Statement of the Problem. What is meant in Matthew 16:18, “upon this rock I will build my church . . .”?
Proposed Solutions. Throughout history this passage has been “among the most controversial in all of Scripture” (W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, Jr., "The Gospel According to Saint Matthew", The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, eds. J. A. Emerton, C. E. B. Cranfield, and G. N. Stanton (1991), II, 623) and so there are many different views that have been held by scholars on what this passage means. But the three three predominate views on the meaning of this passage are as follows:
A) The view that Christ will build his church on Peter (CP) is the traditional Roman Catholic view being that seeks to prove the total “primacy” of Peter (Steinmueller and Sullivan, Catholic Biblical Encyclopedia – New Testament, pp. 503-504) but this view has also been held by Protestants without a view to Peter being commissioned by Christ as the first pope (John A. Broadus, "The Gospel According to Saint Matthew", An American Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Alvah Hovey (1886), I, 358).
B) The view that Christ will build his church on the confession of Peter (CC) is the traditional Protestant belief that seems to have been largely motivated by an attempt to counter the Catholic usage of this passage in proving the legitimacy of the papacy (Donald A. Hagner, "Matthew 14-28", Word Biblical Commentary, eds. David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker (1995), 33b, 470) but there were some early church fathers who held to this view as well (Broadus, p. 356).
C) The view that Christ will build his church on himself (CJ) has been held by many prominent theologians including, Origen, Augustine, and Luther (W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, Jr., "The Gospel According to Saint Matthew", The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, eds. J. A. Emerton, C. E. B. Cranfield, and G. N. Stanton (1991), II, 627). This view relies heavily on various passages in the Bible that call Christ the rock and the foundation of the church (Dallas Seminary faculty, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, eds. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (1984), p. 57).
Preferred View. Solution A, CP, is the preferred view of this student. This view is believed to be correct based on the following hermeneutical principles:
A) The Principle of Word Study
The arguments used in all the proposed solutions depend heavily on the meanings of two Greek words in this passage. The first word is πετρος which is translated “Peter” and the second word is πετρα which is translated “rock”. Πετρος means a piece of rock or a rock and πετρα means a mass of rock or a rock (James Strong, “Greek Dictionary of the New Testament”, Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, p. 57). Proponents of CC and CJ use the difference of the two words to say that Jesus could not have been referring to Peter when he stated that he would build his church “on this rock” because Peter is a little rock and the rock the church is built on is a big one (John Calvin, “A Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels”, Calvin's Commentaries, IX, 339). Those aligned with CC then draw the conclusion that Jesus must have been referring to the confession that Peter had made about Jesus for, “All who confess the same as Peter are joined to the church – therefore, the church is built on the confession” (Alfred Kuen, I Will Build My Church, p. 111). But there are some problems in making this jump based only on dictionary definitions and ignoring the Biblical usage of the words. To show this we must look at the meaning of another Greek word, λιθος, which translated into English means a “stone” (Strong, p. 45). In 1 Peter 2:8 the words πετρα and λιθος are used interchangeably to refer to Christ and being that λιθος refers to a rock smaller than πετρος (Strong, p. 57) it is not required to conclude that Jesus was not referring to Peter in this passage because of the change in words. Even if it is true that the Greek allows for a strong distinction between πετρα and πετρος as defenders of CC and CJ believe, it must be noted that such a “distinction is almost entirely confined to poetry, the common prose word instead of petros being lithos” (John A. Broadus, "The Gospel According to Saint Matthew", An American Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Alvah Hovey (1886), I, 355).
To take this argument farther it is helpful to look at another Greek word that is used to refer to Peter throughout the New Testament, κηφας which is a rendering of the Aramaic word, כֵּיפָא meaning rock (Frederick William Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the NT and Other Christian Literature, p. 544). And if it is said that this is mere speculation, we must remember that the Apostle John supports that the word πετρος has its root in the Aramaic when he translates the Greek rendering of the Aramaic word (κηφας) into Greek (πετρος) for his readers in John 1:42. So a likely reason for the two different words in this passage is not that Jesus was trying to refer to two different types of rocks but that when the words that Jesus spoke, most likely in Aramaic, were “translated into Greek, the masculine form petros would lend itself as a more likely designation of a person (Simon), and a literary variant, the feminine petra, for an aspect of him that was to be played upon” (Joseph Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel, p. 119). In fact, Christ only directly refers to Simon as “πετρος” once (not including Matthew 16:18 for Jesus addresses himself to Simon first) in all the Gospels (Luke 22:34) while he directly refers to him as Simon eight times (Matt. 16:1, Matt 17:25, Mk. 14:37, Lk. 22:31, Jn. 1:42, Jn. 21:15, 16, 17). From this we can gather that Jesus specifically chose this time in Matthew 16:18 to call Simon “πετρος” for the sake of word-play in relating his nickname to the “πετρα” on which Christ would build his church.
Another aspect of word study that supports CP is that πετρος was not used as a proper name prior to its usage as a name for Simon by Christ (Fitzmyer, p. 119) and so when Christ uses it in this passage to refer to Simon the literal meaning of the word would have been what was on the minds of his hearers. The translation of κηφας into Greek as was cited before (Jn. 1:42) also “supports the view that Kephas is not a proper name, since one does not usually translate proper names.” (O. Cullmann, "Petros [Peter], Kephas [Cephas]", Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Abridged in One Volume, eds. G. Kittel and G. Bromiley (1985), pp. 835-836).
B) The Principle of Literal Interpretation
Even though Jesus was speaking in a figurative sense (the Church is not built on a real literal “rock”) it does not mean that this passage cannot be literally interpreted based on the normal and customary usage of language (Roy B. Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation, p. 147-148). The natural understanding of what Jesus states in this passage brings us to see a clear word-play with the name “πετρος” and the word “πετρα”. There is no reason for Christ to bring up the fact that Simon's nickname is “πετρος” other than Christ's desire to relate Simon's nickname to the word πετρα.
In addition, when Jesus says, “this rock” which rock is he referring to? Proponents of CC and CJ say that the word “this” proves their respective views, but that “the word THIS makes reference to anything else than the immediately preceding petros is very unnatural. In the sentence, 'You are Margaret [meaning pearl] and on this pearl I am about to bestow a favor,' it would be very difficult to interpret 'this pearl' in any other sense than as referring to Margaret.” (William Hendriksen, New Testament commentary : exposition of the Gospel according to Matthew, p. 647). Those who defend CC and CJ have to force their view on the text and “depend on bringing in another 'rock' and ignoring the 'rock' that is already there” (T. W. Manson, The Sayings of Jesus, p. 204). This parallelism between the two words cannot be ignored – the text must be literally interpreted (Cullmann , p. 836). We must not conjure up words that are not there but rather use the words provided in the inspired text in order understand the natural meaning.
