come to Him.
(Chorus)
4. Jesus said if I am lost
He will come to me;
And He showed me on that cross
He will come to me.
(Chorus)

That’s good. It doesn’t look like the hymns Isaac Watts wrote, nor yet like the hymns I write. It’s still good. It reveals Biblical study and contemplation, it is focused, and it is deeply meaningful to the believer, especially those who also have spent time in study of the word.

If I may indulge in hymn-geekery for a moment, it’s also good because of its structural strength. Like many modern praise songs, it doesn’t use a strong rhyme scheme and can’t develop structure that way. Instead, it employs repetition, mixed with a few powerful word changes, as its structural element. The change from “thirst” and “satisfy” to “weak” and “strength” makes v. 2 meaningfully different from v. 1, even though most of the words are the same. However, the whole still has unity because of those similarities.

The music is also (or should be, at least) congregationally accessible. The use of verses means that brethren who learn music by rote don’t have to learn as much. The range is limited to a congregation-friendly octave, C to C in the original sheet music, though I’d probably raise it to D or Eb for four-part a-cappella use. I like the tune, too. Churches of Christ should be able to sing this one easily.

When was this fine piece of hymnody written? 2019. All it takes is somebody in the denominational world who cares about the Bible and congregational singing, and they’ll hand us something we can use.

Indeed, this happens frequently. This year, I wrote a workbook called Singing with Understanding for a Bible class I taught. Each lesson of the workbook pitted an unfamiliar hymn I liked against an unfamiliar hymn I didn’t so that the class could analyze the qualities of good and bad hymns. For the sake of fairness, I segregated hymns by time period: old good against old bad, new good against new bad. Of the four categories, I had by far the easiest time filling out the “New Good” category because so many of the best worship songs being written now are unfamiliar to the church.

That’s a shame. Rather than allowing CCM icons and praise teams to drive the additions to our repertoire, we ought instead to be looking for songs that are written for and will benefit the congregation. If we seek, we will find, and our song worship will benefit immeasurably thereby.

Matthew Bassford

Today's post is by guest writer Lucas Ward.

1 Peter 4:7-10  "The end of all things is at hand; therefore be self-controlled and sober-minded for the sake of your prayers.   Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins.  Show hospitality to one another without grumbling.  As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God's varied grace."

 
            The first thing to note about this passage is the reason Peter gives us this instruction and the urgency behind it.  "The end of all things is at hand."  Peter clearly didn't mean "soon to happen" because it has been 2,000 years and the end hasn't happened yet, but for millenia people were looking forward to the coming of the Messiah and now that He has come there is nothing else happening  between us and the end.  The end is the next big event and all we know about it is that it will be a surprise: "like a thief in the night".  Given that, we need to be ready.  Peter tells us three things to do:  be self-controlled, sober minded to prayer, and love one another earnestly.  Peter emphasizes that of these, love is the most important.  "Above all" love one another.  Love is then broken down into two endeavors:  covering a multitude of sins and showing hospitality to one another.  Right now, I want to focus on hospitality.
 
In the 20th and now the 21st centuries we have come to think of hospitality as having people over for dinner or socializing with each other in a variety of ways.  That really has nothing to do with the concept of hospitality current at the time Peter wrote his epistle.  Which is not to say that getting to know one another socially is not important.  One of the first things we learn about the early church is that "day by day . . . breaking bread at home, they took their food with gladness and singleness of heart" (Acts 2:46).  They were in each other's homes; they got to know one another.  Also, how am I supposed to "consider one another to provoke to love and good works" if I don't know my brethren any better than nodding at each other on Sundays?  So socializing is important, but it is not what Peter meant by hospitality.
 
            I looked up hospitality in the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (ISBE).  Hospitality was a duty in the ancient days when travelers had nowhere to stay and hosts often took in strangers and cared for them.  It was considered an honor to be allowed to provide in this way.  According to the ISBE there were four main components to hospitality:
1) The traveler is made the literal master of the house during his stay.
2)  The host performs the most servile offices for the traveler and won't even sit in the presence of the traveler.
3)  The guest is given use of all the host owns, including even the host's wife and daughters.  (This last bit is not Biblical nor condoned in any way by Biblical teaching, but it does show the devotion the ancients had to hospitality.)
4)  The host is duty bound to protect the guest from all dangers that may arise during his stay.
 
