In the book of Acts (recorded by the same author of the gospel of Luke), there is a beautiful little story about an Ethiopian eunuch, who comes to find Jesus. The Ethiopian was an important official by occupation, but by religion he was a faithful Jew who was passionate about reading and understanding the Bible, and as I have found God often makes happen, he became fixated on one passage of Old Testament scripture. The story also involves a Greek Jew who had converted to following Jesus, whose name was Philip.
Have a read of the story below…
Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Go south to the road—the desert road—that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.â€So he started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopian eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of the Kandake (which means “queen of the Ethiopiansâ€). This man had gone to Jerusalem to worship, and on his way home was sitting in his chariot reading the Book of Isaiah the prophet. The Spirit told Philip, “Go to that chariot and stay near it.â€
Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?†Philip asked.
“How can I,†he said, “unless someone explains it to me?†So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.
This is the passage of Scripture the eunuch was reading: “He was led like a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb before its shearer is silent, so he did not open his mouth. In his humiliation he was deprived of justice. Who can speak of his descendants? For his life was taken from the earth.â€
The eunuch asked Philip, “Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?â€
Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.
As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?†And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing.
(This story can be found in Acts, chapter 8, verses 26 to 39. Feel free to look it up yourself.)
I love this story – the ernestness of the Ethiopian to understand the Bible, his humility in asking questions, the way it shows that sometimes the Bible can be tricky to understand unless someone explains it to us, and even the miraculous way God’s Spirit leads Philip to be at the right place at the right time and then leave when his job is done. It’s a beautiful story of “the good news about Jesus” being explained to an honest seeker.
Although it’s also frustrating to me. I really wish the conversation between Philip and the Ethiopian had been recorded. Philip seemed to unpack who Jesus was and how he fulfilled the passage the Ethiopian had been reading in such a way that after a little journey, the Ethiopian develops an enthusiasm to be baptised and become a follower of Jesus immediately. He begins as a curious Jew and finishes a Christian who “went on his way rejoicing”.
I guess we will never know exactly what Philip said, but one thing we can do is, like the Ethipian, read that passage of Old Testament prophecy that proved to be so important.
The story tells us that it comes from the writings of the prophet Isaiah and the story includes some of the verses. This is very helpful, because it makes it quite easy to find the passage he was reading – It was Isaiah 53. I have included it below for you to read for yourself. It is a staggering passage when you consider it was written by the Jewish prophet, Isaiah, over 700 years before Jesus came.
I encourage you to read it and think about what it means, what it tells you about Jesus and ultimately, how it applies to you:
ISAIAH 53
“Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.
Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed.Â
We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; He was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. By oppressionand judgment he was taken away. Yet who of his generation protested?Â
For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was punished. He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.
Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makeshis life a sin offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.
After he has suffered, he will see the light of lifeand be satisfied; by his knowledgemy righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.
Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,and he will divide the spoils with the strong,because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”
I’d love to give you my thoughts on all that this prophecy tells me about myself and about what the Messaiah was prophecied to do and how Jesus fulfilled all that, but I want you to have your own Ethiopian experience.
If you have questions like the Ethiopian had, I encourage you to ask them and may you find the joy that the Ethiopian found.
If you want some questions to think about for yourself, why not reflect on the following:
Philip explains that the prophet Isaiah is talking about Jesus. What does Isaiah 53 tell us about Jesus?
Does the description of the man in Isaiah 53, match your understanding about what happened to Jesus?
How does Isaiah 53 help us understand what was happening “metaphysically” or “spiritually” when Jesus was being crucified?
What does Isaiah 53 say about you and me? Do you think it is a fair assessment?
Philip told the Ethiopian, “the good news about Jesus”. Whether you believe it or not, can you explain what is this news and why it is good?
How did the Ethiopian respond to this “good news”? Why did he respond that way?
How should you and I respond to Jesus?
If it helps, I will also leave you with the words of Peter, one of Jesus’ closest companions and the man commissioned by Jesus to look after the first Christians in those early years. He writes to Christians who faced great oppression these words that show he  had also thought a great deal about Isaiah 53 and how it relates to Jesus:
If you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. “He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.†When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. “He himself bore our sins†in his body on the cross, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; “by his wounds you have been healed.†For “you were like sheep going astray,â€Â but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
(This excerpt can be found in The First Letter of Peter, chapter 2, verses 20 to 25.)
I was recently asked how it is possible to love a perfect God.
I am slightly confused by this question, as I don’t see why it would be difficult to love God because of his perfection, as if it would be easier to love him if he had some flaws.
I was happy to think about the topic though, because loving God is the heartbeat of Christianity.
Despite what you may have heard, “Love your neighbour” is not the greatest commandment that Jesus taught. When asked what is the first and greatest commandment, “loving others” was mentioned as the second most important one, flowing out of the first, which is… “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:37-40)
Loving God with absolutely everything we have is the most important thing we must do. The heart of sin is our lack of love for God. So, how are you going in that area? Do you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind? Do you even love him with your little toe?
Well, to be frank, I don’t love God very well. I often love my self and my desires and happiness and comfort a lot more than I love God. I definitely don’t love him with ALL my heart and soul and mind. But I expect, you don’t either… and I expect even Mother Teresa didn’t either. The only human being to ever love God wholly and perfectly is Jesus, and because he was the 2nd member of the Trinity incarnate in human flesh, his love was also wrapped up in his intimate knowledge and experience of the love of God shared between the members of the Trinity, so did he have a bit of an advantage?… I reckon so.
Fortunately, the joy of Christianity, is that we have the possibility of joining in on that love as well. We don’t become another member of the Trinity, but we do engage with a fellowship with God that is real and intimate and personal, where the 3rd member of the Trinity, God’s Holy Spirit can reside in us and we can experience the love of God poured out lavishly on us and experience it flowing through us to others.
Although I fail every day in loving God in the way that he deserves and to the degree that he has designed me to love, I do not have to face God’s anger or just condemnation for my lovelessness. God’s forgiveness is an expression of his love as well. But his forgiveness is not cheap. Jesus came, not just to embody God’s love and model love for God, he also came primarily on a rescue mission. He came to pay for our lovelessness – to be punished for our sin.
Why did he go to the cross? He died as the greatest expression of God’s love to a world that doesn’t love him back. He died for me, before I was born, even though he knew I would fail at loving him. He paid the penalty I deserve and 18 years ago I acknowledged that truth and put my life into God’s hands, trusting that Jesus’ death was for me.
This is what it means for me to love God. It’s actually primarily about me experiencing the love of God and letting that flow out of me back to God and to my neighbour. This changes everything – your entire life. That why Cat & I used this awesome verse from 1 John as the central focus of our wedding: “This is love – not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.” (1 John 4:10-11)
So now, thanks to what Jesus did 2,000 years ago, and because of what God led me to do 18 years ago, I know God’s love. The more I have experienced and learnt of God over the last 18 years has grown me to love God deeper and deeper, like a good marriage, where at the start the love is all froth and bubbles but after many years it matures and grows deep.
I look forward to loving God more and more as the years pass as well. I want to give him more of my heart and soul and mind, as I experience more and more of his love over the years.
O, if you don’t have any clue what that experience of God’s love looks like or feels like or how it can be real to you as it is real to me, I am praying for you that same prayer that Paul the apostle prayed for the Ephesians: “I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all of God’s people, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge—that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.” (Ephesians 3:17-19)
Truly as the psalmist writes in Psalm 63:3, “Your love is better than life.”
So I love the love of God. My love of God is like the love that someone has for air after they almost drowned. I gasp it in. It is my life. My salvation.
Although, God’s command to love him and our lack of love may hang over you like a gavel from a judge ready to pronounce your guilt, once Christ has freed you from that guilt and you have experienced the love and friendship of God and God comes to reside in you by his Spirit, then love of God ceases to be a demand or a command – it becomes like breathing.
I still suck at loving God. I still have a deep selfishness and lack of love for others. But I am better than I was. God’s love has transformed me and given me new appetites and new joys. I am most alive when I am not hoarding God’s love for myself where it stagnates like a swamp, but when I let it flow through me, back to God and to others like a stream of living water that brings life and love wherever it goes.
Why do many Christians not show the love of God to others? I think primarily because they do not enjoy it themselves.
The love of God is something you can’t keep locked down or bottled up. It’s like a Pandoras Box – open it and you can’t contain it.
I think many Christians are only “Christian” by label and have actually never experienced the love and forgiveness of God themselves (in which case, they would not actually be Christians at all). It is possible to simply mentally tick the box that you believe all that Christian stuff, but you have never actually embraced or encountered or experienced or engaged with it personally. You believe in a God of love, but you do not KNOW the God of love and consequently, how on earth can you SHOW the love of God. If that’s you, I want you to know that Christianity is about a relationship with God, not just a label or a box to tick. There is so much more for you.
There are others though, like me, who have truly experienced the love of God, and yet struggle with letting it flow through us to others (or even back to God). With us, the problem isn’t that there’s no living water flowing in. The problem is with the plumbing. The pipes of our soul are broken or clogged and the water won’t flow through.