Defenders of CJ additionally fail in their interpretation in that they make Christ both the rock and the builder, and this is a very confusing image that goes against the grain of normal literal interpretation (Broadus, p. 356). “As Peter means rock, the natural interpretation is that 'upon this rock' means upon thee. No other explanation would probably at the present day be attempted, but for the fact that the obvious meaning has been abused by Papists to the support of their theory. But we must not allow the abuse of truth to turn us away from its use” (Broadus, p. 355).
C) The Principle of Cross-Reference (Scripture Interprets Scripture)
One of the main reasons defenders of CC and CJ believe that Peter could not be the rock that Christ referred to is because of other scriptures that state that Christ is the rock (1 Pet. 2:8) or that he is the foundation that the church is built on (1 Cor. 3:11) and therefore this verse could only be referring to Peter's confession about Christ or about Christ himself. But this can be countered by the fact that the apostles and the prophets are said to be the foundation of the church in Ephesians 2:20 and in Revelation 21:14 they are the “foundation stones”. Christ is called “a living stone” as are believers in 1 Peter 2:4-5 and therefore we see that it is possible for there to be multiple meanings behind these words in that they do not all refer to one specific person or one specific meaning at all times throughout Scripture. Also in regards the argument that the word “rock” other places in Scripture is normally applied only to God and never to a mere man, it is clear that this name was given to a man by our Lord and so all complaints must be ignored (Broadus, p. 355).
Another verse that is commonly used by commentators of CC bent is 1 Peter 2:5 which refers to all Christians as “living stones” to prove that Peter is not the rock on which the church is built (Calvin, p. 337). But we must notice the difficulty in using this passage to interpret the passage in Matthew because the word “stones” referred to here by Peter is translated from the Greek word λιθος not πετρος. Peter could have easily related all believers to the name that Christ gave to him but he did not. “The apostles are the foundation (Eph. 1:20; Rev. 21:14) because they bear witness to Christ's death and resurrection. Among the apostles Peter is the first and chief eyewitness.” (Cullmann, p. 836). Peter's name is unique throughout Scripture and along with it, the special place given to him by Christ as the rock on which he would build his church.
D) The Principle of Context
One of the arguments against CP is that if this view were true, Peter must have exercised an authoritative role over the church but that in Scripture no such role is seen and even the reverse is true in passages like Acts 2:2ff and Galatians 2:11 (Manson, p. 203). But in reality, this argument only does away with the traditional Roman Catholic view in which Catholics add meaning to the Biblical text, giving Peter sovereign authority over all Christians and supposing this authority to be transmissible to their many popes (Broadus, p. 357). Scripture does not back the Catholic view of Peter's primacy but Scripture does tell us that Peter was of great influence and had a special place among the other apostles and in the church. Peter is always listed first in lists given of the apostles in the New Testament (Matt. 10:2, Lk. 6:14, Acts 1:14), he was the leader of Jesus's disciples and was spokesman for the apostles (Matt. 18:21; 19:27; Mk. 8:27ff; Lk. 12:41; 18:28), he was one of the three closest disciples to Jesus (Mk. 9:5), he was seen as a leader even by those on the outside (Matt. 17:24), he was specifically prayed for by Christ so that his faith would not fail (Lk. 22:32), Christ gives him special care as he restored him into service after having denied Christ and is called to shepherd Christ's sheep (John 21:15-17), he preached the sermon on Pentecost and about three-thousand believed (Acts 2:14ff), Peter took a leading role in the choosing of Matthias to take the place of Judas Iscariot (Acts 1:15-22), and again, mainly through the testimony of Peter two thousand more believed after Peter performed a miracle near the temple (Acts 3-4), he was considered one of the pillars of the early church (Gal 2:9), and the Apostle Paul went to Jerusalem to “become acquainted” with Peter (Gal 1:18).
Many of the CC and CJ persuasion cite two passages after Matthew 16:18 where the disciples asked a question about who would be greatest in the kingdom (Matt. 18:1) and where James and John's mother asked that her two sons might have the seats on the right and left of Christ in his kingdom (Matt. 20:21) as proof that Christ had not given any type of primacy to Peter (John MacArthur Jr., "Matthew 16-23", The MacArthur New Testament Commentary, ed. (1988), 29). But the position that the disciples wanted, was not the position that Christ gave to Peter, for they wanted to lord their position over others as is seen in the response that Christ gives after the request made by James and John's mother (Matt. 20:25). The position that Christ gave to Peter in Matthew 16:18 is not such that he could lord it over others, for that is against Christ's explicit teaching (Matt. 20:25). But rather, Peter is “the first among equals” (Broadus, p. 358). Christ's words about Peter do not mean that Peter was made sovereign over his fellows, but rather that, “because of his significant name, appropriate character, spokemanship on this occasion, and recognized leadership in general” (Broadus, p. 358), the church was built on him by Christ.
E) The Checking Principle
While it is true that throughout history there have been many godly men on all three sides of this issue, checking Biblical scholarly resources confirm that many of these men have held and do hold to the CP solution as does this student. Included in the many who hold to the CP solution are: Broadus (pp. 355-360), France (pp. 254-256), Hendriksen (pp. 645-650), Davies-Allison (pp. 623-634), Manson (pp. 204-205), Cullmann (pp. 835-836), and Hagner (pp. 469-472).
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
What is meant in Matthew 16:18, “upon this rock I will build my church . . .”?
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Impressions on The Confessions
The opening sentence of The Confessions, written around A.D. 397 by Saint Augustine, reads, “Great are you, O Lord, and exceedingly worthy of praise” (p. 39). And so it is that right from the beginning of the book Augustine makes it clear that he is writing, not to boast about his colorful past or about his unlikely conversion, but rather to give praise and honor to God.
The Confessions is not, as most books, written solely for the sake of man. The uniqueness of this work is that it allowed me to listen in on the prayerful confessions of a man as he confessed directly to God. In fact, many times it felt as though Augustine did not care if anyone else ever read his confessions but rather he wrote it to God and to God alone. This allows for an extraordinary opportunity to peer into the soul of this great man of old and his precious relationship with God. Augustine's writing is as the Psalms, honest, deep, and wholly existing to give glory to his God, the one true God and Lord of all. It is because of its uniqueness that I was drawn into its pages as a story unfolded of a man, as of all men, void of good, who was found and sought out by the Source of all good and brought to salvation.
