Attitudes and Actions: 1 John 2

In Summary:
John continues his letter by giving his overall purpose in writing the church. He wants them to not sin—simple enough, right? After all, who would want to continue sinning after meeting the grace of Jesus?

John’s concern, though, is that his church, his friends, will still sin. Perhaps because they are still new to the faith, new to the idea of what it is to follow Jesus. Perhaps because even those who have been in the faith for a while will still stumble and fall. There are two things, though, that John knows about his audience: they are human, which means they will fall short of perfection; they are loved by God, which means they should also have hope.

Yet there must have been those who looked at the grace of God and understood it to mean that they could do anything at all. After all, there was inexhaustible grace and they were released from the law, so all things were permissible, right?

Here is an important aside: John’s readers do not have the rest of the New Testament at this point. They have the Old Testament and the oral teachings of the Apostles, with perhaps some of the earlier writings of the Church. (Everything we deal with in dating the New Testament writings is an estimate, based on our understanding of when various events happened and how they are reflected in the writings.)

So the church John writes to is not in possession of Galatians or Ephesians as reminders of grace. They do not have Romans as an instruction on the importance and use of the Law in the church. They just have what they’ve been told—and now John is trying to help round out the ideas they have heard. He writes to the church about the importance of obeying God.

In Focus:
His focus is on the church members showing love for one another as evidence that the light is shining and the darkness is fading away. One cannot hate his brother and claim to be filled with the love of God, and John’s continued expression of how love looks through the behaviors of the church. The world, he says in 2:17, is passing away. So loving the things of the world is a pointless exercise.

Instead, the love of the church should be spent on those within the family of faith. Now, it is important to get this right about that idea: John’s instruction is not to neglect the community around the body of Christ, but rather an emphasis point. As Jesus Himself said, the church would be known by the world because of its love for one another (John 13:35). The love within the community should have been visible to the wider world, and been something that the world around the church wanted to encounter. Further, it was a genuine love, and those who show love for some will naturally overflow that onto others.

And finally, the church recognized that all people were made in the image of God. Once they accepted that as the reality of the world around them, then it was natural to show love to those they encounter.

Now, what is this love? It is to work to bring others to follow Jesus, in line with His commandments and His ways. Love is to treat others as Jesus would treat them: with grace, mercy, and righteousness.

In Practice:
What do we do about this?

First, we need to look at our own lives: do we love one another? Our actions within churches suggest that we do not. If we are being self-serving or demanding, then we are not showing love. If we are using the church for our own purposes and not surrendering to God to be used for His purpose, we are not showing love to one another. There are too many examples of abuse and wrongdoing in the church to count these days—and those are just the big moments!

How do you approach your relationship with your local church family? Do you look forward to being with and supporting one another? Or are you there because you have to be, and those folks better stay out of your way on a bad day? Or, do you not even have a local church family? You need one. None of them are perfect, but you need one anyway.

Second, we need to look at how we live out our faith in the world around us: does the love we live for the people within the body spill out into the streets around our churches?

Is it possible that our actions reflect an attitude that puts us in the position of anti-Christ in the life of others? Keep in mind that the actual term here means “before Christ” or, perhaps, “in the way of reaching Christ.”

Could that be where we sit with our own demands and methods?

In Nerdiness: 

“Paraclete” is the term translated as “Advocate” in 1 John 2:1. Origen (3rd Century) connects this title to both Jesus and the Holy Spirit, highlighting both intercessor and comforter. It’s a term that is used of the Holy Spirit in John 14:26 (and the verses following in 15 and 16 that refer to the Spirit) and not many other places in Scripture. This is a place where you do get toward the idea by breaking down the parts of the compound word: “Called with” is good, “called alongside” is perhaps better here, and so we get the “one who is called alongside” as the idea. Some suggest a legal concept, thus tying into “Advocate” like an attorney is an advocate, but it may be simpler than that and be anyone who does not have to be involved in someone’s difficulties but joins in to help because he can. (some info from BDAG, some from ACCS)

John 1:35-3:21 #eebc2018

Well, there’s a lot to cover in this passage. That’s what comes of using a computer program to generate a reading plan: it may stretch it farther or make it lopsided. You might need to spread out some of the Friday readings.

This one moves from the public identification of Jesus by John through the calling of the first disciples and then to the first of the miracles identified by John as a “sign” of Jesus as the Messiah. Then we have the interaction of Nicodemus.

Let’s work quickly:

1. I find it interesting that you have public action, public action, public action, and then a private conversation with Nicodemus. This is something to watch in John: the balance between public and private actions in John. Note, for example, that the miracle is public though the actual disclosure of how it happened was not.

2. There is no linguistic or grammatical reason to think that “wine” means anything other than “wine.” That does not mean that Jesus endorses general alcohol consumption and it’s plain that drunkenness is a sin. The telling reality is that it took until the American Prohibition movement of the late 1800s for anyone to define the Greek word for “wine” as anything but wine. If it takes 1800 years to redefine a word, there’s a question there.

Now, wine was typically diluted and drunkenness was frowned upon, so there’s really no parallel to modern wine. Think of it this way: you’re probably talking consuming a beverage that has a grape (or other fruit, probably grape) flavor but is mostly water. A usual ratio was 3 or 4 parts water to 1 part wine. A typical modern wine takes about 3 glasses to hit the legal intoxication limit—you’d have to quintuple that to make the same alcohol content. That’s if there was any strength to the wine. It may have been very weak.

What’s the value? A bit of alcohol kills a lot of bacteria. That’s the main thing that’s happening.

Jesus turning water into wine does not justify beverage alcohol. The cultural gap is bigger than that.

3. Note that the first disciples rapidly bring others to Christ—the Gospel travels most rapidly down relational lines.

Further thoughts: John 2 and John 3 (and more John 3)

John 1:1-34

Today’s Bible reading was from John. Specifically, it was John 1:1-34, covering the Prologue of the Gospel of John and the testimony of John the Baptist.

I thought I’d give you a few quick thoughts on tis passage for the day:

1. John’s view of the beginning of all things is different from most of the world in which he lived. The idea that God the Father and God the Son (later you’ll seem him bring in God the Spirit, but his delay is related to teaching order, not a belief that the Spirit came later) pre-exist all of creation is not echoed in any of the mythologies of his time. Only in the Genesis account do we find a pre-existing God who was and is and is always God. Greece, Rome, Egypt, and many others had gods who had taken the place of other gods, with creation as an after-effect and not a deliberate act.

It’s also worth noting when you read Genesis 1 tomorrow that putting John and Genesis together gives you God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit at Creation. John has 2/3, Genesis has 2/3…

2. John moves quickly to establishing the divide between John the Baptist and Jesus. It’s important to never allow someone to confuse the Christian with the Christ, the servant with the Savior. John is clear about himself and John the Baptist: neither are the light.

3. Note the questions given to John: when you need to know, ask questions. Ask again, and again, if need be.

4. John calls Jesus the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. It’s a singular noun there, sin. What does that tell us? Our individual problems are part of a bigger one, but our Savior is bigger still.

5. For further reading on John 1, click here.

Fishing, Feeding, Caring: John 21

In Summary: We come to the end of John’s Gospel. He has told us everything about the ministry of Jesus that he thinks is important, and wrapped up pretty cleanly in John 20. Then, we get John 21. It reads almost like an addendum, an afterthought. It is one more scene in the story—and it’s important. Perhaps if this were a film it would be the in-the-end-credits scene that actually wraps up the story thread and sets up the next film.

We have the appearance of Jesus by the sea, coupled with Peter’s suggestion that they go fishing. I have heard sermons that support Peter’s declaration that he’s going fish, and some that criticize him for it. It depends a lot on how you take Peter’s “I am going fishing” in John 21:3. There is evidence in Mark 14:28 that Jesus had told the Apostles to go to Galilee, and just how would one expect them to find dinner if not by fishing? Others take it as Peter’s declaration that he’s going back to his old life, but that seems unlikely given that this follows the Upper Room meetings with the Lord.

Then we have the miraculous catch of fish. 153 of them, to be exact. Yet Jesus already has fish on the fire for the Apostles. I think that’s informative: we work in our own strength, and fail. We work in obedience to God and see amazing results, only to find that God has already done even more than we got finished for Him. Great moment. The idea that the net was not torn gets imbued with many symbolic meanings, but I’d see this one: when the Apostles first followed Jesus, they were mending their nets. Now, there is not even that task to delay them. They can get right to the work.