The reason for this is because Jesus doesn’t save perfect people. He saves dodgy, broken people. People who haven’t got it all together. People who don’t know how to receive or give love with all of their heart and soul and mind. People who need to be repaired and put right. People like you and me.
Jesus saves people as they are – with all their loveless baggage, and then begins the reconstruction process. It’s a lifelong process that the Bible calls “sanctification”.
But if you know of a Christian who isn’t loving you are right to expect more of them. Be gracious as Jesus is gracious with them, but also know that Jesus want to take them on to being more and more loving.
Ask them what they think about God’s love for them, and if you see their eyes light up and them talk with real and deep knowledge, then you should also see that love spilling over to other people.
If they don’t know of the love of God, then point them to Jesus. Jesus is not just a historical person you read about in an old dusty book. He is alive and able to engage and encounter people. He lived a life of love and died a death of love and opened a way of love for all those who would put the trust in him.
I have been living with his love for the last 18 years and  I look forward to walking with him for the rest of my life.
“And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.Â
What, then, shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.Â
Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? As it is written: ‘For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered.‘
No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
Nowadays, the meaning of names are not all that important. My name Simon, for example, means “he has heard”, which is ironic seeing as I am terrible at remembering things if I only hear them. When it comes to organising our lives, my gracious wife knows my motto is, “if it’s not written on the calendar, it doesn’t exist”.
But in the ancient world, and notably in the Bible, names were vitally important. Their meaning held great significance and often a name was given as a defining and even prophetic identity. Here are some examples that may illustrate my point:
Adam means “Man”
Eve means “Living”
Moses means “Deliverer”
Ruth means “Friend”
Elijah means “My God is Yahweh”
Peter means “Rock”
Many religions also give names significance. Buddha means “The Enlightened One”, Muhammad means “To Be Praised”, and Abraham means “Father of Many”. This helps us understand some of the significance of these religious leaders (at least from the perspective of their religion). It also can help us understand what the religion is primarily on about. Buddhism, for example, was founded by the first Buddha. As Buddha means “The Enlightened One”, you can conclude that Buddhism is going to be about the path towards enlightenment. In fact, if you leave out some concept of enlightenment, then you’ve probably – by definition – gotten Buddhism wrong.
Christianity, in the same way, is – by definition – about Christ. If you leave Christ out of Christianity, you may end up with something, but it won’t be Christianity. Jesus Christ is the central focus of Christianity and the meaning of those two words – “Jesus” and “Christ” – are very revealing in understanding what Christianity is all about. I would go so far as to say that the meaning of the words “Jesus Christ” gives us a basic understanding of the whole Christian message and how it calls us to respond. If you want to know who Jesus Christ is then you at least have to know what “Jesus Christ” means.
So let’s go through it.
The first thing to point out is that “Jesus Christ” is not his first and last name. His parents weren’t Mr and Mrs Christ. Surnames were not used in ancient Israel, although people were identified by their father (as in “James son of Zebedee” in Matthew 4:21) or by their home town (as in “Jesus of Nazareth” in Mark 1:24 or “Joseph of Arimathea” in John 19:38). However, the word “Christ” does not refer to either one of these.
Whereas “Jesus” is his personal name, “Christ” refers to his title or status. It’s a bit like how we talk about “Judge Judy” or “Doctor Phil”. “Christ” expresses his role. This is why he is often referred to as “Christ Jesus” rather than “Jesus Christ” and sometimes he’s just talked about as “The Christ” (see Matthew 2:4, Matthew 16:13-17 & Mark 14:61-62).
THE MEANING OF “CHRIST”
The word “Christ” is a Greek word meaning “Anointed One”. In Hebrew, the same word is “Messiah”. It refers to the one who would was prophesied to be the anointed king of God’s people. Hundred of years before Jesus was born, God made a covenant with King David (in 2 Samuel 7:1-16) that one of his descendants would rule God’s kingdom forever. This figure is sometimes known as the “Son of David” and just as David was anointed to be king, so this king would come to be known as the “Anointed One” or “Messiah” or “Christ” (see Psalm 2:2 for example). Jesus is the fulfilment of the covenant God made with King David and he is the king that all the old testament prophesies were promising about. He is The Christ, the Ruler. You could accurately translate the name Jesus Christ to be “King Jesus”.
Now this may seem unsettling to you if your only picture of Jesus is the unassuming, quite Mr. Nice Guy and you might think that the idea of “King” Jesus is just something his followers made up after he was gone to promote him and try to take over the government. But the idea of Jesus’ kingship is central to Jesus’ teaching and mission. Not only did Jesus talk extensively about the “kingdom of God” now being here in him, but in the end it was what got him in the most trouble. Consider this conversation with the Pilate recorded in John 18:33-37,
“Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?â€
“Is that your own idea,â€Â Jesus asked, “or did others talk to you about me?â€
“Am I a Jew?†Pilate replied. “It was your people and your chief priests who handed you over to me. What is it you have done?â€
Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.â€
“You are a king, then!†said Pilate.
Jesus answered, “You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.â€
In the end, he was crucified with the charge against him written above the cross: “This is the King of the Jews” and the reason why they put a crown of thorns on him was to mock his claims of kingship. Also, after his resurrection, Jesus declared “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” (Matthew 28:18). That’s kingship language.
Now, this image of Kingship is not very popular today. We think of kings often as tyrants or power-hungry bullies. The idea of obeying or giving respect and honour to those in authority, is a concept that grates against our sense of independence and we have seen too many human kings in the past abuse their power or grow arrogant or indifferent to the suffering of others. So, it’s understandable if we don’t like the idea of a King, anointed by God to rule over us and worthy of our respect and obedience. But that is what Jesus is.
Fortunately, Jesus is kind and sacrificial and life-giving and so his rule is for our good and for the good of all the Universe. For me (as an actor), it’s like the idea of working under an amazing director that I know is brilliant and is a pleasure to work under. I would have no problem taking their direction and supporting their leadership, because I would know that they were better than me and they were worth following. Jesus is like that, but infinitely more so. His rule is perfect, not just in his skill, wisdom and power, but also in his moral goodness and love. He is a wonderful king to obey and we will all benefit from coming under his good rule.
The reality is though, if Christ means “King”, then if you want to get Jesus Christ (and therefore Christianity) right, you need to have Jesus’ kingship as one of the central ideas. A Christianity that makes Jesus any less, or has trouble with the idea of Jesus being king, is no Christianity at all. Likewise, a Christianity that does not call people to give over the rule of their lives to Jesus, is a false Christianity. To become a Christian, you have to see one of the greatest sins as being the fact that we want to rule our own life and that we do not give God the honour or obedience he deserves. We need to turn away from our sin and turn our allegiance to Jesus, giving him the crown of our life. Now, it is very confronting to say that every single person on the planet should come under the rule of no one else than Jesus, but that is what it means for Jesus to be called “Christ”. It means that if you reject Jesus as king, you reject God himself, because Jesus is God’s anointed.
Christianity is by definition therefore an “exclusive” religion. There is only one way to God and Jesus is it. I have heard people claiming to be Christians, proclaiming a version of Christianity that says that we all just have our own “faith tradition” and that as we all seek unity we are all coming closer to God. It doesn’t really matter how you respond to Jesus, what matters is your sincerity or your effort or your kindness towards your fellow man.
This multi-faith understanding of religion and spirituality is very palatable because it is so darn nice. It welcomes everyone and tries to avoid saying that anyone is “right” or “wrong” which might offend or come across as arrogant. But although it may be nice, it’s just not Christianity. You can not say that you follow or side with Jesus Christ, if you ignore the very definition of the word “Christ”.What you have done is just make up your own religion. And if that’s what you want to do, go for it. Just please don’t call yourself a Christian. A Christian is someone who responds to Jesus as Christ – that is, as God’s king, anointed to rule over the entire Universe and over every aspect of our lives. As Abraham Kyper put it: “There is not one square inch of the entire creation about which Jesus Christ does not cry out, ‘This is mine! This belongs to me!'”Christianity has a bold and strong message that effects every person on the planet, but it is also a good message, because Jesus is a good king. His kingship brings fellowship with God and life and wholeness. His kingship is full of love and light and outside of his kingship we are lost and unprotected. As Paul writes in Colossians 1:12-14, “Give joyful thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of his holy people in the kingdom of light. For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.â€
Jesus wants to rescue us from the kingdom of darkness and bring us into the kingdom of light. He is our good king, but he also our rescuer, which leads me to the meaning of the “Jesus” part of his title.
THE MEANING OF “JESUS”
If Jesus is God’s king then our correct response is to submit to his rule – to live under his direction and instruction and authority. To follow him. To become his disciple. To obey and serve and honour him with our actions and our words and our thoughts and all our resources. The reality is though, even for those who acknowledge Jesus as the Christ, we all fail daily at doing this. Our tendency is to live our own way and rule our own life. We ignore God’s authority and live as if he is not our king. Even those who try to follow Jesus as their king, know that their efforts are at times half-hearted and full of mixed and selfish motives. No one can claim to be perfect in their service and obedience to Jesus. As Paul puts it in Romans 3:23, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
We need rescuing. We need saving. We need to be freed from our slavery to selfishness and our tendency to ignore God’s rule. We also need to be freed from the judgement of God.