Throughout the book as Augustine reflects on the grace of God in his own life, one cannot help but be entranced with a God-centered view of salvation – truly, “we were weak and unable to find the truth by pure reason” (p. 142). No room is left for man's empty boasting, for if there was once a man who could have discovered the truth on his own, it was Augustine, considered by many to be the greatest thinker of all the early church fathers. But even he, of the world's intellectually elite, failed to find truth on his own apart from God's graceful intervention. What a testimony, that this man, whose thoughts were and still are far above the common man, would confess his own inability and despair in his pursuit of the truth apart from the Source of truth. And what a great warning it is, lest we, of much lesser mental caliber, should try to go our own way and exchange the wisdom of the Creator for the wisdom of man.
While it is true that Augustine does delve into some of the greatest mysteries of the universe such as the origin of evil, the existence of absolute truth, the multiplicity of the will, along with many other troubling questions, he always uses these mysteries as an opportunity to return to exalting and praising his Maker. Seeking answers to mysteries apart from Christ leads one to meet only with darkness. Augustine recalls some of these attempts he and his friends made to discover the answers to the most difficult questions: “we made no attempt to change our ways, because we had no light to see what we should grasp instead, if we were to let go of them” (p. 150). And so a constant thread is seen in this book — even the pursuits of a man able to philosophize and produce hypotheses on the deepest thoughts men have ever had are to be considered foolishness and a worthless thing apart from Christ. As Augustine himself states, “Unhappy is anyone who knows it all but does not know you [Christ], whereas one who knows you is blessed, even if ignorant of all these” (p. 117).
Aside from the more deep discussions on the mysteries that have plagued mankind's thoughts for ages, there are some interesting Catholic traditions that are scattered throughout the book. Even more interesting is that there is virtually no explanation by Augustine of where these traditions came from, only a somewhat disturbing acceptance that they exist and are essential in the life of a believer. Various traditions are introduced such as, the various stages of the catechumenate, rebirth in baptism, and the saving sacraments. I found it interesting, that a man who so profoundly thought and dealt with so many other matters in regards to the truth, did not question the Scriptural validity of some of these traditions but rather accepted them without so much as an inquiry. But these troublesome traditions aside, it is clear that Augustine was not confused as to the church's role in the believer's life – for not once does he ever claim that he was saved by the church or by good works, but rightly acclaims salvation wholly to the Lord. Shortly after relating the time of his conversion, Augustine states, “He who begot me is also he who keeps me safe; you yourself are all the good I have, you are almighty and you are with me before ever I am with you” (p. 241).
Of all the lessons one could glean from such a precious work this, for me no lesson was more apparent than that of praising God in and through all things. As I read Augustine’s confession to God, I could not ignore how he constantly breaks out in praise, giving glory to God for his gracious works — for bringing sinful men to salvation, orchestrating life's circumstances according to His good pleasure, foiling the best intentions of man, and bringing them to their knees as they come to behold His glory. Augustine was so aware of his own depravity that at every opportunity he burst out, declaring the holiness of God, giving Him the praise and honor due His name for bringing Augustine to see the truth. How often in my own life, though I too see my own weakness and my own inability, how often I fail to declare the holy name of my Lord and Savior and give Him praise for all that He has brought about. What praises I should offer to God that I, such a worm as I, am saved from sin and death, that God cared to orchestrate history so that I would come to see Him as the one true God, and that He would grant me the privilege to call Him my God, the freedom to worship and serve Him, and partake in the joy that He so freely gives. How can His praise not constantly be on my lips? My only limitation is that I do not know Him as I ought and am still far from Him, though He has opened His arms wide to embrace me. May God grant that I too would praise Him as Augustine, that I too would tell the world of my own depravity so the world might turn to God and glorify His holy name.
What a glorious privilege it is to look through the windows of people's lives and be able to see all that God has accomplished in them, to see the many amazing wonders that He has done in the midst of His people, that we might give Him glory and grow closer in our love and affections towards Him. The Confessions is one such window we can look through and see the wondrous grace of God in the life of one of His humble servants.
*All quotations taken from: Augustine, “The Confessions”, THE WORKS OF SAINT AUGUSTINE A Translation for the 21st Century, ed. J. Rotelle (1997), Volume I.*
* This "book review" was done for my Historical Theology class with Dr. Vlach webmaster of http://www.theologicalstudies.org *
Thursday, July 06, 2006
The Manifestation of Christ
John 14:21-24
Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him."
Judas (not Iscariot) said to him, "Lord, how is it that you will manifest yourself to us, and not to the world?"
Jesus answered him, "If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.
Whoever does not love me does not keep my words. And the word that you hear is not mine but the Father's who sent me.
I want us to take some time and focus on this manifestation that is promised to all those who have and keep Jesus’ Word – the manifestation that is given only to those who love Christ and not to the world.
There are two simple questions:
What does it mean that Christ will manifest Himself to those that love Him?
What must we do in order for Christ to manifest Himself to us?
Let’s look at the first one:
What does it mean that Christ will manifest Himself to those that love Him?
This is a manifestation of Christ – a revealing of Christ that is special and given only to those who are Christ’s – not to the world – we see that in the question that Judas poses, it is not to the world – it is only to the ones who love Christ, and keep His commandments and be in God’s loving favor and to whom Christ will manifest Himself.
But what type of manifestation is it? Does it mean that Jesus will come in person, in the flesh and visit these chosen ones?
It is not that Christ will come in person – for He no longer lives among us. He no longer says what He said to Doubting Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe." (John 20:27)
For in that same passage it is clear that there are those who will not have the benefit of sight or touch and we are blessed for it, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." (John 20:29). Beyond that, we know that while Jesus was on the earth, many saw Him who did not love Him – in fact the ones who killed Him saw Him – therefore this manifestation that Jesus is talking about is not one of Him coming in the flesh, face to face – but something else.
If not in the flesh – what of visions and dreams? It is clear that this manifestation is not one of mere dreams or visions. For we know that even those who do not love God at times receive visions and dreams from God. Laban was warned by God in a dream not to say anything good or bad to his nephew Jacob (Gen. 3:24) – and yet there is no indication that He even was trying to follow God, quite the opposite – it seems that he was consumed by greed and did everything he could to gain the upper-hand. Another, even more clear example is that of Balaam. God came and spoke with Balaam (Num. 22:9), and yet we know he was, “a man who loved gain from wrongdoing” (2 Pet. 2:15) and, “one who practiced divination” (Jos. 13:22). Visions and dreams, while, extraordinary are not exclusive to believers – but when God wills, are given to the unbeliever. Therefore visions and dreams cannot be the manifestation spoken of by Jesus in this passage, for this manifestation is exclusive – given only to those who love Christ.