In Focus: Our eyes, though, must be drawn at this point to the interaction between Jesus and Peter. It is here that we see the Denier turned into the leader of the Apostles—though we frequently see Peter as in charge throughout, I think that’s reading the end-state into the story. Peter takes a walk with Jesus, and Jesus questions him. Three times, and Peter is instructed by Jesus in response to those questions.

The questions are fundamentally the same: “Peter, do you love me?” Peter has previously denied Jesus, but here is his opportunity for restoration. Peter has had time to think, and he needs to affirm what he believes and thinks. Then, though, he has commands to follow. Jesus does not leave Peter with a “Great, glad it feels good to you, bro.” He gives Peter commands to follow. Peter is commanded to feed and care for Jesus’ sheep—with the lambs being highlighted. Love is shown not in words, feels, or proclamations. Love is shown in actions.

In Practice: From this, we gather a couple of points. The first is one that goes out especially to my pastoral brethren, but is still broadly applicable. Peter is not told to cause any form of problems for the sheep. He is not told to fix them, save them, shave them, rebuke them, or beat them. He is told to tend them and feed them. Now, you can argue that “tending” involves protection from harm, and it does. Yet how do we do what we do? After all “shepherd my sheep” could be put into English as “pastor my sheep.” If we are more concerned with beating down the bad than we are with filling up the good, then trouble will follow as night follows day. Sheep need something to go to, not just correction about what to run from.

This comes into the second practical point: Peter notices that John is following, and asks “What about him?” Jesus tells him, in essence, “Mind your own business.” We so often want to keep tabs on everyone else, and doing so we miss filling our days with what needs to be done. Yes, there is righteous behavior in correcting the wayward and in fighting off the wolves, but the bulk of the time of pastor or any other Christian is in presenting the truth of God, the eternal Bread of Life and Water of Life who is Jesus Christ, the Lord. Be for Jesus—and against anything not of Him.

In Nerdiness:  In that same section, there is a valuable illustration about being careful with Greek. I’ve heard, and preached (to my shame) a sermon or two about the different words for love used in this passage. Yet if you take a look at D.A. Carson’s Exegetical Fallacies, you’ll see that there may not be the differences of meaning that so many of us preachers have claimed.

Words have ranges of meaning, and we must be careful not to hang too much on differences when overlaps exist.

If you are a Bible Nerdy type, I recommend Exegetical Fallacies to you. After you’ve done Grasping God’s Word by Hays and Duvall, it’s the next step in clarifying your hermeneutics methods.

Not the Whole Story: John 20

In Summary: We are wrapping up John, and will be done with his Gospel next week. I appreciate you who read and keep coming back. More than words can say.

John starts chapter 20 with the trip of Mary Magdalene to the Empty Tomb. The Synoptics show us Mary Magdalene and others going, but John emphasizes her there. It is possible that she makes two trips, one alone and one with other women, or that she arrived before everyone else. It is hard to say with certainty—the fact that she travels “before dark (v. 1)” shows us that she went very early. This was a clock-less society: time was governed by the sun. Making it somewhere in the dark showed a commitment above and beyond.

Then we get the travel of Peter and John to the Tomb. It is empty. They are just not certain what to do with this reality. More on that in a minute.

We get the Upper Room, where there is discussion and debate about what has happened, and then Jesus shows up. Right in the middle of everything. Debating and discussing stops in the presence of Jesus. Fear does not, and the disciples are afraid of many things right now.

Well, most of the disciples. Thomas is not afraid to run an errand or two and miss the gathering. We have no idea why—though I have heard this used as a reason not to miss church! He may have been tending to a loved one. He may have been working on something important.

And our focus on Thomas goes the wrong way. We see his doubts, but we should his confession: “My Lord and My God!” This is stronger even than most of the other disciples.

Finally, we get the word from John that this is not the whole story. This wraps (with the addition of John 21) the earthly work of Jesus with his disciples, but there is more. More that occurred, more that will occur as God redeems His people. But this is enough. Let the whole world be filled with the rest of the story: people who walk in faith and serve the Truth.

In Focus: For a quick focus, let us go back to Peter and John in the Empty Tomb. We see that John gets there first, then Peter. Notice the difference in the verbs describing their reactions?

John looks in from outside, but does not go in. Peter barges in, looks, and then leaves. John then goes in, looks, believes, and then goes home.

In Practice: From this, let us take our practical ideas:

1. Get as close of a look as necessary. Read, read, and listen to Scripture and get a close look at the Gospel. Read even the critics of Christianity, but read honest critics and tough responses—do not be confused by reading the tough critic and wimpy defenders of the faith. (Or the other way ‘round!)

2. When you see, though, do not hesitate to believe. John believes because he’s putting together all that has been said. Peter’s not quite there yet.

3. Be cautious in how you treat those who have not seen what you have yet. Remember the “yet:” Thomas did not believe “yet.” But he does come in time. Imagine if the disciples had locked him out for asking tough questions in the beginning?

4. Go home when you must, but reassemble with the believers when it is time!

In Nerdiness: A good point gets raised regarding the timing of the crucifixion and how to reckon with three days. It is worth noting that John, like the other Gospel writers, points us to the Resurrection “on the first day of the week.”

However we argue that out, this is a good place to start. It’s also why we have church on Sundays. I think that couples with another truth: we owe God the first and best place in our lives. What better way than starting the week by giving Him the day?

Saturday for us, as a day of rest. Sunday opens the week in worship and praise, doing the work of the Lord to set the tone for the rest of the week. True, there are times that does not work—but does it not work because it has to not work or because we just will not make hard choices?

The World's Crown: John 19

In Summary: John 19 continues through the trials of Jesus and concludes with His burial at the hands of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. The chapter ranges through the final mockeries by the soldiers through the flowing of blood and water from His side.

 

We see an important part of the Gospel of John in John 19:35 where the account of the crucifixion is attached to an eyewitness statement. This we typically apply to the entirety of John, and use to locate the author. How? We see earlier in the chapter that Jesus commends the care of Mary to the “Beloved Disciple,” and traditionally we affix that title to John. He’s the only disciple still around, based on the narrative.

 

This chapter gives us the sign over the Cross from which artwork takes its INRI for the label. These are the initial Latin letters for what was written there: King of the Jews, with the addition of the name of Jesus of Nazareth at the beginning. (Remember, there’s no “J” in Latin. Well, that’s obvious, but it’s also true of the language. So, Jesus is “Iesus.”

 

I think there is something significant to the way John records the Jewish leadership complaint about this sign. They wanted written “This man said ‘I am King of the Jews.’” That’s often taken as national pride, not wanting someone crucified as the king of the Jews.

 

I think John sees something more. He sees this: the Jewish leadership knew the “I am” statements of Jesus were claims of Divinity. And they wanted Him crucified for those claims. They wanted Him crucified for “I am.” They would have followed Him for simply “King of the Jews.”

 

In Focus: That they would have followed Jesus for “King of the Jews” is what makes John 19:15 stand out so much. Throughout the Roman period in Israel, the Jews, and their leaders especially, did not much care for the Romans. Even though Rome had come in with the invitation of some leaders, the nation as a whole had never really liked all the Romans.

 

Since they did not like the Romans, there were always movements to get rid of them. There were certain factions, like the Sadducees that were supportive of the Romans. Typically, though, this came from their own benefit. Based on most of the sources I have, the general feeling wavered between apathy and anger.

The truth is that politics makes strange bedfellows. In this case the alliance of the Jewish leadership with the Romans is incredibly strange. Why do they get together?

 

To oppose Jesus. The effort to remove Jesus required two sides to stop warring with each other and focus on a common enemy. Jesus was a threat to the religious and social power of the established cultural leaders in Israel. In the long run, He was a threat to the political dominance of Rome—and His teachings would be problematic. As Sir Humphrey Appleby once said, the Sermon on the Mount is not good for the Defence Budget.

 

In Practice: This resulted in a common effort, and that recurs to this day. The teachings of Jesus are a threat to the ways of the world.

 

Materialism cannot stand in the face of Biblical Christianity. Selfishness cannot stand. Political systems break down in the face of the Lordship of Christ. The focus on sex falls. Individualistic demands fall apart in the face of God.