Talking about things like the judgement of God and hell is not a good way to make friends. Like the idea of the kingship of Jesus, it clearly isn’t a popular concept in the whole Christian message. Some people have tried to re-create a Christianity without the idea of Hell or the judgement of God, but I think you end up with another “watered-down” false version of Christianity rather than the genuine article. I think this for 3 main reasons:
1. Judgement Day is not just the name of a Terminator movie. You can not escape the references through both the Old and New Testaments telling of one final day when all people who have ever lived having to stand before God and give an account for our lives. God promises that all evil will be judged and only the “righteous” will be spared. Unfortunately, another consistent message throughout scripture is the fact that no one can claim to be “righteous” or innocent before God based on their own life. That is why Judgement Day is a terrifying prospect. But nevertheless, the message of the prophets, or Jesus and of the New Testament writers is clear: “God has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed.” (Acts 17:31). If this is true, then to avoid or ignore this coming reality is as foolish as to stand on a beach and ignore the warnings that a tsunami is on its way. Judgment Day is real. It cannot be taken out of Christianity, and any attempt to do so, leaves some major gaping holes in the bible.
2. Jesus had a Hell of a Message. If you read Jesus’ words and want to heed them, you can not ignore the fact that he talks about Hell. In fact, no Old Testament prophet or New Testament preacher, is recorded as talking about Hell as much as Jesus. To simply edit those bits out and accept only parts of Jesus’ teaching is to really misrepresent him unfairly. If Jesus truly is from Heaven (as he claimed) then he has the authority on the subject of heaven and hell and whether they exist. Now the exact nature of Hell is debatable in terms of whether it is consciously eternal or not, but Jesus’ warnings are unavoidable. Hell, Jesus says, is real, and it is the destiny of all who do not accept his offer of escape.
3. No Bad News = No Good News. Sometimes people think that the Old Testament gives us a picture of an angry judging God, while the New Testament is all about love and peace. This is true to some extent in that the judgements of God are quite vivid in the Old Testament (10 plagues on Egypt for example), and in the New Testament we are introduced to the greatest expression of God’s love and the wonderful gospel message that offers peace to all the guilty. But it is a grave misunderstanding to say that the judgment of God is swept under the carpet and replaced with a nicer, loving message. The offer of peace only makes sense to a people who are at war with God. The offer of forgiveness and mercy only makes sense to a people who are guilty and under judgement. You can not show mercy to the innocent. The innocent deserve to be acquitted. It is the guilty who need mercy. The “gospel” is the message of Christianity. It literally means “Good News”. It is only in the context of the bad news of the fact that we are under God’s just judgement, that we can receive with joy and gratitude the good news of God’s solution.
Now this all seems pretty bleak, but think of it as a diagnosis. When the doctor tells you he has done all the tests and you have cancer, you may be blown away by the bleakness of that news, but very quickly we look to what the doctor is offering as a treatment and if there is any hope. The message of the Bible and the message of Jesus is that our diagnosis is bleak. We have a cancer of the soul. Our sin means that we stand before a holy and perfect God with no way of claiming innocence and no means of “paying God back”. Any good deed we have done is simply a good deed that we should have done in the first place and so does not pay for the thoughts, words and deeds that lead us to be standing before God condemned. And although I use that language as a metaphor, it will also one day be a reality when, as Hebrews 9:27 says, “man is destined to die once and then face judgement”.
I don’t write this to make you feel bad or to scare you. In fact, hopefully hearing about the judgement of God brings some clarity to your experience. This is why you feel distant from God. This is why God seems obscured to you. This is why you may be able to work on your bad habits and behaviour but you can’t change your heart. This is why all you can do with your guilt and shame from the ways you have wronged people, is just to try to forget them or “move on”.
The judgement of God is good news. It tells us that God cares about how we treat people and how people treat us. It means God is not just a dithering old Santa Claus in the sky who gives you presents no matter what. It means God loves justice and goodness and mercy and truth and God will ensure that on the last day all the evil in the history of the world will be shown to be evil and done away with. The judgement of God means that “God is light and in him there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5) and in the New Creation that God will bring after the Judgement Day, there will be no more pain or sorrow caused by sin and evil. No evil dictator will “get away” with their crimes, no injustice will be left undealt with and all acts of goodness will be finally vindicated. The judgement of God is a good thing.
The problem is of course that if the judgement of God is real and truly just, then we are all screwed. We need some cure for our cancer. We need to be rescued from our bleak situation. We need a Saviour.
This is why Jesus came… and this is what “Jesus” means.
After Joseph got the news that his fiance, Mary was going to give birth and that the pregnancy had been caused by God’s Spirit (rather than her sleeping around), he was told by the Angel of the Lord, “She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus because he will save his people from their sins.†The name Jesus means something. It’s not just something picked out of a baby book. It is a name that God instructed Joseph that he must have because it related to his mission, “he will save his people from their sins”.
The word “Jesus” comes from “Yeshua” (commonly known today as Joshua). Yeshua is derived from two Hebrew words. The “Ye” points to God’s personal name “Yahweh” and the “Shua” points to the hebrew word for “salvation”. So Yeshua (or “Jesus”) literally means God is Salvation. This is why Jesus is called Jesus, because his mission was God’s salvation. And what do we need to be “saved” from? Well, so that we don’t start thinking that we need to be saved from ignorance or lack of motivation or global warming or political oppression, the angel makes it clear… We need to be saved from our sins.
And it is Jesus who makes that salvation possible through living a perfect life that we did not live, dying a torturous death that we should have died, bearing the judgement of God that he did not deserve, and rising back to life in victory to offer us a way of salvation that we could not earn.
God’s King has come, just as was prophesied, but he did not come to judge us all and clean up his creation. If he came to do that, he might have been called Yehoshafat, meaning “God Judges”. But no, he came to give us a way out. He came on a rescue mission. He came to provide the cure. He came to save us. And so he was named, Jesus.
What’s in a name? Everything.
Jesus Christ means Saviour King. “Jesus” speaks of his mission. “Christ” speaks of his role. If you like pictures, think of it as two rings. One ring is a life preserver, the other ring is a crown. Jesus Christ is both.
If you are exploring Christianity, make sure you at least understand the basics. Don’t fall for counterfeits, even if they offer a more palatable Christianity. If you accept or reject Christianity, at least accept or reject the real deal.
So, if you want to get your head around what real Christianity is, I think you don’t really need to look much further than the name “Jesus Christ”. It tells us who Jesus is and what he was on about. It tells us why he came and what he offers.
Or maybe you’re someone who has, possibly for many years, called yourself a Christian, but you now realise that you haven’t really been one all along. Well, the name “Jesus Christ” also tells us us how we are to respond to him. Not simply as a wise teacher, or a good example to follow. We must respond to who he really is. Our rightful king and our only hope for salvation.
“It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. He is the stone you builders rejected, which has become the capstone. Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.â€
Acts 4:10-12
“These are written
that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name”
I just wanted to write a short blog about a question I have been thinking about since reading and watching the unfolding of the “Occupy Melbourne” protests. The question is about whether a peaceful protest should engage in resisting arrest. I am very aware that this question is not the most important one to be asking. There are many blogs addressing the issues of the greed and corruption of corporations and their relationship with the government. There is disgust at the excessive use of force that some of the Victorian police used to remove the protestors from the City Square. I saw one YouTube video where a police officer reached across a crowd to punch a guy in the face! That sort of action is inexcusable and the recent call for the Ombudsman to investigate claims of police brutality seems justifiable. Having said that, I want to comment on an area of hypocrisy that I feel was present among a portion of the protestors and reflects a common misconception that I think is relevant.
If you watch the YouTube video above, you will see that one of the defining qualities of the “Occupy Melbourne” protests was that they were meant to be “peaceful”. Giving it this label, not only protects the protest from descending into a violent riot, but it also gives the protest an air of virtue and nobility. A “peaceful” protest? Who could argue with that? All they are doing is standing there and expressing their opinion. Why should anyone have a problem with that? In fact, anyone who would try to physically and forcibly remove them from their chosen place of protest is clearly just part of the violent, evil system of power that they are protesting against!
Well, I think that’s hypocrisy. I think protests are an important and indispensable part of a healthy democracy, but I also think that if you are going to break the law when you protest then you have to be willing to take the consequences. There may be many occasions when breaking the law is an important and moral thing to do, and evil laws should be disobeyed and protested against. I think of the brave Rosa Parks who, in 1955, disobeyed the law that stated that a black person had to give up their seat to a white person on buses in Alabama, USA. This act of civil disobedience was the spark that ignited the civil rights movement and led to the rise of one of the greatest advocates of non-violent protest, Martin Luther King Jr.