I believe this manifestation is one that is given in the heart of those who love Christ. For seeing Jesus with your physical eyes, or having a dream, vision or hearing the voice of God do not necessarily change you – for many saw Jesus, many have had dreams, many have heard the voice of God – and yet they still remain in darkness – many are in hell who have had those privileges.
But there is a manifestation of Christ that is special, and given only to those who believe.
I read of a man who lived in the late 1800’s named Mr. Tennant. One evening he was about to go to a small church to preach but thought he would take a short walk in the woods before he headed over. As he walked along in the woods he felt the overwhelming power of the presence of Christ, so much so that he knelt down. The time came for him to preach at the church and when he didn’t show up some of the church members in the small town went looking for him. They did not find him until a few hours later, and when they did find him – he looked like a man who had been with Jesus – his face shining with joy. Mr. Tennant said, even to his dying day, that he should never forget that communion he had with Christ – for though he could not see Christ, Christ was there, in fellowship with him, heart to heart in such a sweet way.
What a wonderful thing fellowship with Christ is in our hearts when we love Him. And you must know something of it, if you do in fact love Him.
It is a manifestation as the one Job experienced – Though there is no indication that Job saw God with his physical eyes – he says in Job 42
Job 42:5
"I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear; But now my eye sees You;
This “sight” is unexplainable to the unregenerate – to those who are yet dead in their sins. Trying to explain it is as trying to explain what a rainbow looks like to a blind man. And yet, all who have seen and experienced the rainbow themselves can easily talk to each other and relate to one another for they have experienced the same manifestation.
2 Corinthians 4:6
For God, who said, "Light shall shine out of darkness," is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.
In what other ways is this manifestation unique and separate from other manifestations? It is unique in that it since it is a manifestation to the heart it changes the one who has received it. It produces humility. If someone says, “I have had such high communion with God – I am a great man!” that person has never had any communion with God at all. For God does not come close to the proud, He does not reveal Himself to them,
Psalms 138:6
“Though the LORD is exalted, He takes note of the humble; but He knows the haughty [or the proud] from afar.”
It produce holiness in the life of the recipient. A person who is not holy has never taken part in this special manifestation. Some people talk a lot about their experiences and their enlightenment – but do not believe them unless their lives mirror what they say. God is not mocked – He will not show favor to the wicked – He will not respect and evil doer.
This manifestation causes us to see the surpassing beauty and glory of Christ – causing us to lay aside all else, so as to better take in the beauty of Christ – it causes us to lay down all hindrances all sins that entangle, so that we can just behold Him.
So we see that this manifestation is special – given only to those who love Christ and that it is a inward manifestation – heart to heart.
But what must we do in order for Christ to manifest Himself to us?
The answer is quite simple – if you desire Christ to manifest Himself to you, you must love Him.
Christ asked Peter, after being raised from the dead, “Do you love me”.
What is your answer? Do you love Christ?
If you do not, than these verses and the privileges that are contained in them are not for you.
Do you love Christ? Do not just gloss over this question – but seek to answer honestly in your heart before the Lord. It is not enough to say you Love Christ – for some make their profession loudly, and yet they are hypocrites for their conduct tells everyone that in fact they are haters of Christ. Do you love Jesus with your whole heart?
If there is any question in your mind – do not pass over this question – but seek until you have a definite answer.
But remember this – if you do love Him, he loved you first.
John 17:6
"I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word.
All those who belong to Christ keep God’s Word – all who belong to Christ love Him.
But He loved you first for He knew you were His before even the world was created. You were created to be His, you were created for Him.
Before time began you were loved by him. Even though you are a sinner, though you were an enemy and a worker of evil – He loved and still loves you. And think of Christ – who stripped Himself of all His glory, descended from a throne of infinite glory to a manger made to feed animals – will you not love Him who became flesh for you? He lived a life of poverty – no where to lay His head, a life of rejection, for even His own countrymen did not receive Him – a life of pain, for He bore all ours – a life of dishonor, for the world hated Him.
Think of the tears He cried in the garden – will you not love Him whose tears fell to the ground like blood, and who groaned, pleading with God in His final hour? What of the blood that flowed as they beat Him and whipped Him – tearing and cutting into His flesh. What of the jeering of the crowds as they mocked Him while He hung on the cross. Do you see Him suffer? Do you see Him hanging on the cross – and all this for you?
Do you love Him? He loved you first.
Beyond his death – Now He is risen, and He is in heaven with the Father – and there what is He doing? He pleads your case before the throne, He is preparing a place there in heaven for you – and He will come again a second time, to take you with Him.
Think on all these things and love Him! Love Him with all that you are.
Do you love Christ?
Do you know and keep His Word? That really is the same question – for all who love Him keep His Word and all who keep His Word love Him.
Do you treasure His Word? Are His words worth more than gold? Do you treasure His Word above all earthly things?
Do you try and know His Word – do you diligently study – searching the Scriptures – is His Word your daily bread? Do you live by it?
Is your life different from the world? Are you like Christ? Do you live as He lived?
Do you seek to keep His word in your hearts?
To keep means to obey. Obedience flows from the heart. In every Christian there is an passionate, and steady longing to do what God wants – to walk as He tells us to walk in His Word. Some might have this longing stronger than others, but it is there!
Think of Peter – He denied Christ – and not just denied Him once, but three times. Not with a sword to his throat, but to the question of a servant girl!
Christ is risen, and He meets the disciples on the beach – let’s read it together: John 21:1
John 21:1-17
After this Jesus revealed himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias, and he revealed himself in this way.
Simon Peter, Thomas (called the Twin), Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two others of his disciples were together.
Simon Peter said to them, "I am going fishing." They said to him, "We will go with you." They went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing.
Just as day was breaking, Jesus stood on the shore; yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus.
Jesus said to them, "Children, do you have any fish?" They answered him, "No."
He said to them, "Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some." So they cast it, and now they were not able to haul it in, because of the quantity of fish.
That disciple whom Jesus loved therefore said to Peter, "It is the Lord!" When Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his outer garment, for he was stripped for work, and threw himself into the sea.