 

This makes something that is challenging for those who would follow Christ. The challenges and travails of life will double down on the effort to derail us.

 

This is why there feels like so many odd factors oppose the Gospel—they do. This is also why that opposition is not worth losing sleep over. It will lose out, over time, just as Israel is not ruled by Pharisees and Sadducees, and the Roman Empire is the subject of history, not current events.

Focus on the obedience to the One who said “I am.” Because He still is.

 

The world’s crown may be made of thorns, but the Lord’s Crown is filled with His Glory forever.

 

In Nerdiness: Want to have some fun? Chase the rumors and historical maybes about where Joseph of Arimathea ended up. Legends put him getting to England. One or two crazies will get him to America…but that’s not really strong in my opinion.

 

Further, we see Joseph and Nicodemus crop into the stories here. The more sustainable history ideas follow the Apostles and James, because these really became the leaders of the Early Church. It is uncertain what truly became of the wealthier followers who show up at the burial of Jesus. There’s not a lot to track.

 

The stories that push them, especially Joseph, to the fringe of the Roman world just sound neat. And they are fun to read.

Betrayed! John 18

In Summary: At this point in the story, Jesus and the disciples have finished the Last Supper and head to the Garden of Gethsemane. This chapter continues through the arrest of Jesus, including the betrayal by Judas, and works its way through the trials of Jesus. We see Caiaphas and Pilate here, including Pilate’s offer of release and the infamous shout of “Not this man, but Barabbas!”

The challenge of John 18 is finding one focal point among these summary ideas. Should we examine Jesus and His trials? The injustice carried out when anyone is presumed guilty is bad enough, but here we are certain of His innocence! Neither Caiaphas nor Pilate are concerned with justice, though. They are both concerned with power and control. This is bad.

Then we encounter Peter and his denials of Jesus. We knew this was coming, for Jesus had told Peter it would occur (John 13:38), and Jesus is never wrong. It still hurts to see it happen, and even on a second reading, when you think Peter would straighten up between Luke and John, he doesn’t. This is too often my life: I know it’s coming, a major failure. Then I do it anyway.

We could look at how the religious leaders and the political leaders of the day took someone into custody under cover of darkness. How they ramrodded a set of show trials. How they had looked the other way until it was convenient to grab Him. Of course, that’s probably a shade too close to home, isn’t it? There are too many times we want to let Jesus loose until He’s inconvenient, then we want Him locked up. When He has disaster relief workers out, He’s okay, but when He sends people out to rebuke sin, He’s got to go. When He’s inspiring gift-giving, He’s welcome, but when He inspires chastisement or calls for sacrifice, then He’s a menace.

In Focus: Instead, though, I think we could benefit from a focus on the betrayal of Jesus by Judas. I could wander endlessly across the reasons for Judas’ action. Why would he do this? What wrong had Jesus done him? Not a bit.

Judas, though, stands in for Adam at this point in the story. We could, and should, ask the same questions of Adam. Why would you betray God’s commands? What wrong had He done you?

Yet in my heart, I know this: we all carry that ability to be self-absorbed and betray those who do us no wrong. It is not a positive character trait, but it is a common one. Why Judas did this, why Adam did, all pale in comparison to the real point.

The story’s not about them. It’s not really about us, either. It is about Jesus. With Jesus, we know why. He goes through all the injustice and all the mockery for us. Because the worst of humanity came forward, struck Him, and He overcame. The light shines in the darkness, and darkness flees.

In Practice: What can we take in practice from this?

First: Defend the innocent. We can be certain that none are as innocent as Jesus, but the point stands. In the interest of justice, we treat all as innocent until proof shows that must change.

Second: Restore the fallen. We see this again with Peter, but realize that any of us can slip. We need restoration.

Third: Quit leashing Jesus. We lock up the Son of God when we try to make Him white, Baptist, or hip. While I’m convinced He speaks with a strong voice and no wimpy sound, He did not look or sound like me—it is my job to learn to sound like Him! Let the Word speak for Himself, and stop masking Him.

In Nerdiness:  Two main nerd points: first, the differences in John’s account and the Synoptic accounts are interesting. John compacts the trials and leaves out the prayers in Gethsemane. That’s a “why” I can’t explain. Perhaps John felt that time too intimate to share?

Second, note the “I am” statement in John 18:5, John 18:6, and John 18:7. You may have missed it, because for the sake of English grammar, we get it as “I am he.” But take a look at the NASB’s italics for “he” or the NLT’s capitalizations of “I AM.”

Jesus simply tells the arresting posse that “I AM.” They fall. I like the view that they fall at the power of His words, though some have them falling out of fear that God is about to lightning-strike Jesus for blasphemy. Which raises the question: when that didn’t happen, why didn’t they rethink?

John uses a lot of “I am” statements of Jesus. They are worth your noticing.

Praying for You: John 17

In Summary: This passage is known as the High Priestly Prayer of Jesus. Throughout this chapter, Jesus prays for His disciples, both present and future.This chapter is pretty straightforward, and I think we need to be careful not to make Jesus saying strange things here.

 

A couple of main points that this prayer does touch are worth noticing. First is the idea of glory. Jesus is headed to the Cross, but His prayer is about glory. There is no sense here that the Cross is anything but the intentional point of His life. I know I hit this subject often, but we need to remember that Jesus’ death was no accident, nor was it the plans of mankind. This is the glory He came for: to redeem His people to Himself.

 

The second point is found exemplified in John 17:11 about the world. Recurring throughout, Jesus highlights that He is leaving the world, but the disciples will remain in the world. These disciples are connected to the world, but also linked to Jesus. They are no longer of the world, or loyal to the world, but remain within its borders.

In Focus: Focusing in this passage, I like John 17:20. There is, of course, the cheering factor of knowing that Jesus prayed for those of us who were not even born yet. That is not the only thing to note in this verse.

 

Another aspect to note is that Jesus’ statement here lets us know that He knew generations would follow His current disciples. It is either necessary to place this statement on the pen of a later writer or acknowledge that Jesus let His disciples know at this point that they would not see His literal return. It would come in time.

In Practice: What, then, do we do? First, we follow the example of Jesus and we pray. That should be clear, but it bears repeating. Second, we acknowledge our unity with other believers. This is how Jesus prayed for believers: not as Baptists and Presbyterians, but as His disciples.

 

Isn’t about time that became our focus?

In Nerdiness: The imagery of “in the world but not of it” would have been very clear for people within the Roman Empire. Rome conquered and held many places, but few people were considered to be “of Rome.” Instead, they were “in Rome’s Empire” but not “of Rome.” They had fewer rights, fewer opportunities.

 

Consider the Gauls, the Jews, or the Egyptians. These all retained their own customs and religions. They held tightly to their own heritage, though they were in Rome. Further, one could go to the edge of the Empire and find the Celts. These are the historic situations which should give us some insight into how we live as people in the world but not of it.

 

So break out the Asterix books, the hieroglyphics, and the kilts. We don’t belong here, we just live here.

Trials, Tribulations, and Trials: John 16

In Summary: John 16 continues the last night’s teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ. In this chapter, we get the promise of the Holy Spirit, the promise of trials, and some warning about Jesus’ visible departure. Working backwards, the chapter ends with Jesus telling the disciples that they will be scattered. This is a tough warning: these men have been together through a great deal for at least three years. Possibly more—and they are about to see that fellowship broken.

 

Coming to the middle, the main focus is prayer in Jesus’ name. This is not placed in a vacuum, but is in the context of His departure to the Father. The idea here is not that we get anything, but reflects that the disciples will have direct access to the Father rather than having to pass through Him. Keep this connected to the concept of a throne room or an emperor: typically, you need someone to carry messages, unless you’re important. Jesus is telling the disciples they may have access because of Him. It’s not a guarantee of grant so much as a guarantee of an audience.

 

Then we see the area that we will take in focus today: trials, tribulations, and trials. Jesus assures the disciples, as He did in John 15:18, that the world is not on our side.

In Focus: John 16:1 opens our focus discussion. Jesus summarizes the teaching of John 15 by telling the disciples that the intention is that they not lose faith when trials come. Whatever else one can say here, we cannot say that Christians will not suffer trials.