            We have Biblical examples of all these precepts. Which is not surprising since hospitality was held in such high regard that Job defined his righteousness in part by his devotion to hospitality (Job 31:32). 
            In Genesis 18:1-8 we have the story of Abraham showing hospitality to three strangers.  He runs to meet them, begs for the right to serve them and, despite promising only a drink of water and a bit of bread, provides cakes made with the finest flour and a young calf cooked up right -- think veal -- as well as milk and butter.  While they are eating, Abraham stands by ready to serve.  He doesn't join them in eating in his own tent, he stands by like a servant. 
            In Judges 19 a Levite is traveling and when he gets to a Benjaminite town, no one will take him in.  He is so desperate and angry that when someone finally speaks to him, he offers to pay his own way for the right to not sleep in the streets, which normally would have been an insult.  The older man speaking to him says, "Peace be unto thee; howsoever let all thy wants lie upon me; only lodge not in the street." (vs. 15-21)  While the town failed in its duties, the old man accomplished hospitality by providing for all the needs of the traveler. 
            Then a truly shameful thing happens (vs. 22-23).  The men of the city try to attack the traveling Levite.  True to his duties as host, the old man steps out and faces the crowd, protecting his guest:  "do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into my house".  If this sounds familiar it is because it is an almost exact replay of what happened in Sodom when Lot tried to protect the men who were staying with him.  In both cases the women-folk of the host were offered to the mob in an effort to protect the guests.  Again, this is not condoned by the Bible, just reported as having happened, but it does also show how seriously these hosts took the duty to protect their guests, using whatever means necessary. 
            So, hospitality as defined for us by those four principles and shown to us by many Biblical examples is what Peter is telling us to do in 1 Peter 4:9.  Not to be good to strangers, though, he says to show hospitality "to one another".  The ASV says "among yourselves".  So we need to adapt these principles to our relationships with our brethren.
1)  The guest becomes master of the house.
            Galatians 5:13 tells us that we should "through love be servants one to another".  So I should be acting as if my brothers are the bosses and I provide their needs.  Phil. 2:4 reminds us not to look out for ourselves but to look out for the needs of our brothers.  If everyone does this, all will be taken care of, and we will be showing hospitality.
2) The host performs the most servile offices for the guest.
            Washing guests' feet was among the most demeaning services rendered and the task was usually given the servant with the least status.  That shows why the Apostles were so shocked when Jesus began washing their feet in John 13.  He then explains, "If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another's feet." (vs 14). In other words, there is nothing my brother might need from me that I am too important to do.  Repeat: THERE IS NOTHING MY BROTHER MIGHT NEED FROM ME THAT I AM TOO IMPORTANT TO DO.
3) The guest is given access to all the host owns.
            1 John 3:16 says we ought to be willing to die for our brethren.  Rom. 8:32 says that God, having already sacrificed His Son for us is willing to give us anything else we might need.  If you put those concepts together then if I am willing to die for my brothers is there anything short of dying that I'd withhold from them?  In a way, even to the point of sharing your spouse.  Ask any Elder's wife or preacher's wife if she doesn't share her husband with the church.  And some husbands, whose wives are the older women who teach the younger (Titus 2) or who are best at weeping with those who weep also share their spouses with the church.  Why do these brothers and sisters put up with the disruptions to their home life?  Because they are showing hospitality through love.
4)  The host is duty bound to protect the guest from all dangers.
            If I am to protect my brethren from dangers and I know there is a lion stalking the earth trying to eat them (1 Pet. 5:8) what should I be protecting them from?  Isn't it my responsibility as a hospitable brother to do what I can to protect my brethren from the temptations Satan attacks us all with?  Certainly I shouldn't be putting stumbling blocks in front of them.  (Matt. 18:7)  So, if I usually have a glass of wine with a meal, but I know my brother is a recovering alcoholic, I shouldn't pour him a glass of wine when he comes over for dinner.  I probably shouldn't even drink my glass in front of him.  And while it is every man's responsibility to control his own thoughts and eyes, surely if my sister loves me she won't dress in such a way as to excite illicit thoughts.  Why do you think it is that the most common adjective used to describe clothes these days is "sexy"?  Because those clothes are designed to provoke certain responses.  I submit that no Christian woman OR man should be wearing clothes that are DESIGNED to be sexy.  Attractive? yes.  Nice looking? yes.  Sexy? no.  Not if I love my brothers and my sisters love me.  Or if there is anything else I might do to put a temptation in front of a brother, I need to be willing to give those things up (1 Cor. 8:13).
 
            Loving through hospitality is serving my brethren, giving my all for my brethren, and protecting my brethren.  Important?
 Matt. 25:40  "And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me." 


Lucas Ward

Today's post is by guest writer Lucas Ward.
 