On the website for the “Occupy Wall Street” protests (which the “Occupy Melbourne” protest is inspired by), there is a wonderful comment on their forum. One person writes that in order for the numbers of protestors to actually demonstrate power there is a need to agree on certain “organisational goals” which everyone should agree upon. This is what they wrote as their fourth goal:
4) Always remain non-violent and non-threatening – continue to apply the non-violent rules of engagement of Ghandi and Martin Luther King, Jr. Do not threaten law enforcement officials; do not even look at them menacingly. Do not taunt law enforcement officials. Engage them in dialog but do not get defensive or angry. Do not resist arrest. If police attack a member of the group, render aid to the member but do not attack the police in retaliation.
I believe the decision to protest non-violently requires you to also accept that your actions, if illegal, may result in you being requested to stop doing those actions – whether it be blocking something, staying in one place too long, making too much noise, or simply walking in solidarity with the oppressed. When requested to stop, you have to make the decision – will I obey or not? If you believe the moral thing for you to do is disobey, then you must accept that you will most likely be arrested for disobeying the civil authorities. If then, you do not accept that you will be arrested and you physically resist the consequences of your civil disobedience with more illegal activity (by “resisting arrest” which is illegal), it is then that you can no longer call yourself “non-violent”.
Physically resisting someone who legally is allowed to try to prevent you from doing something illegal, is a violent act. It is a form of passive aggression. Now, I guess some would argue that they were protesting the police’s right to enforce the law, and that may be a valid argument, but I don’t see how that secondary protest can be peaceful. If you hold the view that “people who act illegally should not be arrested if the cause is just” then I don’t see how you can engage in civil disobedience that is non-violent. In the end, you will always come up against the police whose job it is to defend and enforce the law. It is even more amazing then, when there is an outcry against the police who used excessive force and the call for the Ombudsman to see if the police acted illegally. What hypocrisy! If you are going to argue that the police must enforce the law in a way that is legal, then you have to also agree that the protestors must protest in a way that is legal. Now, I don’t in any way want to tarnish groups with one big brush. There were many protestors who left the occupation of the City Square at the time requested and there were those who refused and were removed or arrested without violent resistance. These protestors I believe are to be commended as consistent and deserve to hold the title “peaceful protestor”.
I keep thinking about Jesus and his form of peaceful protest. He disobeyed the expectations and false teaching of the religious rulers of his day and spoke out against them as he preached the gospel and pointed people to himself as the source of life and salvation. This got him arrested and on the night of his arrest he is ambushed by a group of thugs carrying swords and clubs.
Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs? Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me. But this is your hour—when darkness reigns.â€Â Then seizing him, they led him away and took him into the house of the high priest. (Luke 22:52-54)
Peter, a close disciple of Jesus, responded with aggressive resistance when Jesus was arrested. He used his sword to defend himself and protect Jesus, but he was met with Jesus’ firm rebuke, “Put your sword back in its place. For all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” Later, Peter reflected on Jesus’ arrest and wrote these words in his first epistle,
It is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. How is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth. When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. (1 Peter 2:19-23)
Jesus and the first Christians were powerful advocates for non-violent protest. In Acts, we see many acts of civil disobedience. Check out Acts 5:40-42 for example:
They called the apostles in and had them flogged. Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go. The apostles left the Sanhedrin, rejoicing because they had been counted worthy of suffering disgrace for the Name. Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Christ.
It is right to protest against something wrong. It is right to disobey a morally wrong law. I would even say that it is right at times to disobey a law that is not morally wrong (like a request to stop protesting) if it is in solidarity to a cause that stands against something that is morally wrong (I hope that made sense!). But in that last case, I think that you have to wear the consequences. To be willing to be fined or go to jail over an issue is a powerful message. I think of the men who were drafted during the Vietnam War and took a stand as a “conscientious objector”, refusing to be involved in a war they believed was wrong. Many went to jail rather than go to war. I think those men had great courage and honour and deserve to hold the title of “peaceful protestor”.
I’ll finish with advise: you can do what evert you want, but be ready to meet the effects and meet lawyers in Albany NY.
The call to prove God’s existence is a common challenge put to Christians. And fair enough. If you told me there was a world-wide flood going to wipe me away and my only hope for survival was to leave everything I knew and get into this giant boat sitting in the middle of a field, I would probably ask for some proof that you were right, and not just crazy. Especially, if I couldn’t see any growing storm clouds or at least, if I had never experienced a flood. The request for proof is understandable. However, at times, it is still foolish. There may be a flood coming and the fact that you can’t see the clouds and you lack experience of floods, doesn’t change reality. You just may be blind, or inexperienced.
So the question remains. If requiring proof of God’s existence is understandable, then how does God meet that basic need?
IS PROOF RELEVANT?
Some Christians make the point that you can’t really prove anything and so the expectation of proof is unrealistic. If you required scientific 100% proof for every decision, you wouldn’t do anything. You wouldn’t sit on a chair because you couldn’t prove it won’t break, you wouldn’t eat food because you couldn’t prove it wasn’t laced with poisonous iocane powder, etc. Basically, day to day, we live by faith. But it’s not blind uninformed faith. It’s faith in our experience and faith in what people tell us and faith in our understanding of the world. We make decisions based on what we are convinced of. And so, for all intents and purposes, that is what most people mean when they say they want “proof” of God.
There are some hard-core atheists that expect that Christians should provide scientific proof of God’s existence and acknowledge that even if all the weight of the evidence pointed towards God’s existence, they would still reject the idea of a God, simply because if there is any other possible explanation then that is preferable (I have heard Peter Singer express this view). This sort of blind commitment to atheism is to me a complete rejection of logic, science and common sense and in the end, a lot more “religious” than the most committed fundamentalist there is.
So should we throw out the word “proof” altogether? Well, I don’t think so. It’s such a part of our cultural language. If you want to return clothes you have to provide “proof of purchase”. If you want to buy alcohol you have to show “proof of age”. If you want to get a passport you need “proof of ID”. If you go to court you are innocent until “proven” guilty. Maybe we just have to think about the way we define “proof” and see if we can apply that to the existence of God.
PROOF #1 – JESUS’ RESURRECTION
I started thinking about writing this blog after I remembered how the bible uses the term “proof”. In Acts 1:3 it says, “After his suffering, [Jesus] showed himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God.” and then in Acts 17:31 “For [God] has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead.”
Both of these passages refer to the resurrection of Jesus as the clearest and most convincing proof of God. The resurrection vindicates all that Jesus taught about himself and about God and is the best evidence for the reality of God and the truth of the gospel. Many philosophers and theologians, both secular and Christian, have realized that the historical truth of the resurrection is the cornerstone of Christianity. If it didn’t happen, then Christianity completely falls apart, but the fact that it did happen proves Christianity is true.
Now this is clearly not the sort of proof that a scientist would consider valid. It is not reproducible and therefore can not be tested. It happened once, but if it truly did happen then once is enough. The resurrection is such an unbelievable event that Jesus knew that his disciples needed proof of its reality. He showed himself to them and allowed them to physically touch him and see him interact with physical things (like eating fish) to prove that he was physically and tangibly alive. This was proof to them and the message that Jesus was alive was the driving force behind the explosion of Christianity in the first century. All of the eyewitnesses to the resurrected Jesus went to their graves (mostly through murder and execution) professing that the resurrection was a true event.
This event happened. The proof that it happened was shown to the disciples by Jesus himself. They in turn wrote down their eyewitness account for us to read and be convinced by. Now this may not sound like a convincing proof to you but it’s like the question, “Can a man walk on the moon?”
Think about that question. How would you answer it? Most likely you would say “yes”. But if someone asked you to prove it you would point to the fact that man has indeed walked on the moon. Six times in fact. The first time was in 1969 and the last time was in 1972. That’s the proof. It’s happened. The answer to “can man walk on the moon?” is yes.
But why do you believe that it happened? For many (including myself) all six moon landings happened before I was born, and even if they happened when I was born, I didn’t experience it myself. The idea that man could walk on the moon is absolutely crazy and unbelievable, and yet most of us (other than the rare conspiracy theorist) believe that it 100% happened purely on the basis of the reliability on the account. We read the eyewitness accounts of the astronauts, we see the photos, we watch the video, we listen to the famous words, “that’s one small step for man…” and we are convinced. No matter how unbelievable it may seem, we can confidently say that man can walk on the moon and it has been proven.
I hope you can see where I’m going with this example. I think in the same way that we can say man has walked on the moon, we can say that Jesus rose from the dead and therefore his teaching and message about the reality of God and everything else are reliable. We believe that Jesus’ resurrection has been proved by his appearances and interactions with his disciples who then went on to proclaim and record their eyewitness account of that fact. Their account is still available to us in the gospels and in the book of Acts, and it is just as reliable today as it was when they wrote it. Now some may try to argue against the reliability of the gospel accounts, but I recommend you research the topic yourself to see that they weight of evidence greatly points to their reliability (check out “The Christ Files” if you’re interested). Either way, the issue then becomes “are the accounts of the proof of the resurrection reliable”, not “is there any proof of the resurrection”. The proof is there. Like the moon landings, the resurrection happened. You can either disbelieve the accounts or you can accept them for what they are – reliable records of historical events.
Now, although the resurrection is the primary proof of God that there is, there are also two more proofs which we can personally experience that do not rely on a historical record.