The other disciples came in the boat, dragging the net full of fish, for they were not far from the land, but about a hundred yards off.
When they got out on land, they saw a charcoal fire in place, with fish laid out on it, and bread.
Jesus said to them, "Bring some of the fish that you have just caught."
So Simon Peter went aboard and hauled the net ashore, full of large fish, 153 of them. And although there were so many, the net was not torn.
Jesus said to them, "Come and have breakfast." Now none of the disciples dared ask him, "Who are you?" They knew it was the Lord.
Jesus came and took the bread and gave it to them, and so with the fish.
This was now the third time that Jesus was revealed to the disciples after he was raised from the dead.
When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs."
He said to him a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep."
He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep.
Jesus asks Peter three times if he loves Him. Three times Peter answers, but the last time there is something different about his plea.
Each time before Peter said, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.”
But the third time – he says, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.”
When I read some of the passages in the Psalms that say things like, “Search me O God and know my heart…see if there be any grievous way in me…test my heart and my mind…I walk in faithfulness” I quiver – Do I really want God to look into my heart? There is so much evil there! I am so far from perfect!
But listen to what Peter says – listen to how he pleads with Christ
“Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.”
It is as if Peter is saying, “I know my denial of you contradicts me love; my fellow-disciples have good reason to wonder if I really do love you. But you know my heart, you know that I do love you and that I desire to do what you command with all of my heart!”
He pleads before Christ – “Look into my heart, though there is sin there, though I am imperfect, look to my heart, for deep down my whole being groans within me with longing to do Your will”
When we love Christ – there is sorrow when we disobey. When we know that we have grieved Christ – we can not help but mourn as Peter did. But following that sorrow, there will be repentance and earnest pleading with God for the grace to enable us to do what He has asked us to do. There will be a pleading from the bottom of our heart – “Lord! You know that I love you!”
Do you desire for Christ to show Himself to you? Then love Him – do what He has commanded – and by the Grace of God, though you fail, He will manifest Himself to you.
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Freedom
Danny made an interesting comment to me in a discussion that we were having the other day, on the nature of the New Covenant. I said, "The conflict of the judaizers against Paul in the Book of Acts illustrates that the break with the Old Law is also a break with culturally-based law, and the Law of the Spirit is not a replacement, but a new kind of law that is grace-based and less specific." Although I didn't say it that concisely. He disagreed, saying that the commands in the New Testament are a replacement or update of the Old Law, for instance those regarding the place of women in the church (feel free to post your arguments, Danny ... obviously I'm not going to be able to do them justice).
I thought I might illustrate my idea/theory with a brief look at Galatians Ch. 5 (NASB). Actually, I was thinking of supporting my argument with v.1 and then I said to myself, "Um, maybe I should actually read the whole passage to try and make sure it really says what I think it's saying, rather than just using it to support my theory." I'm posting my process of study here.
1 It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.
2 Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. 3 And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law.
Ok, what is the freedom he's talking about? Freedom from circumcision first of all, and the Law by extension. What does he mean when he says they don't have to keep the law? He probably talks about it later -- I don't imagine that he means, "Hey, go ahead and start stealing and killing and etc."
4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness.
So, now maybe he's talking about justification, putting your hope of salvation in the law? Here he warns of the danger of trusting the Law rather than grace, but we've still got to wonder what the freedom he's talking about is. Maybe, freedom from obligation to the Law? But which parts? Just circumcision is probably not what he's talking about.
6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love.
7 You were running well; who hindered you from obeying the truth?
8 This persuasion did not come from Him who calls you.
Ok, so now he says "faith working through love" is the means of salvation. But it's not just that following the Law is unnecessary: he says that they are being "hindered from obeying the truth".
9 A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough.
10 I have confidence in you in the Lord that you will adopt no other view; but the one who is disturbing you will bear his judgment, whoever he is.
11 But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? Then the stumbling block of the cross has been abolished.
What is the stumbling block of the cross? It is that salvation is received not through following the law, but by grace. He's being persecuted because he encourages Gentiles to seek Christ without adopting the Jewish Law.
12 I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate themselves.
Read this one in NIV for a good laugh. This is coming from the same guy who admonishes against "coarse joking" in Ephesians. For everything there is a season, eh?
13 For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.
14 For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."
Interesting that he doesn't mention the precursor "Love God" component. This may be the part where we can really start answering my question, "Is it a replacement law, or a new kind of law?" If, following on the heels of a declamation of putting your trust in following the letter of the law, he comments "The whole law is fullfiled in this" ... perhaps he might be pointing to a new principle that replaces the old rules, because it transcends them? Not as a libertinous opportunity to do all sorts of bad things ("don't turn to opportunity for the flesh"). But maybe something like the speed limit in Montana? There's no speed limit, they just expect you to drive no faster than is safe. :)
15 But if you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another.
Hm. Indeed.
16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.
17 For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please.
18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law.
Well, that is something interesting. "If you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law." That, if anything, justifies my "Spirit of the Law" = "Law of the Spirit" idea. This is not mere knowledge of the correct set of beliefs and practices. This is an injunction to "walk by the Spirit". Of course, I'm sure all of us can call up images of some adulterous husband saying, "Well it felt right to have an affair. I'm sure God wanted me to." Etc. I guess we can only deduce they are mistaken ... ?
19 Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality,
20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions,
21 envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Yikes ... try to find anyone who doesn't show up in that list somewhere. I know that it's orthodox to take passages like this in the context of other "grace-oriented" passages, but I still always feel a little uncomfortable reading them.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.
How often can mere study produce these? The fruit of the Spirit requires the Spirit.
24 Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.
25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.
Now, that's another interesting thing. If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. A command and a separation of the two concepts. Basically saying that we all live by the Spirit (if we are saved, I guess), but we need to take it a step further and walk by the Spirit. Interesting.
26 Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another.
Haha! I've got to watch out for that one too.
So did the passage support my idea? I think so, but you're welcome to disagree. Later on I may delve more into what I think my idea actually consists of ... that may not even be entirely clear. I came up with it while studying the Jerusalem Council in Acts, and also passages about eating meat sacrificed to idols, etc. More to follow.
Monday, June 26, 2006
Sola Scriptura Gloria
Let me tell you first of all the position I am arguing against. It goes like this: "The Reformation was in essence a Restoration. It put the church back at the place it had been at the onset of the middle ages, and restored it to its former near-perfect balance." On the other hand, there is this: "The Reformation was a Revolution. It took many ideas which had never been mainstream and tried to define the church by them." I believe the truth is that it was both, and therefore open to conjecture as to which elements of the Reformation are essential and which are not. I think that an objective (of course, totally impossible for us) study of history and philosophy would bear out that claim.