            This begins a series on "Love of the Brethren."
What does it meant to love my brethren?  What does it entail?  "Do I really hafta?" (said in the best whine possible).  The logical place to start any study of love would be 1 Cor. 13:4-7.  In fact, this is an even better place to begin than some might realize, because this passage is NOT talking about romantic love, but brotherly love.  It is often read at weddings and if a man endeavors to love his wife this way and his wife reciprocates the effort they are guaranteed a long and happy marriage.  The context, though, is Paul telling the brethren at Corinth to stop fighting over who has the best spiritual gifts and learn to work together.  Right in the middle of that he gives us this definition of love:
"Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.  Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things."
            The first thing you should notice is that love, as defined by the Bible, is not an emotion.  Love is not warm, mushy feelings, nor is it wild, passionate desires.  Love, as defined by the inspired Apostle, is action.  Love is what I do, or refrain from doing, for the one I love.  If I say I love someone but I am not patient and kind, but, rather, arrogant and rude toward them, then I don't really love them.  This is not the way the Bible describes love.  According to Paul, I can have warm, mushy feelings towards someone and not love them, while disliking someone else and still loving them.  This is how we can follow Jesus' command to love our enemies (Matt. 5:44).  I don't have to like them -- if they are my enemies and "spitefully use" me, I probably don't like them -- but I can love them by treating them as described above.
            A second thing to notice about this list is how often patience of one kind or another comes up.  "Love is patient" or long-suffering, as older translations say.  It is not irritable but does bear all things and endure all things.  That's four out of fifteen descriptions.  How much of loving someone is just putting up with them?  Honestly, you people married 30 or more years, how much of the reason you are still together is you've learned just to put up with each other?  Sure, you are fond of each other and do nice things for each other and rely on each other, but if you hadn't learned to overlook certain things over the years, you wouldn't still be together, would you?  If that is true of a marriage, wouldn't it also be true of my relationship with my brother in Christ? Be patient.
            Finally, "believes all things, hopes all things" means that I don't automatically assume that everything my brother says or does is mean-spirited and meant to hurt me.  Instead, I believe the opposite:  that my brother would never intentionally hurt me or undermine me.  "He must have misspoken."  "I must have misunderstood his meaning."  We are going to give every possible benefit of the doubt.  If more Christians believed and hoped all things about their brethren, there would be a lot less fighting in the church. 
            Love of and for the brethren is a concept much discussed in the New Testament.  Learning to live the concepts in 1 Cor. 13:4-7 is a good way to begin.
 
Phil._1:9  "And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and all discernment"
 
Lucas Ward
 

Today's post is by guest writer, Keith Ward.

My mother grew up in times both kinder and gentler, but terrible for their poverty—The Great Depression.  Her Dad owned a moderate sized farm. He had been mustard-gassed in WWI, and had a pension, so times were not as tough for her family as they were for many. Gardening was learned before there were so many hybrids and as a child, I can recall her doing what she learned as a girl – saving seeds from the best tasting fruit and vegetables for planting the next spring. Hybrids are bred to be at the pinnacle of a number of desirable traits and though seed from hybrid corn will still be corn, it will revert to its lower quality ancestors. Saving seed from a hybrid is fruitless.
 
Fruit from wild oranges is sour and useless.  But they have hardy, disease resistant roots. The well bred flavorful oranges we have come to expect have roots that will not last more than a few seasons. The solution was to graft the tree from the good orange onto the root from the wild orange and create a tree with the best qualities of both. They did this with olives in New Testament times (Rom 11:16-24).
 
One year when I was “home” to northwest Arkansas, Mom gave me a small orange tree, “because you live in Florida.” I understood that a neighbor had given it to her. I put it in a larger planter, unsure what to do with it as North Florida is not orange country. By the time I tried to do anything, it had rooted through the bottom of the planter and there it still grows by a corner of the shed, partially under a live oak. When the big thorns began to appear, I knew. On a subsequent trip home, I asked and learned that the neighbor had not given Mom a tree, but an orange from a tree that she had cultivated on her enclosed porch. Now, seed from a graft reverts to its roots, not to the trunk and branches that are seen bearing luscious fruit.  My mom reverted to her roots and saved the seed from the best tasting fruit, planted it, and gave it to me.  I continued to let the wild orange grow, an ironic tribute to my Mom.
 
What are your roots?  Too many who claim to follow Jesus try to graft some good into their lives without changing what they are deep down inside. So, out of them grows ugly fruit, sour and useless as Jesus said, “A corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit” and “out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.” (Mt 7:18; Lk 6:45). What passes through your mind when the leader prays, Forgive us our secret sins?” (Psa 19:12). What corruption lies within us that you and I hope that no one ever finds out? 
 
Look to your roots and change them –change who you are. Then you can bear good fruit.
 
“Wherefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature: the old things are passed away; behold, they are become new.” (2 Cor 5:17).
 
Prayer:
Father, help me to see that the things that I do that are wrong are the fruit of a fundamental wrong within me. Open my eyes to discern the hidden fault. Strengthen my faith and my will to change who I have always been into a new person who will bear good fruit for you.
 
Keith Ward