 

In truth, we need to consider the statements of this chapter. Jesus warns the disciples that they will be sundered from the center of religion and community for following Him. Now, in theory, we should not be sundered from the Christian Church for following Christ—that should be impossible. But some assemblies of men label themselves churches, and will throw a follower of Jesus out as quickly as any other worldly gathering.

 

The disciples will be betrayed by neighbors and friends, family and associates—all of whom will think they are serving God, or whatever gods they have concocted. It will be considered a service to humanity to dispose of Christians. It long has been, depending on which region of the world you live in.

 

We must be cautious not to expect that Christianity will always flow free and easy for us even in nations that have long harbored that freedom. Even countries founded to allow religious freedom will eventually turn against the followers of Christ. How do we know? Because Jesus tells us, and He has not been wrong. Ever.

In Practice: So, what can we do? Do we practice tribulations and trials? I do not think that is as much the answer as we might expect. After all, Jesus does not run the disciples through a mock tribulation. He does not have them practice sneaking quietly to church or gathering in the catacombs.

 

These skills and practices have served the Church. They serve the Church, and will serve the Church. Practical methods to preserve life in the face of tyranny are always good things to know how to do. A stockpile of canned goods and bottled water has rarely been a bad thing for someone.

 

However, let us consider how Jesus prepared the disciples for trials, tribulations, and more trials. He taught them the truth. He built their understanding of Him, the Father, and the Holy Spirit.

 

He gave them the information to assimilate into their faith. Faith that would last, that would hold them. He does not dumb anything down. He also does not talk about strategies for keeping the world a little happier a little longer.

 

He plainly speaks of the enmity of the world for Him and His ways.

 

So, what do we do?

 

More than learn to make the world a better place, we learn to draw near to Jesus. If through that, we make the world a better place, so be it. Yet let us not lose sight of how He prepared the disciples, and let us prepare the same way.

In Nerdiness: Wrestling with John 16:5 in comparison to John 13:36 and John 14:5 gives some difficulties. Does anyone ask where He’s going or not?

 

Perhaps the solution is in one of these:

 

First, it could be focused on that moment. Before He started this teaching, they asked. Now that He’s talking about suffering, they don’t ask. Or:

 

Second, it could be focused on the destination. When speaking earlier, the disciples are interested in the final destination: heaven. Now, they are not interested in asking about the Cross, or where they are headed that night. The disciples were men, after all, and we are prone to miss the forest for the trees. Or:

 

Third, it could be focused on the details. Jesus is giving them more precise details, but now that they realize He is definitely going, there’s no questions, no protests. It’s as if they have just accepted, blankly, and don’t really care where He is going, since He is going.

 

What do you think? Because it appears to be a conundrum for many scholars…

 

In text nerdiness: it is possible that the issue comes from John’s Gospel being theological rather than chronological, and that the chapter order for John is not timeline-oriented. Therefore, the questions of 13 and 14 could be farther removed from 16 than they appear. I’m not fond of this idea, personally, but it is out there.

Where is the Love? John 15

In Summary: John 15 continues the teaching from the last week of Jesus’ life. This teaching is happening probably in discussion on the way to the Garden of Gethsemane, though it’s tough to place it exactly. In this chapter, Jesus teaches about two relationships.

First, the relationship of believers to God. Believers are those who remain in God. The method? Obedience. There are several good books that dig into the idea of remaining Christ and abiding in the vine. Fundamentally, the idea is that we must remain connected to God to do anything, and obedience to the person of Jesus Christ is the path to that.

Second, the relationship of believers to one another. It should suffice to note that we are branches on the same vine and have to survive together, but it seems like it does not. We too easily copy the natural, wild vines that compete with each other rather allowing ourselves to be tended, pruned, and guided to work and live well together, producing much fruit.

In Focus: John 15:18-19 are verses we would do well to remember. Jesus expresses that we disciples should expect to be treated like He was treated by this world. How is that?

First, He was respected as a teacher. Then, He was demanded as a healer. Then, He was executed for being obedient to God instead of pleasing to the world.

So, we should expect the same thing. The world will hate us in the end stages, and if our strategies of life always need us to be loved and adored by the crowds, it’s a bad strategy.

In Practice: What are some things we can do about it?

First of all, we need to know God’s Word, so that we can know God’s will, so that we can obey God. That is the loop that is “abiding in Him.” Know, serve, obey, repeat. Constantly. Not like Lather, Rinse, Repeat, and then bail out when the hot water’s gone. It’s a constant cycle. The more we serve, the better we understand our connection, the better we understand what we should do.

So we do it.

Second, we need to trust God’s Word to guide our relationships with others. Rather than being wild vines that try to choke out our brethren, we need to realize that there is enough light from the Son for us all to grow.

So we sacrifice and share.

Third, we need to realize that the world’s approval is fleeting. One day, they like us for our help in crisis. One day, they appreciate the feeding the hungry or the development of a hospital or the educational system. The next day? If you are not with the latest, then you are out the door—and be grateful to be allowed to keep your ideas and faith to yourself rather than being examined, exiled, or executed for it.

So we lean hard on Jesus, because no other kings will back us up when it matters.

In Nerdiness: What kind of details can be found here that are more nerd-oriented?

There’s a great discussion to be had about where the disciples and Jesus are when this teaching goes on. One suggestion is that this is around the table at the Last Supper.

Another suggestion is that it occurs after they have left the Upper Room, and perhaps as they are progressing through the Temple Courts. The Beautiful Gate had levels of ornamentation, and perhaps in the scenery there Jesus was able to point out pictures of vines and draw the illustration.

A third possibility puts the group coming out of Jerusalem and passing through olive groves or vineyards.

What do you think? Does it matter where this happened?

Believing for understanding: John 14

The Passage:

John 14 contains Jesus teaching during His last night before the Crucifixion. Throughout this chapter, He’s wrapping up the last items the disciples need to hear before they have a very, very bad weekend. Well, until Sunday.

Jesus is even upfront with this idea in John 14:29. He teaches through the coming of the Comforter and the idea of His return so that the disciples will believe when it happens. He further instructs them to be aware of the coming of the Holy Spirit.

The teaching on the coming of the Spirit strains my belief in the adequacy of Scripture. I want to know more, but this is what we’ve got: The Holy Spirit is coming with a primary role of reminding of God’s Truth.

We have to keep that in its context. The bulk of the chapter is dedicated to either encouraging the disciples with the hope of His return, or reminding them to obey His commandments. We find other works of the Holy Spirit in different parts of the New Testament, but here we find just those two. I suggest that the primary action of the Spirit expected by the disciples would have been remembering what Jesus said and hope about His return. That is not to exclude other work of the Spirit—I think Scripture is certainly clear that no one comes to saving faith without the work of the Spirit.

The Passage for Us:

Much of what Jesus teaches here is not abundantly clear, and a decent amount of it is nearly illogical from our perspective. It gets harder to fit into a nice, neat box when we consider that the Holy Spirit, the Comforter in this passage, is as much God as Jesus is. Who is as much God as God the Father is, and that both of them are equal in eternality and deity right there with the Holy Spirit.

It took a couple hundred years to reach the conclusion that going ahead and making the word Trinity to describe this reality was okay, even though the word wasn’t present in Scripture. Even to this day, the great challenge for a theology student is to learn to explain the Trinity. Most of us don’t even fully understand the idea, so it’s a bit of a challenge to explain.

This is where we get into things we believe more than we understand. Anselm of Canterbury (11th century) put it this way: credo ut intelligam, which is “I believe so that I understand.” At least, I believe that’s what the Latin says, so I understand it.

This is part of the message of John 14: some things, we believe to be true even though we do not understand them.

A further example in this passage are Jesus’ words that equate love for Him and keeping His commandments. I believe heartily that we are saved by grace, through faith, and not by works. Yet works are an inescapable part of the evidence of our salvation and relationship with Jesus. We believe it, and slowly our understanding matures.

I think this reveals a danger in our youth-addicted culture. We let people teach who have no maturity, just facts, and the end-result is a lack of understanding based in belief. That might not be quite accurate, but I see the possibility.

What else do we see here?

That Jesus will not leave us alone, and that He will not leave us abandoned. This is the greatest hope: that He is coming back, and that we are not left unattended in the meanwhile.

That’s really, really good news. And we should be thankful for it more and more.

Today’s Nerd Note: As if credo ut intelligam wasn’t nerdy enough? Seriously?