Additionally, take for instance the Eucharist. Although Luther supported it, the Reformation in general shot it down. I don't believe in the Eucharist, but the truth is that it was a quite early and generally accepted doctrine. Early practice/doctrine does not equate to correct practice/doctrine. And, unless we are to throw out the Reformation entirely, scholarly and ecclesiastical consensus does not add up to correct doctrine, either. Bear in mind that the consensus of the church that the Reformation challenged on many doctrinal issues was also the same that established our current canon of scripture.
Ok, switching horses midstream ...
The Reformation had a lot of benefits, indeed. Making scripture the "constitution" against which "laws" are judged, and by which "judges" are limited is definitely a good idea. But, like many mostly good principles, it contains in itself the seed of a bad principle, which flowers when the good is taken to excess.
In the case of "Sola Scriptura", this takes place when scripture is elevated to godhood.
"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life."The scriptures have an important place in the life of the Christian. They are useful, but they are a means and not and end. They are a pointer to Christ. According to every even remotely Orthodox Christian sect, there are three persons in the godhead, but they're not The Father, The Son, and the Holy Scripture.
John 5:39-40
There is a great temptation that results from Sola Scriptura in our current Protestant milieu. It is to slip into a religion that wears the mask of faith, but is in truth an intellectual and anti-supernatural worship of the words of the Bible, rather than its Author. When Bible reading is given precedence over prayer, when rote memorization is given precedence over the godly action that should result, when the Holy Spirit is transformed from our comforter and leader, indwelling us, into a phantom that is only accessible through intellectual pursuit, then you know you've passed beyond a healthy respect for God's word into the realm of idolatry.
Look, indeed, at Jesus' life and example. Though he was quite familiar with the Scriptures by the time he began His ministry (whether this was through study or direct knowledge as the Son of God is anybody's guess) there is virtually no record of Him taking time to study the scriptures in the gospels. He takes the opportunity once of reading from the scriptures in the synagogue, "In your hearing this prophecy is fulfilled, etc." but most instances of spiritual discipline recorded about Him are of prayer rather than study and scholarly explication.
The same mindset that led the Pharisees to take "bind these Words on your hand and your head" far too literally is just as dangerous today. The devil is not picky, he will take any opportunity you give him to undermine the fruit God has prepared for you.
Read More......
Sunday, June 25, 2006
"Do not let your heart be troubled"
John 14:1-11
"Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me.
"In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.
"If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.
"And you know the way where I am going."
Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?"
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
"If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him."
Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us."
Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, `Show us the Father'?
"Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works.
"Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe because of the works themselves.
What must have been going through the minds of the disciples on this night – this last supper with the Master. It all began with a call, “Follow me”. They had followed – they had left everything behind to follow this man – they had seen the extraordinary signs and wonders – they had seen Jesus feed thousands, heal every sickness and disease, cast out demons, walk on water, calm a raging sea – and even raise the dead to life. They started their journey with someone they thought was a great man, a great teacher – and now, on this night – they knew – they believed with all their heart, that this man, this great teacher, this prophet, was the Son of God, God in flesh - the Christ – the Messiah – the Anointed One that had been promised so long ago.
But it was different than they had expected it. They had originally thought that Jesus would conquer the Romans and free their nation from bondage and that they would reign with Him in a great kingdom after having put down all their foes. But it was different – death was in the air. Jesus had mentioned on several occasions that He would suffer and be killed, but they always pushed it to the back of their minds – I mean, Jesus couldn’t die – could He? He’s the Messiah! He’s God!
But this night – it was becoming clear – all the other times that Jesus had mentioned His soon coming death were coming to a point. Worse than that, one of their group – one of the closest followers – one of His friends will betray Him – will give Him over to the enemy to be killed.
Jesus was going to be leaving them – was this it? Was this the end? Was Jesus truly God in flesh? Was He truly the Messiah that they had all been waiting for?
Peter raises his voice:
John 13:36-38
"Lord, where are You going?" Jesus answered, "Where I go, you cannot follow Me now; but you will follow later."
Peter said to Him, "Lord, why can I not follow You right now? I will lay down my life for You."
Jesus answered, "Will you lay down your life for Me? Truly, truly, I say to you, a rooster will not crow until you deny Me three times.
What do you think Peter felt when these Words left the lips of the Master? He was willing to die for Jesus – and Jesus replies, Really? Would you die for me? Actually, you will cower like a little girl and deny me, not once, not twice, but three times – three times you will say that you do not even know me.
The impact these words must have had on Peter – the crushing feeling that must have overtaken him! The aching that he must have felt in his heart! The sorrow, and the shame…
But now, listen to the Words of Jesus, “Do not let your heart be troubled”
Life is filled with troubles – filled with things that we can worry about – things that scare us, things that depress us, things that make us want to cry, pain that causes us to want to be alone.
What is your trouble this morning? Is something outside of your control – is there something that you’re just not sure how to deal with?
“Do not let your heart be troubled”
There is but one solution to a troubled heart. And Jesus tells that way in this passage. There is only one way to overcome a heart wrought with the pain and disappointment of this life.
The world whispers in our ear that it has the answer – just believe in yourself, they say – you can do it! You don’t need anyone else, you have the power within yourself to overcome any problem – don’t put yourself down – you are the solution! You have the power!
But the world has been deceived by the lord of lies – their solution is no solution at all but leads only to death.
As it says in Jeremiah 17:5
Thus says the LORD: "Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength, whose heart turns away from the LORD.
But the words of Jesus, the Words of Truth give us the true solution to a troubled heart.
“Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me.”
Belief in God and in His Son Jesus Christ is the one and only solution to a troubled heart. Are you troubled this morning? Believe in God, believe also in Jesus.
Psalms 42:11
Why are you cast down [Why are you depressed], O my soul, and why are you in turmoil within me [Why are you upset?]? Hope in God; for I shall again praise him, my salvation and my God [For I will again give thanks to my God for his saving intervention].
Jesus then gave us three reasons why we should be comforted – three reasons why we should hope in God and give thanks to Him for his saving intervention in our lives.
