Those whom God chooses

Father David Epps's picture

God chooses the strangest people to do His work in the earth. In 1 Kings 18:20-39, the story is told of Elijah the Prophet who calls down fire from heaven. It is a dramatic account of one man calling out to God and receiving an awe-inspiring response.

Yet, in James 5:17, the author writes, “Elijah was a man with a nature like ours ...” (NASB). As evidence, just a few verses later in 1 Kings 19:3-4, Elijah is found cowering for his life, fearful of a vengeful queen, and sincerely praying to die. Quite a contrast from the dramatic accounting of Elijah earlier on Mt. Carmel. Then, in verse 9, God visits Elijah who is hiding in a cave and asks, “Elijah, what are you doing here?”

The scriptures present its apostles, prophets, and saints in all of their glory and, at the same time, in all of their humanity — including their failures, flaws, and sins. Perhaps it is so that we can know that God uses people who are, as we say, “messed up.”

Noah, for example, was an obedient servant who labored for decades to build an ark and to save his family and humanity. Yet Noah, following the months-long voyage, is found by his family drunk and naked.

Abraham, the “friend of God” and “father of faith,” was a great man of faith and a powerful warrior. He also tried to give away his wife and lied in order to save his own skin.

Moses was the Great Emancipator of Israel and the “Giver of the Law.” He was also a murderer, a fugitive, was reluctant to obey God, and was given to outbursts of anger.

David the Shepherd-King was a mighty man of war, a “man after God’s own heart,” and the greatest song writer of the Testaments. He was also an adulterer, a schemer, a murderer, a betrayer of loyal friends, and a user of people.

Solomon was the wisest of ancient men and the builder of the Great Temple. He was also a compromiser and a man who had his own share of woman troubles.

In the New Testament, Peter was a man of passionate action, great physical courage, and a “rock.” He could also be cowardly, legalistic, and prone to making promises he couldn’t keep.

Paul, the gifted preacher and missionary, was possibly the most brilliant author and theologian of the New Testament Age. He could also be intolerant of men he deemed “weaker” and ran the danger of discarding men that had God’s call on their lives.

In fact, all of the Apostles, who participated in miracles and lived a sacrificial life, were filled with ambition and were rebuked for their desire for glory, honor, and power.

In a more modern time, John Wesley, the tireless evangelist and gifted preacher and author who brought a great revival to England and to the American Colonies had a terribly miserable marriage.

Martin Luther, the Great Reformer, and a man of outstanding courage, was given to deep bouts of depression and despair.

Charles Spurgeon, a golden-tongued orator and one of the greatest church builders of his time was morbidly obese.

Even the late Mother Teresa, whom many called a “living saint” and lived with and as the poorest of the poor was plagued with doubts and a sense of the absence of God’s presence for much of her last 50 years.

Paul says that the church is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets — all of whom are flawed, fallible, and sinful — every one. Yet it is the “Cornerstone,” Jesus Christ himself, who holds it all together and builds the “living stones,” flawed men and women, into “God’s Holy Temple (see Eph 4:11-13 and 2:20-22).

If God had to use unflawed, infallible, sinless people, then He would have no one to work with at all because, “If we say we have no sin, we lie and the truth is not in us.”

We are fairly comfortable with biblical saints and historic religious figures having major flaws in their character, but we are viciously intolerant and brutally judgmental of those with whom we are contemporaries.

These people we want publicly exposed and removed from service — even while we call for mercy for our own sinful, flawed, fallible selves. Historians tend to be more charitable and objective toward flawed leaders than we seem to be.

Elijah was a man, James says — flawed, fallible, and imperfect. But in God’s hands, such men and women change human history. And God doesn’t even seek our permission or our approval to choose whom he will.

login to post comments | Father David Epps's blog

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by d.smith700 on Thu, 11/08/2007 - 7:20pm.

Although you didn't mention one person who was or is prominent in religion as having been, or is, pious, law abiding, penniless, possessionless, and wholly assured of himself, I do feel sure that there have been more of those type people than those you mentioned as being faulty in so many things!
If it be your contention that those who rant and rave in public or church, and are more obsessed with possessions than being pious, also bring people to religion, and that their faults should be overlooked---then I disagree.
Hypocrisy enters here early in this game.

Submitted by revsally on Sun, 11/11/2007 - 3:13pm.

Hmmm... I don't read him saying, per se, that faults should be overlooked; I read him saying that God can work through us despite our human faults.

Submitted by Nitpickers on Sun, 11/11/2007 - 3:37pm.

past faults are somewhat different than ongoing ones, but it is so obvious as what is important to some so-called religious people and their preachers, that they do more harm than good!
It is downright stupid to want such obvious enhancement, flowing expensive robes and titles, and still claim to practice righteousness.

ctkcec's picture
Submitted by ctkcec on Mon, 11/12/2007 - 11:04am.

"If anyone says that he has no sins then he lies and the truth is not in him." "There is none righteous, no not one."
We are ALL sinners, priest and peon alike. God uses fallible people because that's the only kind of people available. Does God hate sin? You betcha. He works in spite of us, not because of us.


Submitted by Nitpickers on Mon, 11/12/2007 - 4:49pm.

All sinners, yes, as many things as are called sins it would be impossible for a human not to be.
However, the sins of one human can be much worse than the sins of another--depending upon one's attempt to contribute to humanity.
I remember the old fundamentalist churches called everyone sinners except their members! They "churched" those members who they thought sinned! (or didn't tithe).
I can not excuse so called "reverends" however, who use the church to obtain riches and pretension. Riches, being defined as much more than that which is required. I realize there can be any type of religion that is not unlawful, setup by anyone, and if they all think all of them being rich is the thing to do to have salvation, then that is their judgement.
I just don't have to approve of it.
Pick another religion---like capitalism---if you want to get other people's money to be rich.
Now, let me say the clincher: How many rich Buddhist Monks are there? Hindu leaders? Rabbis? and on and on?
Using religion as a social means to comfort each other while violating every religious law know to man is a sin in itself!
One can be religious, as a minor sinner, without acting like a church mouse, however greed, trickery, flamboyant activity, and obvious pride, are not required and turn-off far too many potential members. And, their are words used here that can be defined differently by individuals, but it seems that if each brand of religion can set its own rules (who is right, who is wrong), why can't I? You should not defend the existence of many of our charlatans of today!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.