PROOF #2 – EXPERIENCING GOD
The first is the experience of the Christian themselves. Now I admit that this proof is not convincing for those who aren’t Christians who are looking for proof of God before they choose Christ or not, but that doesn’t make it any less of a proof. It simply means that it’s a proof for an audience of one, which incidentally, the person asking for proof is an audience of one and often they aren’t asking that you prove God’s existence on a global universal scale. They’re just asking you to prove it to them, and so the subjective, outwardly untestable, personally experienced proof is just as satisfactory.
It’s like the old saying, “the proof is in the pudding”. This is actually a misquote. The original full saying is “the proof of the pudding is in the eating”. This makes more sense. It’s saying the reality of the pudding – it’s temperature, taste, whether it’s laced with iocane powder, etc – can only be proven when it is eaten. You could put it through the lab and test it with every scientific instrument, but the best proof of the pudding is in the eating.
This is true for God as well. I can’t speak of other Christians experience, but my experience of God is so real and tangible that it is the greatest reason why I don’t doubt the existence of God. I see and sense God’s daily interaction with me, I experience his guidance, his comfort, his joy and his strength. I notice his leadings as he directs me in life and I know through and through when I am stubbornly working against his Spirit. God’s presence is so real to me, and has been from the very day I gave my life to following and trusting Jesus, I can not deny the reality of my experience. It can be a very hard experience to explain or describe to those who do not have a relationship with Jesus, but those who have responded to the gospel often know exactly what I mean with no need for explanation.
It’s very much like trying to explain colour to a blind person. There is no language that can communicate it and there are no proofs that can convince the blind person that colour exists (other than the proof of a reliable account as mentioned earlier). You can’t prove colour to the blind, but if a blind person receives the gift of sight and looks around then you won’t need to prove colour. Colour will prove itself to the individual.
Is the proof that this person experiences any less valid simply because it can not be tested by blind people? Of course not! In some ways, my experience of God is like that. I wish my non-Christian friends and family members could experience God in the way I do. If they did, it would make believing in God’s existence a given rather than a possible option, and all arguments about which position is more logical completely null and void. As the great evangelist Billy Graham said, “I can tell you that God is alive because I talked to him this morning”.
A clear place where the Bible uses this sort of argument is in 2 Corinthians 4:3-6, where Paul says, “If our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For we do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who said, ‘Let light shine out of darkness,’ made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.”
The terrifying reality if you do not see or experience any “proof” of God, is that you may be blind and perishing in your blindness, and it will take God to shine his light in your heart, remove the “veil” that blinds you and give you “the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.” If you realize that you are in this position and you are seeking God, but you just can’t see him, then I encourage you to ask him to remove your blindness, like blind Bartemaeus in Mark 10:46-52, call out to Jesus and say, “Rabbi, I want to see.” Maybe Jesus will be merciful and reveal himself to you, giving you every bit of proof that you need.
Now, I realize a problem here. If you don’t see proof that God exists, then how can you call on God to take away your blindness. It seems a convenient argument that anyone could use. Someone could say, “Oh, you would believe in the Mighty Chicken God if you weren’t blind to his glory. Pray and ask the Chicken God to reveal himself.” Now, I’m not going to pray to a giant invisible chicken just on the possibility that he exists and the fear that I might be missing out on something if I don’t pray to him, so I don’t expect anyone else to pray to Jesus if they’re in the same position.
My encouragement is not to the person who can’t see anything, but to the one that God is already working with. God begins to remove the veil and open our eyes, and we start to see things of God and if you are in that position then I encourage you to work with God, rather than against him. Hebrews 3:7 (quoting Psalm 95) says that the Spirit of God is calling to people saying, “If today you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts”. If you hear him, then respond. If you do, you will experience the proof of God that only those who know Jesus can experience. Like the kid covered in chocolate pudding, you will be able to know for yourself the words of Psalm 34:8, “Taste and see that the Lord is good!”
But what if you don’t hear his voice? What if you can’t see the glory of God in the face of Christ? Is there no experiential “proof” for this person? Will God’s existence ever be proved to them?
Well, the reality is, not in this lifetime.
PROOF #3 – DEATH
Scientist are often looking for experiments that are reproducible in order to prove something. Well, when it comes to God, there is one experiment like that. It’s called death. Every person who has died has without fail, come face to face with God, proving in the most real way possible that he exists. It is an experiment that is reproducible and it will work every time. If you want me to prove that God exists, then all I have to do is say, “Sure, no problem. Just die.” You may not be very obliging, but that matters very little seeing as you’re mortal and will one day partake in the experiment whether you like it or not. As Paul writes in Romans 14:10-12,
“We will all stand before God’s judgment seat. It is written: `As surely as I live,’ says the Lord, `every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.’ So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.”
and in Hebrews 9:27 it says,
“Man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment.”
Everyone will stand before God, either as his friend or his enemy. Either forgiven or still under judgement. Everyone will see and know that God is real. The proof will be in the pudding for everyone. Of course, like my last point, this “proof” has a problem as well. The problem isn’t that some can experience it and others can’t – everyone will experience this one – the problem is obviously that on this side of death, we can’t access the results of the experiment. What we really need is someone to have died (really died, rather than just had a near-death experience) and then come back to life so that they can set the record straight about life and God and everything else. Of course, they would have to show us convincing proofs that they had actually risen from the dead, and then we would have to have some reliable record of what this person said so that all people for all time could know the proof that God exists as well…
Gee, that would be sweet…
CONCLUSION
In the end, this blog is not written to non-Christians who are looking for proof of God. It is written to Christians, who have for the most part, gotten into the habit of avoided using the word “proof” when it comes to God. Or, on the other hand, Christians focus on all the evidence in nature and science to show proofs of God. As much as I think that all those are wonderful evidences for God, I don’t think they are good enough. They are not proof.
In my life there are only three major proofs of God: The resurrection of Jesus, my own taste of God’s goodness and the experience of meeting your Maker when you die. One is in the past, one is in the present and the last one is in the future.
I hope you see and experience the first two, before you experience the third.
Today I saw on the front page of the Saturday Age, an reference to the Insight article on the life and death of Apple genius, Steve Jobs. It caught my eye because of the heading, “The Man Who Changed Mankind”. Now, to be sure, his creations have changed many ways that many people communicate in the West and across the globe. I own an iPhone, I am writing this blog on my iPad and earlier today I was looking at buying an iMac. Steve Jobs has definitely impacted my life.
But “changed mankind?” I know it’s just sensationalist journalism, but I think it does reflect how impressed the world was with Steve Jobs.
Steve had everything the world values: Friends, family, money, power, creativity, intelligence, perseverance, moral values, respect and a legacy that effected the world. He was truly “successful” in every way that the world defines that word.
And yet with all his success he still had no power over when his time was up. He had everything that people are working so hard to achieve, and yet, in the end, he still died and all his success is snuffed out like a candle. Like every other person who has died before him, he died and met his Maker – a Maker that he didn’t believe in and a Maker that was in no way prepared to meet.
Jesus famously said, “What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet lose his soul?” (Mark 8:36). Sadly, Steve Jobs is a perfect example of that man. All of his wealth and success and global impact meant absolutely nothing when he stood before God to be judged. God was not impressed with all of the gadgets Steve has helped to create. He was not won over by Steve’s cleverness or intelligence or even whatever level of moral character he had. In the end, Steve stood before God simply as a human being with nothing in his hands other than all of his debt to God. Steve was judged by God not based on human materialistic standard, but on his holy standards based on how he lived up to the ultimate purpose and duty of a creature who is made in the image of God: Whether he loved God with all his mind and soul and strength, and whether he loved his neighbour as he loved himself.
Not just because he didn’t believe in Jesus and denied God’s existence, but like all of us, Steve’s life fell very short from God’s standard and he would have no excuse before a God who sees all and knows all.
Now in this way, Steve is just like all of us. As Paul writes in Romans 3:23, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” The saddest thing is that Steve stood before God with no way of turning aside God’s judgement. He had no way of appealing. No argument for mercy. No hope for salvation. He did not know nor respond to the amazing and unique provision that God has provided for humans who find themselves facing death and judgement.
God came to earth 2,000 years ago in the man Jesus to specifically deal with this great problem that we all face. He lived the perfect life that we all should live and then he died a unique death. It was unique because in his death he didn’t face any judgement for his own sin (seeing as he didn’t have any sin to be judged). Instead he bore in his death the great judgement that is reserved for us. He took all our punishment and guilt and sinfulness and died so that those that put their trust in him would be able to stand before God with no judgement left. For those who turn to Jesus and trust in him, all of the judgement of God has been exhausted. This is the one and only hope that any human has to be able to meet their Maker and be welcomed into his kingdom. It truly is amazing that God would go to such lengths to make it possible for us to enjoy something that we don’t deserve, but that is what he has done and Jesus is the one and only way to receive it.
Sadly, unless Steve Jobs experienced some form of last minute conversion that no one knows about, I don’t think he went to meet God with any such hope.