Here are some nerd thoughts: catch who wants to know where Jesus is going: it’s Thomas. Pick on “Doubting Thomas” all you want, but he asks questions that are worth having recorded in inspired Scripture, and he asks the same questions many of us do.

Also note the “Get up, let us go from here” that finishes the chapter. The night is full of motion and action—not set-piece teaching, but progress toward the goal. Which is the Cross and our redemption.

Only from Behind You: John 13

There is so much in the Passion Week narratives of John, that begin here in John 13 and continue until John 21, and I hate for you to miss any of it. I cannot, however, write it all in one blog post, so I’m going to narrow down one thing. One person, really.

Judas.

While the finality of Judas’ betrayal does not come for a few more chapters, it begins here. Judas goes out from among the disciples, from the inner circle, and finalizes his deal with the religious establishment and ruling authorities. The end is well-known, and typically accepted even by those who doubt the validity of any other part of the Gospel: Jesus goes to His death, betrayed there by His friend.

Countless bottles of ink have been spilled over Judas’ actions. Even the M*A*S*H episode “Quo Vadis, Captain Chandler?” (one of my favorites out of 11 seasons) features a discussion about Judas’ motivations. Typically, we want to know why?

Yet the reality is that there were only 12 people who could have betrayed Jesus. You find their names listed in Matthew 10:1-4, Mark 3:13-19, and Luke 6:12-16. It had to be one of the Twelve. There were no others who were truly a portion of the ministry of Jesus enough to betray Him.

It is, as the wise Sir Humphrey Appleby once said, necessary to get behind someone if you are going to stab them in the back. Only a close supporter could betray Jesus. The Pharisees could not, neither could the Romans. Persians were no threat to His work, and the Chinese Empire of the Han dynasty could not have cared less.

The pool of betrayal possibilities was pretty shallow.

Why do I highlight this?

Quite simply, because we need to realize the same thing in modern Christianity. While I do not wish to downplay the danger to Christians from people like Kim Jong un, in the news today for having people executed for owning Bibles, or the intellectual challenge to people of faith from atheist scholars like Richard Dawkins, these people cannot destroy the faith as a whole. After all, history shows that scholars like Nietzsche and John Stuart Mill have attacked the faith before, and we are still here. Neros and Stalins and Hitlers have risen and fallen, and Christianity remains. Often, we see the old statement that the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church proven true—the more the opposition, the more we see the Word of God spread.

Our greatest danger is not our external opponents. Instead, our greatest danger comes from within. The danger is from those within the faith, the leaders, the speakers, the authors, the pastors, the conference organizers (for us in the US), the professors, all who rise up and then twist the Christian Faith to their own ends.

These are the sources of our danger. The people who preach purity and chastity and do not live it—and flame out in the process, rather than truly being open and repentant. The people who write books on humility and practice arrogance. Those who are called and directed to protect the weak and instead protect themselves.

When we see this behavior, we should see the face of Judas in their eyes. The face of betrayal, not merely of us, but of Christ Himself. And typically the motivation comes back to the same old problem: a little bit of coin in the purse. A jingle of silver across our tables.

Yet the end remains the same: the betrayer eventually will face their actions. The personal gain will come to naught, and they will stand before God for what they have done.

What, then, shall we do?

1. Take heed for ourselves: if you are on that edge of turning against the faith, come back. Now. The cliff is perilous, the rope shorter than the fall.

2. Take grace for ourselves: I firmly believe that Judas had a myriad of opportunities to call out for grace and repent. The textual evidence suggests he never did. There was grace available—but it was rejected. Wherever you are, you can come back. Peter does—so can you.

3. Take grace to others: While I am speaking somewhat harshly, there is a balance. Betrayal comes from within, and one who betrays must choose repentance, that one still has access to God’s grace, and to our best ability we should extend grace to them. Take grace—oftentimes, a person falls and fears because they will lose the only thing they know. I personally know several ‘fallen’ ministers who never knew where to turn, because their whole life and education had been about working for churches, and they knew that would end—as would their ability to feed their families. Grace does not prevent all consequences, but it does aid with the landing.

4. Take heed for others: Alongside that grace, though, must be the concern for others that have been betrayed. It is our community responsibility to protect each other—allowing someone to stab another in the back shows a slip in the community work. We allowed too much power to one when that happens—or we were all deceived. If so, we must all work together to address the issues.

Yet nothing is more important that binding up the wounds of the broken-hearted in these cases. Bind the wounds, then fix the problems.

Today’s Nerd Note: John speeds through the Passover meal that institutes the Lord’s Supper ordinance of the Church. I think this is further evidence that John is aware of the Synoptic Gospels and Paul’s own writings on the night—and their ready availability among the churches of the time.

Not Stinketh! John 12

Well, John 11 was about those that stinketh, so this seemed like a good title.

John 12 is the turning point from active public ministry to the Cross. This is six days before the Crucifixion, and leads into the Triumphal Entry. I preached on this back in April, 2012, and the link is here if you want that outline. (The audios are here: morning and evening if you just want to listen.)

This is another of those chapters that are remarkably rich. You have the anointing of Jesus for burial, the Triumphal Entry, a story about Greeks seeking Jesus, and the clear statement by Jesus that His death was imminent. I’m personally persuaded John should have twice as many chapters for the content, it’s far too easy to miss things in the current arrangement.

I would simply, today, contrast for you the people, especially the rulers, in John 12:42 with Mary in John 12:3. We have much to learn from these two verses that almost summarize the point of this chapter.

First, we have Mary. Despite opposition by one of the Apostles, she pours her life’s savings out as an offering for Jesus. That’s really the only viable explanation here: throughout her life, Mary has gathered enough to purchase this box of perfume, or she was given it at some point, but it’s effectively priceless. The cost reflects that it’s worth a year’s work, and typically those who could were not likely to be wasteful of their work.

She pours out this offering, recognizing the truth: Jesus will soon be dead and buried. At this point, the Resurrection is not quite expected by anyone, so she is doing what she knows—prepare the body and hope for that day at the end of days.

The opposition? First, Judas. Keep in mind that only Jesus is aware of Judas’ betrayal at this point. To Mary, this is an argument from Jesus’ inner circle of friends and followers. Additionally, she now risks the wrath of the religious leadership at large: remember, Rome has tried to kill Jesus before (Herod the Great?) and the Jewish leaders are out to squelch any further of this Jesus stuff.

Mary, at this point, has nothing but Jesus. And He is all she needs.

Then you have the unnamed “rulers” in John 12:42. These are afraid of the cost of following the Messiah. After all, the synagogue is not just the center of religion in Israel of the time, it’s the center of community. It’s the center of resistance to those blasted Romans, too. Even if that resistance is only cultural and linguistic, rather than military.

For those, there are so many additional things they want. Cultural approval, friendships, business opportunities, whatever else is available, these people cannot give it up.

What’s it going to be?

Jesus, and let the rest fall where it does?

Today’s Nerd Note: Don’t overlook the strange behavior of the religious leaders in John 12:10-11. Let’s kill Lazarus? Really?

If you are so angry about God’s work that you would kill someone to cover it up, that’s a problem.

Stinketh! John 11

We come now to the story of Lazarus. John 11 is where we find the recounting of this event. Jesus travels to Bethany upon his friend, Lazarus, dying. The immediate impetus for travel is that Jesus heard from a messenger, but John quickly dispels any notion that Jesus did not already know in verses 13 and 14, showing He knew exactly what was happening.

If you have read through this chapter, you know how this goes: Jesus goes to Bethany. Martha meets Him on the road, admits that she wanted to Jesus to heal the sick Lazarus, and weeps. Mary then comes and they have the same interaction. Jesus then goes to the tomb, commands the stone be removed, and raises Lazarus.

That’s all well and good. We could spend hours dissecting how amazing this is. We could spend time on how this miracle was the pinnacle of the signs in John’s Gospel, and how that transitions so well into the Passion Week. We could focus on how Lazarus, being in the tomb four days was not merely mostly dead. He was all dead. His pockets had been gone through, the loose change was gone. And this was no pill, no medicine, just the word of God to bring him back.

Instead I’d like to point you to my favorite verse here: John 11:39 and Martha’s insistence that “by this time, he stinketh!”

Stinketh. Smelleth bad, in the alternate versions to the King James.