1. He was going to His Father’s house before them
2. He was going there to prepare a place for them
3. He would come back in person to bring them to heaven
1. He was going to His Father’s house before them
Even though they would see Him beaten, whipped, mocked, bleeding, hung on a cross – even though they would see Him die and laid in a tomb – believe! For after all of this He was going to His Father’s house. To a place where He would be honored above all – where His power is above all – never to suffer and die again – to be clothed in glory with the Father. He says later in chapter 14, “If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.”
Be not troubled – for Jesus is King! He reigns in heaven – there is nothing outside of His control! He is above all things – nothing can put a stop to His plans.
“Do not let your heart be troubled”
2. He was going there to prepare a place for them
Not only is Jesus in heaven – but He is there preparing a place for all those who believe in Him – for all His chosen people. If you are afraid that there is no place for you – believe in Him and be troubled no more!
Jesus went to heaven as the forerunner – as the first of many to follow. He made the way clear – He took out all obstacles – not only is the way prepared, but the places for us in heaven – when we arrive, when we die, there is a place for us – specifically for me, just for you! Think of the care of Christ – that He would prepare a mansion just for you, His child. It is enough that we even get to be in the place where He is, but that He is building a mansion for us! He is saving a special place for us! That is beyond comprehension!
He is getting everything ready for you!
“Do not let your heart be troubled”
3. He would come back in person to bring them to heaven
“I will come again” If nothing else – this should wisp all of the troubles in our hearts away. In the end, He will come and personally take us up. Can you even imagine. He will not send his angels, Jesus – the Son of God – God Himself will come and gather us up and take us to be with Him.
Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.
(1 Corinthians 15:51-52)
Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war.
His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself.
He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God.
And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses.
From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty.
On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.
(Revelation 19:11-16)
This is our King – This is our God – This is our Savior – and He will come for us – NOTHING can get in His way, though the whole world go against Him, He will prevail. He will come – He will come for His own.
"O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?" (1 Corinthians 15:55)
“Do not let your heart be troubled”
There is never a reason for us to be troubled in our heart – if you are – examine yourself – who are you looking to – where is your hope? Seek to believe in God and in Christ – with your whole being – then, as you believe, your heart will be filled with peace because you know what the future holds – for God has spoken and you believe – even though the troubles remain, you will stand un-buffered, your heart will be filled with praise, for you are standing on the Rock – and regardless of how big a storm you encounter in this life – you will be secure – the Rock will save you and secure you.
Our Lord is coming – “Do not let your heart be troubled” – So come Lord Jesus! Amen.
Monday, June 19, 2006
The 11th Commandment
John 13:34-35
(34) A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another.
(35) By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."
In the early days of Christianity, a deadly sickness broke out in the Egyptian city of
But when a Christian became sick, the other Christians in the city would come and visit and care for their brother or sister who was sick. No Christian died without a fellow Christian being by their side caring for them. Even though the Christians knew that because they were in contact with those who were sick, that they too would most likely become sick, they continued to care for their sick and dying. So well did the Christians in Alexandria care for each other that outside the city were all the dead were being thrown, not one dead Christian could be found, for their fellow Christians took care of them even in their death, burying them, exposing themselves to the disease, rather than just throwing them in with the piles of other human corpses.
All the non-Christians in the city who had seen what these “Christians” were doing started asking each other – “What is the meaning of this?”
The answer went throughout all of
“By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
The love that the Christians in
This is the clearest way to know whether you are a disciple of Christ – if you love as He loved. Are you in Christ this morning? Do you love your Christian brothers and sisters as Christ loved you? Think on that as we look more closely at this new command together.
Jesus says, that this is a new commandment – that it is not the same as what had been given in the law before He came. But is it really all that different?
We know the ten commandments:
I am the Lord thy God and you shall not have other gods besides me.
You shall not make for yourself any graven images.
You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Honor your Father and Mother.
You shall not murder.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
You shall not covet.
And the greatest commandment, what is that?
And he said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” (Matthew 22:37)
And the second?
“You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matthew 22:39)
But, on the night Jesus has His last supper with the disciples, as a parents on their death bead gives their last words to their children, He gives them this new commandment – a commandment that is different in at least three ways from the Old Testament law.
It is different in degree, different in motive, and different in example.
It is different in degree – we are to love our neighbors as ourselves, but we are to love our brothers and sisters in Christ as Christ loved us – which is way more than any of us love ourselves. The love of Christ surpasses all knowledge – it is a love that is so great that we cannot even comprehend it. It is a love that suffers everything for the sake of the one it loves. It is a love that dies, that the beloved might live.
“Greater love has no one than this, that someone lays down his life for his friends.” (John 15:13)
It is different in motive – the command in the Old Testament is backed by the statement, “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the
It is different in example – the commandment in the Old Testament told us to look at how we love ourselves as the example of how we should love our neighbor, but this new command tells us to look Christ as the example of how to love our brothers and sisters.
There is no longer any excuse, for the example of Christ is clear – there is no room for, “But so and so is so hard to love!” or, “They don’t love me back, so why should I continue to love them?”.
Romans 5:6-10
For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.
For one will scarcely die for a righteous person--though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die--
but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.
For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.
Before I close I want to show you a simple application from Scripture. It happened the same night that Jesus gave this command, but is not mentioned in the Gospel of John. Turn with me to Matthew 26 verses 21 and 22.
Matthew 26:21-22
And as they were eating, he said, "Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me."
And they were very sorrowful and began to say to him one after another, "Is it I, Lord?"
They thought they were all brothers in that room that night. No one pointed a finger at anyone, but automatically assumed that it must be themselves because they believed with all their heart that one of the other twelve would never do such a thing.
No one suggested, “Ah, it must be Peter, he’s always been hot headed and not thinking about what he does before he does it.” Or “It must be Judas, he’s always been a little sneaky with the money bag, in fact, I think I saw him stealing money out of it the other day!”
No, there was none of that.
There was only, “It couldn’t be me - could it? Could it be? Surely it is not me - Lord, is it?”
They expected evil more from themselves than from others. They believed the word of Christ, that one of them would betray Him, and so, one by one, they asked, “Lord, is it I?”
Then Judas, trying to keep up his deception says almost exactly the same thing, but exchanges the word “Lord” for Rabbi or Teacher – giving himself away as the betrayer and hypocrite –for the word “Lord” he could not bear to say can only be said in truth of Christ Jesus by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:3).
But even after all this – the disciples still suspected no one. Even after Jesus ordered Judas “to do what he was going to do quickly” they did not know.
Being with Jesus they had learned to love one another. And soon the whole world would “recognize that they had been with Jesus”.
So where are you this morning? How’s your love? Do you love your brothers and sisters as Christ loved you?