All of his efforts in life were in vain. Like the book of Ecclesiastes so repeatedly says, all of his success was meaningless, like a vapour or wisp of smoke that comes and then disappears from vaporizers at https://www.grasscity.com/vaporizers/. No matter how impressive he may have seemed by our petty standard, ultimately his life was wasted.
The bible has lots to say about making sure we don’t waste our lives in the same way and I hope that we all heed God’s warning. I will leave you with these powerful and harrowing words from a story Jesus told in Luke 12:16-21…
Jesus told them this parable:
The ground of a certain rich man produced a good crop. He thought to himself, `What shall I do? I have no place to store my crops.’ Then he said, `This is what I’ll do. I will tear down my barns and build bigger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I’ll say to myself, “You have plenty of good things laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.” ‘
But God said to him, `You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?’
This is how it will be with anyone who stores up things for himself but is not rich toward God.
(This blog is dedicated to my friend and brother in Christ, Ben Mason, who died recently. He did not share the global success that Steve Jobs experienced. He was not wealthy or famous and no one other than a group of people even knew he existed. His life has come and gone and the world will not remember him. But he was a man that knew and trusted in Jesus, and because of that it makes all the difference. Because he was a Christian he stood before God as a man forgiven and innocent. Because he was a Christian all of heaven welcomed him and he could enjoy life with God forever. He was a man who had not gained the whole world, but in gaining Jesus, he saved his soul rather than lost it.)
Ben, we will remember you and we look forward to catching up with you later.
This is a resource I wrote up for my Bible Study. We have been studying 1 John for the last few weeks and on the summary week (tonight) I took on the task of getting my head around some of the tricky verses that come up in chapter 5. If you don’t know the first letter of John, I highly recommend you read it and the following blog entry might not make much sense until you do.
For the sake of reference, here is 1 John chapter 5:
1 Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well. 2 This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands. 3 This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome, 4 for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. 5 Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.
6 This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.9 We accept man’s testimony, but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son. 10 Anyone who believes in the Son of God has this testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about his Son. 11 And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. 13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life. 14 This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. 15 And if we know that he hears us—whatever we ask—we know that we have what we asked of him.
16 If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray about that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death.
18 We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the one who was born of God keeps him safe, and the evil one cannot harm him. 19 We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one. 20 We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. 21 Dear children, keep yourselves from idols.
There are lots of tricky concepts in chapter 5 of 1 John (and indeed throughout the whole letter) but from this last chapter I want to offer some explanation for two of the most trickiest.Â
The testimony of the water, the blood & the Spirit. (5:6-12)
The sin that leads to death. (5:16-17)
 The testimony of the water, the blood and the Spirit. (5:6-12)
 This passage gets us asking a few questions:
What is the “water†and the “blood�
Why is it important that Jesus didn’t just come by water?
How do the water the blood and the Spirit testify about Jesus?
Why is it important that there are three that testify?
 The first and most important thing to say about this passage is that although all this talk about water and blood is interesting, it isn’t actually the point of the passage. It’s easy to get distracted by the part of the passage that is the most confusing (and therefore the most interesting), but the most important thing is to see where John is going in all this. This will not only help us avoid getting distracted by peripheral issues, but it will also give us the context to help us understand why he is using such odd language.
 John states his main point in verse 13: I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.
Whatever his argument is, the purpose of it is to help Christians have confidence in the truth of the fact that they have eternal life. In John 20:31, he writes that his purpose for writing the gospel record is so that people can HAVE life. In this letter, his audience is those who have now responded to the gospel and his purpose is that those that have life can KNOW that they have it. The next verse (v14) goes on to talk about the confidence we should have in prayer as a result of this “knowledgeâ€, and the final verses of the letter (v18-20) are all about what we “knowâ€. It even concludes with the purpose of Jesus coming is so that we may know him who is true (which is possibly why there is a final warning against idols – or “false†gods).
So the point of all these tricky verses is to give us confidence in the truth of who Jesus is and the truth of the life that he gives. Okay. So how does he get to that point?
Well, he sets up a picture of the Testimony of God (v9-10). The false teachers that John is refuting were teaching the idea that Jesus did not come in the flesh (see 1 John 4:2-3, 2 John 1:7). They believed that the flesh and everything physical was evil and so the Son of God could never have taken on a human body. They taught that Jesus only appeared to have a human body, but was really just a spirit. John believes this is completely anti-Christian (that’s why it’s the teaching of the antichrist) and throughout the letter uses lots of different arguments to show that it is false.Â
In chapter 5 he sets up a picture of a courtroom, where the Testimony of God is given about the fact that Jesus is the Son of God and that life is found in the Son (v9-12). It’s not just John’s opinion, it’s God’s opinion and so we can have full confidence in it. In fact, John says in v10, if you don’t believe this testimony then you’re not calling John a liar, you’re calling God a liar.
So in this imaginary courtroom, John describes three witnesses who stand up and testify about this Testimony of God. The three are: the water, the blood and the Spirit.
Now, there are lots of theories about what the water and the blood mean. Some say it’s referring to the water and blood that spilled from Jesus side at the crucifixion (John 19:24), others say the water is his baptism and the blood is his death, still others try to argue that the water is the sacrament of baptism and the blood is the sacrament of communion (a big stretch if you ask me!).
For me, the best explanation is none of these. I think the best fit is the concept that the water is referring to Jesus’ physical birth and the blood is referring to his physical death.
Water is a common image used of birth and creation (think of the waters that the Spirit hovered over in Genesis 1:2) and in John’s gospel (3:5-6), John uses the concept of being “born of water†as a way of describing being physically born, or “born of the fleshâ€. In this passage, Jesus is telling Nicodemus that he has to experience two births in order to see thekingdomofGod. He has to have a physical birth (born of water) and he has to have a spiritual birth (born of the Spirit).
I think this is what John is meaning when he uses the same language in 1 John 5:6. Here he says that Jesus “came by waterâ€, meaning Jesus had a physical birth. This is exactly the concept that the false teachers were denying, and John pushes the point by talking about “blood†– another fleshy concept that the false teachers would have hated. This is probably referring to Jesus’ physical death, a death that was proven when the blood flowed from his side. Blood is used throughout the New Testament as a reference to Jesus’ death (including in 1 John 1:7), and so we can safely say this is what John is meaning here.
It makes sense too. He is arguing that the Testimony of God is that Jesus came in the flesh and two of the witnesses are the physical birth of Jesus (the water) and the physical death of Jesus (the blood). But it’s not just historical events the witness to Jesus, but God himself proclaims this testimony about Jesus through his Spirit. This is why John says in 1 John 5:6-7 that the Spirit testifies along with the water and the blood. This could be referring to Jesus’ baptism (John 1:32-34) or more likely where Jesus says that he will send the Spirit of truth who will testify about him (John 15:26-27). Either way, John’s courtroom scene is completed with three witnesses – the water, the blood and the Spirit, and these three are in agreement (1 John 5:7).
But why is it important that there are three witnesses? Well for that we need to understand one of the most important Old Testament laws in regard to courtroom justice. In Deuteronomy 19:15 the law states that a truth was not able to be established if there is only one witness. There had to be two or three.
“One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.â€
This law is re-enforced by Jesus in Matthew 18:15-17 when he teaches about how we should respond when a brother sins against us, and Paul uses this principle when talking about proving his ministry (2 Corinthians 13:1-3) and also when bringing a charge against an elder (1 Timothy 5:19).
The idea is that although one witness may be telling the truth, it can only be validated or established as true and reliable when “two or three†witness to it. This is possibly what Jesus is talking about when he says: “Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. For where two or three come together in my name, there I am with them.†(Matthew 18:19-20)
In relation to John’s argument, it means that in the imaginary courtroom scene that he is describing “there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.†Do you see what he’s arguing? It’s John’s way of saying that the testimony that Jesus is the Son of God is reliable and is an established truth that we can have full confidence in.
And this in the end is his goal remember? He writes all of it, painting this elaborate courtroom scene, so that we can have confidence that God’s testimony about Jesus is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Â
The sin that leads to death. (5:16-17)
Like the “water and the bloodâ€, there are a few suggestions as to what John is talking about when he talks of the sin that leads to death. Some say it’s the unforgiveable sin of “blasphemy against the Spirit†Jesus talks about in Matthew 12:31-32 (a tricky passage in itself) or the sin of “lying to the Holy Spirit†that instantly kills Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11, or even the sin of taking communion without acknowledging Jesus which seems to have been judged by God with sickness and death in 1 Corinthians 11:29-30.
These are all big stretches to squeeze into the context of 1 John and so the best and simplest way of understanding what John is talking about is to look at the letter itself.
Just before talking about the “sin that leads to death†John writes in v12, “He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.†This is the two distinct groups that he keeps going on about throughout the whole letter. There are two camps. In one camp is the Christ who gives life, and in the other camp there is the antichrist who gives death.
So what is the “sin that leads to death� It is the sin that leads you away from Christ.
More specifically, it’s the sin that John keeps going on about – The sin of denying that the Son of God came in the flesh. This is the sin that leads people away from the truth of the gospel and so leads them to death.