Martha is convinced that things have gone from bad to worse, and gotten past the point of redemption. She has lost the hope that God can do anything about it anymore, all that she has left is the hope for the final resurrection, the end of time.

And it is so easy to fault her, laugh and go on with life. How silly! He stinketh, but God is bigger! God is stronger.

But then I stop and think about what stinketh to me.

I think about the foul stench that comes from the United States Government. Honestly, if I could buy 537 seats on the Titanic, I would give them to every elected member of the federal government. Why? They stinketh. Every last one of them, in my opinion. The ones who are honest enable the criminal element among them, and altogether they are making a wreck of this nation. The reason we haven’t been attacked by terrorists and other enemies in the last decade? Who could do more damage than our own government? Seriously.

Yet are they beyond hope? Despite my desire to lock them all in a cave and roll a stone in front of it for four years, there’s not a Repulicrat or Democan that is irredeemable. None are too stinky.

Then there are those religious leaders who mistreat and abuse their charges in ministry. Yet even these are not so stinky that God cannot work in their lives.

Who do you class as stinketh? Your political enemies? People who did not have the same advantages as you and don’t fit your moral categories right now?

Perhaps you would call another culture one that stinketh?

Your attitude harms one person: yourself.

You will spend your time weeping rather than seeing the miracle of the work of God. It’s a marvelous thing to see, that God works in situations that none of us fathom as workable.

Stop looking for the smells and look at the Saviour.

Today’s Nerd Note: Take a look later in the chapter. What do you do with the idea that the High Priest prophesied with clarity due to his office and not his own spiritual understanding?

How does that apply to any work done by those who God has placed in authority or leadership situations? Even if they are not the kind of people we like?

Sheep Listen: John 10

John 10 gives us the last pure teaching section of the Gospel of John. John 11 goes into the story of Lazarus, and after that the Passion Week begins. While there are other teaching and preaching moments in the life of Jesus, I am sure, that happen between these chapters, this is the last one from John.

I think that’s important to consider. Think about this: probably John wrote his Gospel after Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written. It is possible that John was aware of the other three, and had perhaps read them. He then writes an account that builds on those accounts. I accept the theory that puts John’s authorship somewhere in the 80-90 AD range, meaning he wrote not only with the other Gospels written, but with a long lifetime of reflection on the life of Jesus. John, then, has thought about what needs to be told. A great deal.

Jesus teaches throughout this chapter about His followers as sheep. Now, I’ve heard for many years that sheep are not the brightest critters and various other negatives about sheep. There is, however, nothing negative given about sheep in this passage. Jesus does not bring us up as sheep to degrade His followers. He points us out as sheep for a couple of other purposes.

The first is this: Jesus highlights people as sheep because sheep have keepers, and keepers can be good or bad. And He is drawing the comparison not between people as sheep versus people as something smarter, but between good shepherds and bad shepherds. He is highlighting the failure of those who claim religious authority over others and then exercise it without compassion. Those who claim to be for God’s people but who live only to honor themselves.

This is the contrast in John 10. Between caring shepherds and wicked ones. Jesus is not speaking about how clueless we can be, not that we are not clueless at times, but that we must seek only to follow those shepherds who echo the voice of our True Shepherd. Not those whose voices call us to themselves.

Which brings us to the second point: who do the sheep listen to? Jesus highlights not the foolishness of sheep here, but the learning capacity of sheep. Sheep learn to hear their shepherd’s voice. Sheep know who leads them, follow familiar voices, and feed where they are led.

So here lies our question today: are we learning to hear the voice of the True Shepherd?

We are, likely, listening to to someone. Is it the One who created us, saved us, redeemed us, and sustains us?

Or is it someone who claims to speak on His behalf, but sounds nothing like Him? If we want to know the voice of God, we start with His Word. If another is out of congruence with Him, then we abandon that voice and focus on the voice of God Himself.

The question is this: will we learn and react? Jesus says that His sheep know His voice and follow Him—are you following another voice, just because a few others have the wool pulled over their eyes? Are you following another voice because you know you can always go back? Turn back to the one true Voice: the voice of Jesus.

Today’s Nerd Note: John 10:16. Aliens?

Believe it or not, that has been proposed as the “other sheep” of John 10:16. Another religion claims that the “other sheep” were Jews who had sailed to the Americas and founded a new society.

Personally, I’ll give you the answer: it is people that are not Jews. John’s Gospel is very centered in the life of Roman Israel. However, John is writing from the Roman world. He likely now lives in, or has lived, in Ephesus. He has traveled and seen Jew, Greek, Gentile, Scythian, Barbarian, and more come to be part of the Flock of God.

These are the other sheep. It’s important to John to remind his readers of this, that Jesus Himself referred to that time coming. Let us remember it as well: not all believers look like us in the mirror.

Who knows, they may even have weird hair and believe in aliens.

It’s not my fault! John 9

At the present moment, the United States government is basically shutdown because the President and the Congress cannot get along. I will not attempt to parse the exact problem, because I am almost certain that if you read this five years from now, the first sentence will be nearly accurate. Even if it’s not the budget-type of a shutdown, it’s still going to be gridlocked.

The big question is always this one: Whose fault is it? Who is responsible for this mess?

That question, though, is not unique to the United States. It is not unique to the western world. It reaches back, truly, to the Garden of Eden, but we’ve already done that. Here we have a different question. A man is suffering: he is blind, in a world without any real support for someone with that challenge.

And the disciples want to know from Jesus: Whose fault is this? Is it his? Or did his parents cause this?

Jesus, as can be expected, responds to an either-or question by taking a third option. Now, there is much here to address the existence of evil in the world, how some of the suffering we see is caused by our sin, but much of it is so that we can see the glory of God. Much of it is so that we have the opportunity to be a part of the glory of God in relieving it.

Yet something else strikes me in this passage. The disciples here make for great students of religion. There is a situation in front of them, and they want to discuss the theological ramifications of it. Here is, after all, a perfect chance to learn about the way the world works. It’s like a case study. Excellent!

We do the same thing, don’t we? We look at the news and see civil war in Syria and wonder, “Who are the good guys?” We examine immigration and parse the finer points of economics and border security. We debate government-mandated health insurance and marvel that the US hasn’t done what other countries that are going bankrupt have done for years.

In our churches, we get into the same discussions. Here’s a teen mom—what failed that she finds herself in that situation? Here’s a divorced man, an abandoned child, an unemployed father, an abused wife. And we want to figure out the causes. We discuss the ebbs and flows of fortune, and then we think of the policy we ought to have about such issues.

At the end of the day, though, the answer is not about whose fault it is. I know that we need to find systemic solutions to systemic problems, that we must both teach people to fish while feeding them fish.

I would suggest, though, that we must also do as Jesus does here: cut off the debate and help the person in pain. The disciples barely notice him, except as a teaching tool. Jesus sees him as a person in need.

How do you see people? When you see that rock star in trouble with the law? When you see that kid in trouble with the law? When you see that deacon fail?

Rather than looking first for your theological point, look at the person.

Do what you can. Then, as the situation cools, analyze it and learn what you can.

But do not overlook people in your rush to determine if it’s your fault or not. Because if you leave him blind, hurting, hungry on the road while you check your algorithm?

Then it really is your fault.

Today’s Nerd Note:

Take a look at John 9:24 and the command of the Pharisees to “Give glory to God” as they question the not-blind man. Now, take a quick look at Joshua 7:19.

This was a charge to the man to tell the truth. A few takeaways:

First, the truth brings glory to God. Deception and lies do not.

Second, the two Scriptural instances of this phrase come from interrogations regarding sin. Both involve known realities: it is known in Joshua that Achan sinned. It is known here that the man can now see. There is nothing left to debate, really.

Third, both uses seem to indicate an idea of telling the truth to clean your conscience, not to escape trouble.

Fourth, both uses show people asking questions that they think they already have the answers for.

Finally, is there cause to think that the Pharisees deliberately harken back to Achan and Joshua? It seems, generally, that the Pharisees were concerned that individual sins would bring down the nation as a whole, so are they putting the not-blind man in that same boat?

Light, Freedom, Life: John 8

The pager goes off. I stumble off the bed, grab my Motorola Startac, and call in to the phone center. An hour and a half later, I’m at the delivery entrance of a hospital in a non-descript blue van. I meet the technician, who helps me load up, and I’m about to head back to Arkadelphia. In the mirror at the morgue, I see my reflection.