This is the love that the Spirit of Christ grants all those who believe, to those who are His own:
1 Corinthians 13:4-8
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.
Love never ends.
At the beginning of Chapter 13, there is a perfect summation to all of this – a summation of the example of Christ that He is calling us to follow:
“Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father, having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end.” (John 13:1)
What exactly was the Reformation?
Why did Luther challenge the church? And why did his challenge succeed philosophically and politically? I mean, the Puritans' motives are somewhat easier to siphon out. But even if you limit the Reformation just to Luther, who can say why it happened or what it was?
Was it about "freedom to study the Bible and take its authority first?" (a la "know the truth, and the truth shall set you free"). Well, yes; and no. Luther wanted everyone to read the scriptures, certainly. But the spirit of the Reformation is in its essence revolution and not anarchy. Luther didn't want the removal of ecclessiastical authority, he wanted its replacement. Luther, again, opposed many doctrines (see: the deutero-canon) that had been decided by church councils a thousand years before. In many ways, Luther wanted to replace the Pope, arbitrarily deciding the truth about Christianity.
Was the Reformation primarily an attack on corruption and self-serving church primacy? Well, kind of ... ? Initially, he did not want to change the hierarchy of the church. As he became angrier and angrier, he increasingly directed his invective against Popes, Cardinals, authorities, etc. and fought the concept that Salvation was not available outside of the Pope's blessing (quite in contrast to the policies of the Puritans, who executed members of rival denomenations, such as the Quakers). But was the Reformation really about exclusivity or corruption? Probably not. The Catholic church no longer claims exclusivity, but that has hardly served to end the feud. Recent scandals aside, the Catholic church is hardly more corrupt than any Protestant branch, but I haven't yet heard of any Protestant denomenation seeking to be re-introduced into the Catholic fold.
Another dynamic that I've heard mentioned in my various readings is that of the conflict between the more ancient, more scholarly and less populist orders and the rising trend of the "Mendicants". In some ways, Luther is both a manifestation of and reaction to the Mendicant orders. To plumb the murky depths of this issue, I would need to hold my breath for too long. Therefore, suffice to say that while conflict between the orders and their philosophies might have played a part, it could not have been the central issue, as it rarely played out upon strict sectarian lines.
What about political expression? There is certainly some truth to the statement that the Reformation rose out of Northern Europe's desire for independence. The Lutheran church is certainly a German church. The Reformation could not have succeeded except as a power play between two equal opponents (see John Huss), and those princes who defended him would probably not have done so if they had not increasingly resented Roman influence on their nascent sense of national identity. There is also something very nationalistic about the translation of a German Bible. But at most, this could only constitute the enabling factor, the historical component of a philosophical movement. I don't think anyone approaching the Reformation as a Christian would argue with that.
Probably the main factor that a hard-core Calvinist / Puritan / Reformed / Evangelical / Conservative /etc. theologian is going to point to is the concept of justification by faith through grace. Certainly an interesting point. I think this post is long enough already, so I won't go into a lengthy discussion of this issue -- but I will finish with a story related to it.
What Luther considered the crowning achievment of his theological career was a series of literary discourses he engaged in with the still-Catholic scholar Desiderius Erasmus on the determination of the will. Luther himself, in these discourses, claimed that the sum total of the Reformation and all that he had done boiled down not to papal authority or anything else, but to this: he believed that man had no free will.
A) Is that Biblical?
B) How Biblical?
C) Is that important?
D) Is that what Christ taught?
E) Is that what Christ prioritized?
P.S. Don't hate me. If it wasn't for my incendiary posts, there wouldn't have been any action on this blog for a month and a half. And besides, this is important stuff for us to think about; it has a lot of implications for the church today. Well, kind of.
Monday, June 12, 2006
Catholic v. Protestant
What are the Reformers and Puritans encouraging us to do? Christ corrected the Pharisees for spending all their time on side issues, and neglecting the real issue: "Come back when you have learned the meaning of this: I desire mercy, and not sacrifice". How is a slavish devotion to outward, intellectual conformity with one corner of Christianity's version of doctrine any different than imposing byzantine and draconian sabbath laws?
In the center is the religion Christ preached: simple, yet revolutionary; incendiary, and yet based in basic love for God and others; the religion of the sermon on the mount, the religion of the cross.
At one end is the syncretism and corruption of the Roman Catholic, tying the church too close to the world. At the other end is the bare religiosity of the Puritans, so intellectual and impersonal that there is room for the practicioner to be completely evil and yet still fill all its requirements.
In Jesus' time there were two parties that represented these concepts as well: The Pharisees and Sadducees. The Sadducees were corrupt, used the power of the church for their own ends, and would do anything to hold on to that power. The Pharisees were a reaction, seeking to purify the nation (by their standards), trying to find God in complicated lists of rules and doctrines.
Jesus rebuked them both, and demonstrated the correct path. Unfortunately, it is narrow and there are few who find it.
Really, I am not advocating an absence of beliefs or knowledge. It's just that I'm advocating a different set of beliefs, or at least a different priority of beliefs. When you hear from the pulpit that you probably aren't a Christian if you don't jibe with their interpretation of a few particularly contentious passages about women, or that you're probably not a Christian if you have ongoing psychological problems, it's a far cry from "Come to me, all you who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest" or "As I have loved you, so love one another."
I think it's really easy on this blog to talk past each other. Without context, a lot of times we'll miss what the other person is saying. I can tell you, I did arrive at these conclusions by studying the Bible. They are beliefs. But two people can approach the same Bible with different perspectives, and come out with different priorities and beliefs. I'm not advocating an absence of knowledge, I'm advocating the knowledge that is found only in the foolishness of God, that is an embarrassment to the world. I'm advocating the things about Christianity that I think are important, not just to me but to Christ, who is the representation of God to us. No one has seen the Father, but the Son has revealed Him. Etc.
Friday, June 09, 2006
What do you believe?!
Shouldn't faith be a bit more than group-think? It's so riddled with hypocrisy, it stops making sense with a fierce velocity. In light of conflicting claims, most of which have similar feet of clay, how can we think that choosing one equally valid and invalid type of Christianity over another is pivotal. Do you really think that Christ is going to quiz you on the minutiae of theological effluvia? I'm not Catholic, but balance is so dramatically crucial. The true essence of Christianity is found in St. Francis before it is found in Jonathan Edwards. The courage of God is found in Thomas More, more than it is found in Martin Luther. I believe that actions speak louder than words.
Read More......