Before talking about this sin, he encourages us to pray for a fellow believer who has sinned (v16). This fellow believer (or “brotherâ€) believes the Testimony about God, has come to Jesus and has been given eternal life. This is a believer that John describes as being “born of God†(v18) and therefore will not continue sinning. John says that God will keep him safe and the evil one cannot harm him and earlier in the letter, John says that if a believer does sin then Jesus speaks on our defence and he atones for all of our sin by his death (1 John 2:1-2).
This is why, when we see a believer committing a sin, we are right to pray and ask God to give them life. God has promised to forgive them and give them life because all of their sin, past, present and future, has been dealt with by Jesus.
Then John makes a distinction. He refers to this sin that leads to death – this sin of rejecting Jesus consistently and deliberately – and he clarifies that he is not saying we should pray for that sin. Notice, he doesn’t exactly tell us we must not pray for that sin, but rather he clarifies, saying that the sins he is instructing us to pray for are specifically the sins of a believer. These are the sins we can have confidence God will forgive, and again remember, this is what this section of the letter is about – confidence in God.
That’s what John is referring to in the previous verses:
“This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. And if we know that he hears us—whatever we ask—we know that we have what we asked of him.†(1 John 5:14-15)
John is saying, when we ask God to forgive the sins of a believer and give them life rather than death, we can have confidence that he will give us what we ask. This is true, not because we are special, but because we are asking “according to his will†(v14). It is God’s will that he gives life to those that believe in Jesus. It is God’s will that anyone born of God will not continue to sin.
This is the sin that we should pray to God about. There is lots of sin that leads to death around us. Everywhere we look we see people rejecting Jesus, and John is saying we can’t have confidence that God will give life to every sinner. Maybe we should pray that God forgives. Maybe we shouldn’t. Maybe we should pray that people repent and that God has mercy. This passage actually doesn’t answer that issue. The point of John’s concluding words in 1 John is to encourage us to pray for Christians having full confidence that God will give them life.
The most important thing is to test our hearts and see which camp we are actually in. Are we committing the sin that leads to death by rejecting Jesus, the Son of God who came in the flesh? Or are we in danger of following false teachers who preach a false gospel about a false God?
We need to always be diligent to keep ourselves from these paths that lead away from eternal life and lead straight to eternal death. This is probably why John finishes this letter in with such an encouragement and a warning:
 “We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true – even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. Dear children, keep yourselves from idols.†(1 John 5:20-21)
As I write this I am in the car on the way back to Melbourne from the Oxygen Conference in Sydney. It was a wonderful time away with a couple of old mates of mine and I have been greatly challenged about living for God, growing in true joy and seeing that all of God’s plans for the Universe are for his glory. These are weighty and challenging issues that raise a lot of questions (I can write a blog on these if you like) but what I wanted to share is what my motivation for coming to the conference was actually about and how that made me reflect on why I originally became a Christian.
Although God used my time up in Sydney to achieve a great many things, the simple reason I wanted to come up was because of the fact that one of the two guest speakers was Pastor John Piper. It’s not a very noble reason and is smells of a bit of celebrity worship, but I have been blessed and challenged by Pipers teaching for many years and the prospect of seeing him in the flesh and meeting him face to face was very appealing.
In the end, when I did finally get to see him and meet him and thank him for the impact of his ministry in my life, I realized that although his preaching is bold and impressive, he is just a guy like me, frail and flawed and seeking to love and know Christ more and more.
After the conference was over, I was chatting with a friend over lunch and they asked me about why I became a Christian. It struck me that my reason for coming to Christ was pretty much the same reason why I came to the conference – put simply, it was an opportunity to meet someone.
All my life I had learnt about God. God was big and impressive and full of love. God was part of my thinking about the world and to be honest, I have never ever thought of the possibility that God might not exist. His existence to me was a given.
Now this may grieve those that believe that think that people should contemplate and conclude that God does not exist, but I see no problem with the fact that I had come to the conclusion that God exists simply because I was told as much. I know lots of problems can arise when you just blindly believe what you’ve been told as a child, but the reason why I don’t have a problem in this case is because I have come to discover that God’s existence is actually true and can be known and experienced. It’s like how parents tell children not to touch the flame otherwise they will be burnt. If they believe them without experiencing the truth of a burnt hand, it doesn’t make the fire any less hot.
For the first 16 years of my life I believed in God in the same way I believed in John Piper. I had no reason to doubt God’s existence and I had no reason to doubt Piper’s existence. I enjoyed what God had given me (life, the world, family, health etc.) and I enjoyed what Piper had given me (sermons, a clear theology of marriage, a passionate southern accent etc.). I admired and enjoyed both God and John Piper, but there was always a distance.
With Piper it was the fact that he was in America and although I wanted to travel to the States again, there was no expectation that I would ever meet him in person.
With God it was the fact that he was in heaven (not in any way comparing heaven to America!). God was far away and although I possibly hoped to go to heaven when I died, even then I guess I didn’t expect that I would be able to meet him in person. God was big and wonderful and good and loving, but he was distant and removed from my real life, day to day experience.
It wasn’t until I met some Christians when I was 16, that I came to discover the good news of Christianity. They shared with me, through their explanation of the gospel and through the way they lived and described their experience of God, that the whole point of Jesus’ coming and dying on the cross was to make it possible for me to have a real, living and personal relationship with God!
God who I had loved and admired from afar was now within reach. The distance was being covered and I could meet him in a way that was as real as face to face!
When I came to see this it blew me away! The moment I heard that Piper was coming to Australia was similar. Why did I go to the conference? Why did I decide to follow Jesus? The real question is, why not??
Like my motivation to go to the conference, maybe my reason for becoming a Christian was a bit of celebrity worship. Maybe it wasn’t very noble, but like after I had met Piper, once I met God, a lot changed. After meeting him, Piper for me was a bit less God-like, a bit more human. But after meeting God, he only grew in my opinion of him.
If you have never met God, if you have only heard about God and your relationship with him is distant and impersonal, my hope for you is that you will experience the same thing I have.
I hope that you come to Christ. He is the only one who has and can make it possible for you to know God in a way that is real and personal. That’s my experience. I believe the Christian good news is that it can be yours as well.
“For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God.” – 1 Peter 3:18
When you see a photo like this, with a car stuck in a tree, you ask the obvious question, “How the hell did that get there?” It demands some form of an explanation. I think the universe is like that.
The very fact that we and everything else is here rather than not, demands some form of explanation. I’m not talking purpose (although that may be related). I’m talking origins. When you look at the world, when you stare up at the stars, when you look at your own hand, you can not ignore the obvious question, “How the hell did all this get here?”
Now I am absolutely no expert in science or quantum mechanics, but it seems to me that there can only really be three options for the origins of the universe. Each option is in it’s own way whacky and unbelievable. Each one involves an idea that is bigger and weirder than anything we can see or experience or test scientifically, but all scientists still fall into one of three camps in how the explain the ultimate question of origins.
These are the 3 options:
Option 1. Magic Gun Theory – The material reality had a beginning that was from nothing and caused by nothing.
Option 2. String Theory – The material reality is eternal and had no beginning.
Option 3. Creator Theory – The material reality had a beginning that was caused by an eternal, non-material reality (God).
Now, I’ll explain what I mean by these three option in a moment, but as I see it, every theory imaginable must fall into one of these three. Consequently, every person must chose to side with one of these three options if they are to answer the “How did it get here?” question. You could, of course, go with Option 4. which is “I have no idea” (this by the way is my answer to the car in the tree) but if it really is the case that there are only 3 mutually exclusive options for the origin of the universe, then you still would have to conclude that one of these three options must be the answer, even if you feel there is no definitive way of discovering which one is true.
The terrifying thing about the idea that we can never know the answer is that the implications that stem from each option are vastly different. If there is a non-material (or spiritual) reality and if that is in the form of a personal deity then a mountain of questions arise and the relevance of theology and philosophy about the nature of God and spiritual reality becomes incredibly important. If on the other hand, there is no spiritual reality and that the material reality is all the is, then that has great implications for the irrelevance for all religion and raises many questions about the origins of morality and the claims of those who have experience of the spiritual. This is of course only skimming the surface of the implications that arise on both sides, but hopefully the point is clear that trying to work out which of the three options is true is a vitally important and practically relevant pursuit.
Let me now try to simply describe each of the three options:
Option 1. Magic Gun Theory
This is the theory that claims that the material reality (including all matter and energy that exists) came into existence as some point in history, exploding on to the scene with the Big Bang. This is supported by what we observe about the universe – that it is expanding – giving the impression that it had an origin at some point. The reason why I call this the “Magic Gun Theory” is because it states that this event somehow created matter and energy out of nothing and nothing at all (non-material or otherwise) caused the bang to happen in the first place. It all just magically happened and appeared for no reason. This theory seems like an easy way of combining what we observe about the universe with an atheistic view of the world. The problem with this view is that it is completely unscientific. No modern scientist would claim that matter and energy can all of a sudden just appear from absolutely nothing, with nothing causing that to happen. It is simply a theory that defies all we know about science, for the sake of marrying evidence (that there seems to be a beginning) with prejudice (that they want to believe in nothing spiritual).