My hair is out of whack, badly. My shirt is buttoned one-off, I’ve forgotten my belt, and my zipper is down. In short, I look more awful than normal. Why?

In the interest of sparing my roommate, I had gotten dressed to respond to the call in the dark. I had done as best I could without any light. I had then driven, in the dark of the early morning hours, without stopping to even think about how I looked. The morgue tech was apparently so used to people looking like death that he said nothing. Quickly, I ducked into the men’s room, straightened my appearance out, and headed down the road.

Light, you see, is a powerful tool. Light reveals the way things are. It may be the way things are in the world around us, or the way we are. Light reveals. Science teaches us that light also disinfects, and experience tells me that bugs and other icky things tend to prefer dark places. Light is wonderful.

Light allows us to walk in freedom as well. This is why open government policies are referred to as “Sunshine Laws.” They expose the deeds that occur in darkness, and most freedom-killing actions occur in the darkness. It is in the dark backrooms that conspiracies of governments and businesses occur; darkness covers the criminal; shadows cloak even the dark hero who rejects the laws. Freedom is crushed from the shadows, from the diners to the beer halls to the counsels of the evil one.

Freedom is crushed by others from the dark, but it is truly destroyed within us from our own darkness. We carry darkness in our own hearts that is hard to overcome, and that darkness oozes out from within to destroy our freedom to follow God. It keeps us bound to our sin, bound to our past, and blind to the Light of the World.

With that freedom shrouded in the darkness, light cannot be life-giving. In courses I don’t remember taking, in grades I know I was in for elementary school, I know we learned that our biological life gets all of its energy from the Sun. I remember reading how astounded scientists were to find life at deep-ocean vents that existed without light, surviving only based on heat. That biology discussion can come later, but suffice it to say that you and I have physical life only because of light.

That life is also maintained and improved by light. Ever walked through a forest so dense it was dark in the daytime? It can be terrifying—I’ve done it. You trip over so many things, you stumble, you crash, you get pains. I would rather spend twenty miles in open country than five in dense forest. It’s just not pleasant. Even worse would be living in a cave with no hope of coming out for an interminable period of time. (There is a documentary coming out soon about a group of Jews who did this to survive the Holocaust. I can’t find the link, but that looks worth seeing.)

Light, freedom, and life. These all tie together with the underlying principle of truth. Truth, from a Bible-centered view, is not a negotiable construct. It is something unchanging, something fundamental. This is something that our modern philosophy thinks can only be found in a few scientific principles and logic rules, like gravity and non-contradiction.

For the Christian, though, truth is known in a person. John 8 gives us the reality: truth is found in Jesus, and if we know Him we have the Truth. The Truth that brings life, the life that brings freedom, the life lived in the light.

This is the message of the Gospel of John: the Light of Christ is greater than the darkness of the world. The Light shines through Jesus. Through the signs of His miracles. Through the Cross. Through the Empty Tomb. This is what John wants us to see: Jesus.

What about our lives? In the midst of a failing nation, in the midst of chaos rising, are we focused on the light? It does not originate from Capitol Hill or the White House. It does not even originate from the church or the family. He is the Origin, and if we as His people are not seeing him as the ever-fixed mark that we follow, what good are we?

Not much good at all.

Light up the world by following the One who is Light, Life, Freedom, and Truth.

Today’s Nerd Note:

John 7:53-8:11. This is a great story. It is a marvelous example of grace and truth: no condemnation, but sin is to be abandoned. It also paints the older Pharisees in a better light.

It’s the only example we have of Jesus during the Incarnation writing. That does not mean He only does so here. Just that we only have this example.

I have preached this passage. I have taught this passage. I have used this passage to bridge tense situations in churches. I have based restoring people and rebuilding fellowship on these exact verses. I love this passage.

But if you have a modern Bible translation, it’s in italics or it’s in brackets or it’s not even there. Why? Because there are some major questions from the science of Biblical textual reconstruction about it. There are some very valid reasons why the experts in original Greek manuscripts would remove this passage.

I agree with Daniel Wallace’s major point that the emotional attachment to this passage is the reason it remains (See The Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts through iTunesU or other sources.) I am not quite certain where to go with the academic matters. I see the evidence that would place the passage more in the Synoptics, and in a vacuum would likely print Bibles with the passage definitely set aside as material possible, rather than material definite.

Yet we do not do Biblical study in a vacuum. Theology bears weight on the methods we bring to the text, even though the text itself informs theology. There is no theology in this, the pericopae adulterae that is divergent from the mainstream of theology in the rest of the life of Christ.

There is also the question of our theology of Bible transmission and preservation. In all, I know that the Greek nerd in me says to excise the passage. My favorite Early Church Father, Chrysostom, is one of many who skip straight from John 7:52 to John 8:12. (actually, everybody but Didymus the Blind do that, and Didymus doesn’t quote the story quite the same.)

But I’m vested here, emotionally, and wonder if we hurt ourselves theologically by claiming that the church had a faulty text for a thousand years and we finally fixed it. I’m uncertain, and I’m certainly uncommitted. If I were preaching through John, I would preach this passage and likely not fully address this unless someone asked.

Disunited for Jesus: John 7

Unity. This one word sums up what many people think should be the goal of humanity in general and church-people in particular. If you want to expand the term, it would be unity without judgment. There is a pressure to develop a unity that is founded in just getting along with everyone everywhere every time.

To advance this as Christian ideal, though, is to skip John 7. First, we need to get there. Jesus has been teaching in Jerusalem in the days surrounding the Feast of Tabernacles. This was a time to remember the Exodus and the time when the people of Israel, on their way out of Egypt, dwelt in tents.

This specific chapter occurs after Jesus has fed the 5,000 and done many miracles. John’s Gospel records specific signs of Jesus’ status as Messiah, and those are half-done at this point. During this time, there is an argument among the people and the religious leadership about who Jesus is.

Not about whether or not his name is Jesus or whether he grew up in Nazareth, but whether his identity is deeper than those simple concepts. Jesus, rather than trying to soothe the divisions, actually pushes deeper into them. He highlights that the Jewish law of the time required religious ceremony to be upheld on the Sabbath while He was being criticized for healing on the Sabbath.

Jesus’ words on the matter? Judge, but judge righteously. Judge according to God’s standards.

This does nothing to still the division. Some continue to follow Jesus, while others determine that the time has come to silence Him. There is even a division between the Pharisees, the chief priests, and their own guards. The guards refuse to arrest Jesus, saying He has done nothing wrong. The religious leaders insist that He has.

It is, truly, just a mess.

Why?

It is not a mess because people were trying to judge who Jesus was. In fact, He encourages them to do so. He simply insisted that the judgment be based on righteousness and not selfishness. He does not appeal that they all be unified as Jews or as anti-Romans. He instead leaves the crowd divided. He leave Nicodemus to face the Pharisees and the crowd condemned by those same Pharisees.

Why?

(Frequent question in Scripture study, honestly.)

Because the highest ideal of Christianity is not simply unity. It is unity with Jesus. It is not our goal as Christian people to be at peace with just anyone. It is our requirement that we be at peace with the Lord Jesus Christ. End of story.

Any others who are at peace with Jesus are then, automatically, at peace with us. Those who are opposed to Him? Well, if they want information, we are there to share it. If they have needs, we are there to meet them. Why? Because we are all unified with Christ, and so He does those things through us.

If those who are detached are just out to attack Jesus? Well, then they will attack us. And we will deal with it, going to the cross when it is our time

Division is a natural part of the human experience, and a natural part of the Christian experience. Your faith, hope, and love are not shown by having unity with all people at all times. These are shown by how you handle the lack of unity.

What do you do to bring others into unity with Christ? Because you will accomplish no such thing by anger, irritation, or bitterness. So take the necessary steps.

Today’s Nerd Note: Much has been discussed regarding John 7:8-10, where Jesus tells His brothers that He will go the Feast, and then He goes.

So, He lied?

Well, He told them that He would not do something and then He did it. Either that or He meant something else by not “going up.” It is frequently posited that He meant He would not go in entourage, with big publicity. This may be accurate, but I’m uncertain. Another suggestion is that He changed His plan.