Option 2. String Theory
The material reality is eternal and had no beginning.
Option 3. Creator Theory – The material reality had a beginning that was caused by an eternal, non-material reality (God).
Now in the end, although this theory seems quite ridiculous, I guess I have to admit that each theory has it’s element of wackiness. In this case, you either believe in a magic universe that can defy scientific logic or you believe in a magic deity that defies scientific logic. I personally think that
The Origin and Fate of the Universe – Steven Hawkins
According to this theory [strong anthropic principle], there are either many different universes or many different regions of a single universe, each with its own initial configuration and, perhaps, with its own set of laws of science. In most of these universes the conditions would not be right for the development of complicated organisms; only in the few universes that are like ours would intelligent beings develop and ask the question: “Why is the universe the way we see it?” The answer is then simple: If it had been different, we would not be here!
There are something like ten million million million million million million million million million million million million million million (1 with eighty zeroes after it) particles in the region of the universe that we can observe. Where did they all come from? The answer is that, in quantum theory, particles can be created out of energy in the form of particle/antiparticle parts. But that just raises the question of where the energy came from. The answer is that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero. The matter in the universe is made out of positive energy. However, the matter is all attracting itself by gravity. Two pieces of matter that are close to each other have less energy than the same two pieces a long way apart, because you have to expend energy to separate them against the gravitational force that is pulling them together. Thus in a sense, the gravitational field has negative energy. In the case of a universe that is approximately uniform in space, one can show that this negative gravitational energy exactly cancels the positive energy represented by the matter. So the total energy of the universe is zero.
Now twice zero is also zero. Thus the universe can double the amount of positive matter energy and also double the negative gravitational energy without violation of the conservation of energy. It is said that there’s no such thing as a free lunch. But the universe is the ultimate free lunch.
One could say: “The boundary condition of the universe is that it has no boundary.” The universe would be completely self-contained and not affected by anything outside itself. It would neither be created nor destroyed. It would just BE.
The idea that space and time may form a closed surface without boundary also has profound implications for the role of God in the affairs of the universe. With the success of scientific theories in describing events, most people have come to believe that God allows the universe to evolve according to a set of laws and does not intervene in the universe to break these laws. However, the laws do not tell us what the universe should have looked like when it started – it would still be up to God to wind up the clockwood and choose how to start it off. So long as the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator. But if the universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundaries or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end: it would simply be. What place, then, for a creator?
This is a response to my brother’s post reviewing Tim Keller’s book The Prodigal God.
Please first read it here:
http://humblewonderful.blogspot.com/2011/08/prodigal-god-my-rambling-response.html
This is my response. (for some reason his blog wouldn’t let me post it)
(for those other than Tony)
After posting his blog, my brother Tony sent me a text message that said:
“You’ll hate it – I don’t like it myself – but prodigal god is up”
Well, I don’t know what you were worried about Tony – I loved the blog. I agree with much of what you wrote and in principle, think you approached the passage in a way that more Bible College students need to. I’ll explain more of that a bit later.
First and foremost, I want to say I wholeheartedly agree with what you said in your introduction – It is true. I am intelligent and caring and humorous and ridiculously good-looking (hmm I may have read into your post more than what was there).
I also want to say, I haven’t actually read Time Keller’s Prodigal God, so I won’t be commenting on it or whether you are picking on poor Mr Keller unfairly. I have though read, studied, memorised and even performed Luke 15 in the past and so I wanted to comment on how I really like your reading and interpretation of it.
I agree that the main issue in the parable is the elder brother’s attitude towards the younger brother. As you point out, when put next to the earlier two parables the clear pattern is something is lost, something is found and then everyone celebrates. Jesus’ even explains this when he points out that “there is joy among the angels of God over one sinner who repents.” So clearly, sinners are the things that are lost – like a coin, sheep or younger brother -, God is the one who finds – like a woman, a shepherd and a father – and everyone should be celebrating over repentance and restoration – like the neighbors, friends, angels in heaven and… wait a second! Here’s where the contrast in the last parable is evident and the real point of the parable is brought home to Jesus’ audience, the pharisees.
The older brother like the pharisees should have been rejoicing and yet they are focussed on injustice. As you point out, the main focus of the older brother’s outrage is that 1. the father is not giving the son what he deserves (rejection and condemnation) and 2. the father is not getting what he deserves (a son that has not treated him so disrespectfully).
I do think that the elder son has a sense of self-righteousness in his tone and that his indignation does expose the fact that he thinks that he is in a different category to the younger son and is not equally in need of just as much mercy and generosity. Jesus was often addressing this sense of self-righteousness among the pharisees and often used parables to point this out (see for example, my favourite parable in Luke 18:9-14).
Despite this, I agree with your basic conclusion, “There should be no doubt that what Jesus is saying is that the correct response to the restoration of a sinner to the family is rejoicing.”
I don’t think Jesus is saying that judgement is wrong or that sin is not actually sin and that’s why the father welcomes the son back. As if God doesn’t really have any problem with us and that’s why the elder brother needs to just get over his whole moralistic focus on justice and come join the party.
I think the message that sin is real is still very much part of the story. The sons rejection of the father and squandering of his inheritance is told with emotional weight and are supposed to be an apt parallel to what our sin is all about. We reject God and yet we want to use the things he gives us (life, our bodies, the planet etc.) for our own purposes and desires. The fact that Jesus repeats the point about how the celebration happens when “one sinner repents” is a clear message that sin is not imaginary. It must be repented of (turned away from and rejected). The younger son would not be welcomed home if he only came home to borrow more money so he could pay for more prostitutes. He needed to repent.
So the issue is not that the elder brother got sin wrong. What the elder brother got wrong was the character of the father. The father could have very rightly rejected the younger brother. Even the younger brother knew this as he didn’t come back expecting to be forgiven and accepted back into the family, but just to get a job. But the father put aside his rights and the judgement the son deserved and he welcomed him back with great joy. His heart filled with love and joy compelled him and this is the character of God.
The problem with the elder brother and with the pharisees is that they were waiting for God’s judgement and they did not welcome God’s mercy. It reminds me of Jonah actually (won’t go into that now. You’ll have to read it yourself).
Although the elder brother’s sin includes his lack of love for the younger brother, it can’t be ignored that the younger brother’s sin was against the father. It was real and it needed to be dealt with. The younger brother could not come back without acknowledging and repenting of his sin and this is the sin that Jesus is referring to saying that this requires repentance if you want to be cause for celebration. You can’t be “found” if you don’t acknowledge that you are “lost”.
Tony, I very strongly disagree that seeing sin as primarily (if not only) a vertical issue means in practice that “if we want to treat someone with absolutely no regard we merely have to declare them God forsaken”. That is implying that sin being a vertical issue compels us to twist whether God loves or hates in order to allow us to love or hate as we choose.
On the contrary, anyone who sees sin in this way will be compelled by God’s example of love, forgiveness and generosity. Unless they totally ignore the whole gospel story (which sadly some so-called “Christians” do) they will not be able to ignore God’s example. The flow on effect from seeing sin as a vertical issue which then goes to horizontal is that forgiveness and love travels in the same way. As Paul says, “Forgive as the Lord forgave you” (Colossians 3:13) and as John says, “Since God so loved us, we ought to love one another.” (1 John 4:11) or as Jesus says, “As I have loved you, so you must love one another.”
This is the rebuke to the elder brother and to the pharisees. God has shown grace and forgiveness. He has welcomed the repentant sinner and so who are we to withold our grace and forgiveness when he has been so generous?
The parable is not just about the elder brother’s response to the younger brother in a vacuum. It is about his response in the light of the generosity of the father. The parable is a beautiful declaration of the character of God and the wonderful time that we are now in. As Paul says, “I tell you, now is the time of God’s favor, now is the day of salvation!” (2 Corinthians 6:2)
The day of Judgement is still coming. Jesus spoke about that in great detail and so it can not be ignored if we want to get his teaching correct. But today is not the day of judgement. Today is the day of salvation! That’s what the pharisees were missing out on. That’s what the elder brother couldn’t accept.
Tony, you set out the challenge of seeing if anyone could find Jesus in the parable. For me, I see Jesus in the party. Jesus is in the robe and the ring and the fatted calf. Jesus is in the running of the father to meet the repentant son.
Jesus (and what he was about to do in dying for sin) is the only reason why today is the day of salvation.
The coming of Jesus declared a new era. A time when sinners could come to God and be welcomed with celebration rather than condemnation. As Jesus said in Luke 4:17-19 part of his message was to “proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor”.
As with all parables, this is only part of the story, and though we shouldn’t squeeze what Jesus did on the cross into the story if it isn’t explicitly there, I think it is a necessary element of the whole gospel story and makes sense of how judgement and mercy can co-exist.
Lastly, I want to say that I love that you avoid reading more into the parable that is there. A lot of bad teaching is done when people do that, and although as an evangelical Christian, I expect that I completely agree with Keller’s understanding of the gospel, I am confident that if we read the entire gospel as you have done – with honesty, in context and avoiding presuppositions – we will come to the same gospel, without having to do hermeneutic backflips.