Another interesting factor from this early part of the chapter is how His brothers are not believing in Him, and are basically taunting Him to go have a confrontation with the religious leaders.

I think there is a connection here. Jesus is not going up for that purpose. He goes to the Feast but not to force the confrontation. That comes later, at a specific Passover. This is just one of the places where you need to read and think, not just gloss through it. People outside of the faith will do that. Those within must not.

Fourth-Telling is Important: John 6

We come back to the Gospel of John as we work through the whole Bible. John 6 gives us the feeding of the 5,000, the walking on water, and several discourse passages where Jesus teaches the people.

If I were writing a commentary, I would spend many thousands of words here. Instead, though, it’s a blog. So, you get a little bit and then will have to dig the rest out for yourself. I will highlight one major sweep of the passage:

There are at least 5,000 adult men with Jesus at the beginning of the passage. This is quite the crowd. They are watching the signs and hearing His Word, not as we do from the page but directly from His mouth. Yet by the end of the passage, Jesus looks at the Twelve and asks if they are going to go away also. Peter’s response is hardly enthusiastic to my ears: “To whom shall we go?” It sounds almost like they would leave, but they know Jesus is the Messiah. They may not like the hard things about following Him, but there is no other option.

In that, I think many of us ought to be close to the same way. We hold to the faith not because it is temporarily beneficial. Not for the easy teachings. Not for the happy sermons. We hold to the faith because there is truly no where else to go. There is nothing else for me: if God has not spoken truly through the Word, if I am not redeemed in Christ, then I have nothing. I do not have to have tried everything to know this, but I know that there is one right path and it is to follow Jesus.

Now, on to a little focus in this passage: the Feeding of the 5,000 is considered important for more than one reason. Obviously, the story itself bears importance for demonstrating the power of Christ over the physical world. There is the obvious value in teaching that we bring what we have and God uses it. We should note that few people would have looked to a young kid to provide the first step in the solution.

Yet that is not what I would highlight at this point. I would, instead, draw your attention to one of the quirks of New Testament studies. We find that there are great similarities between Matthew, Mark, and Luke. These three are often called the Synoptic Gospels, meaning that they see the life of Jesus through almost the same eye. (If I am recalling correctly, syn meaning something like “together” and optic meaning something like “appearance” or even “eye.” These are seen together Gospels.)

Then, there is the Gospel of John. John sees things very differently. Now, I hold that this is because John wrote after Matthew, Mark, and Luke were in circulation and John wrote with an intention toward filling gaps in either events or meaning that the Synoptics left unsaid. There is debate about how to characterize the percentage of difference between John and the Synoptics, but until you hit the Passion Week, the week of the Crucifixion, there are no miracle narratives recorded in both the Synoptics and John.

Except this one. This event is recorded in all four Gospels. Further, all four carry some variations, indicating that they are not merely copying each other but including their own knowledge and understanding of the event.

Let us dwell on this for a moment: if the Bible contains exactly what God intended it to contain, has truth without any mixture of error, and is the complete Word of God, then there is a reason that this story shows up four times. It is apparently important. Very important.

Think about it. If you have a job, your boss repeats important things. If you are the boss, you repeat important things. In life, this is true, otherwise, why put signs in the bathrooms to tell employees to wash their hands? It’s important enough to remember.

The question is not if the feeding of the 5,000 is important. The question is why?

Here is why:

1. Jesus shows compassion. The hungry people have needs, those needs are met by His hand.

2. The story shows His power. Five loaves leads to twelve baskets of leftovers, so that the disciples have snacks for the week? Only God can do this.

3. Jesus subtly rebukes Satan here. What was one of the temptations of Christ? To make bread. Here Jesus makes bread for the right reasons. That’s right, the tempter gets reminded here that he did not box out the power of God.

4. Jesus reveals His true purpose. It is not to rule over mankind without first atoning for sin and going to the Cross. John 6:15 points out that the people were ready to revolt with Jesus at the head of them.

Instead, He backs down, preaches the hard truths, and drives many followers away. Because His goal is not a revolution of government but a surrender of mankind to Himself, the One who vanquishes sin and death.

This is important enough to tell us four times, which is more than we are told about Jesus’ birth. Or about certain aspects of the Cross. Or Creation, or Paul’s journeys, or even the Second Coming. Keep that in mind: some truths really are more worth repeating.

Today’s Nerd Note: John 6:49-58 is sometimes used to justify a belief that the practice of taking Communion or the Eucharist is mandated for salvation. This is, however, stretching the point. First of all, the elements of Communion remain what they were: bread and the fruit of the vine. If it is necessary to eat the actual body of Christ, this would make Communion pointless.

Second, taking this as actually eating the flesh of Christ slides toward a pagan view rather than a Christian one. It is necessary to understand figures of speech as figures of speech, even if one is taking the text “literally.” Here is no different: Jesus is referring to complete dependence on Him, not to literally eating Him.

Witnesses Abound: John 5

Again in this chapter, we see the arbitrary nature of the chapter divisions of the New Testament. In all honesty, I’d argue that the chapter divisions, except for the Psalms, are useful only for locating material. They have no actual meaning—and sometimes are filled with disparate ideas.

With this, we turn to John 5. Where do we go in this chapter? Should we take a look at the healing at Bethesda? Perhaps dip into how we once even called the National Naval Hospital here in the United States the Bethesda Naval Hospital, but politics consolidated it into the Walter Reed Army Hospital and thus we froze out the name?

Should we take a look at our old friends the Pharisees and other religious zealots, who are more concerned with a man carrying a mat than with him having not walked for 38 years? How they have not given two hoots for him as he lay, near healing and near exhaustion, just around the corner, but now worry about his “sin” of carrying a mat?

There are a great many ways to consider the story that occupies the first half of this chapter. I think we could learn a lot from considering what our preoccupation is: healing and the work of God or self-preservation and rule-keeping? I’m all for people sitting still and listening to sermons, but that’s not the most important thing every time. Sometimes, it’s more important to feed the truth over the chaos than to spend time eliminating the chaos.

And if someone were saved and delivered from addiction problems, who are we to trouble them about wearing shoes to church instead of flip-flops? Does that really matter?

Beyond this, though, I think the higher point of John 5 is the second half of the chapter. Jesus, as He answers the charges regarding His working on the Sabbath, makes the central claim of His purpose. John 5:17-19 record that Jesus called Himself equal with God. This was not a matter taken lightly by the religious establishment of Israel.

Jesus goes on through the rest of the chapter to speak of the witnesses to this fact. He does this, not because He needs proof of who He is, but to show just how clear God had made the Truth. There is the witness of John, the witness of the works Jesus did, the witness in those works of the Father’s approval, and the witness found in Scripture.

Dear reader, that’s a lot of witness to the Truth. The Law required two witnesses to establish something, and Jesus gives twice that number. These four provided are of different characters, and they all provide different forms of testimony. This is one of my favorite parts of the Gospel:

Jesus does not leave us with just one point of information. It is true that our current, primary source of information is the Bible, but that records multiple streams of information. Additionally, there should be a few other witnesses that we live alongside the Word of God. Our works should also witness the truth of Jesus Christ.

Further, looking at the four witnesses of John 5, we see differing witnesses that will resonate with different types of people. The activist sees Jesus’ works, the spiritual person sees the Father’s witness, the non-conformist sees John the Baptist’s testimony, and the bookworm searches the Scriptures. Across this spectrum, it is hard to not see the one group that rejects Jesus: the religious traditionalist.

We have to be careful with this. People have been following Jesus for two millennia. That’s a long time. Every generation adds traditions while pruning others, every culture adjusts for itself. These are not all bad, but we must be careful that these traditions are not taken to be more important than the idea behind them: that we follow Jesus with all we are.

That is where the Pharisees had gone wrong in the first half of John 5. Rather than remembering the Word of God or seeing the witness of the works of Jesus, they only saw tradition violated. Their reaction is troubling, but we cannot change theirs. We can only watch out for ours.

Are we doing so?

Today’s Nerd Notes:

1. Grab a good reference work on textual criticism (or a good commentary) and check out the background on why most modern translations bracket or footnote John 5:3-4. I’m not going to track that whole discussion here, but I do find it worth contemplating. It is less important how the man was not healed, the story is about how he was healed.

2. It is not uncommon to encounter the argument that Jesus never claimed to be God. How that survives this chapter is a mystery to me. The Jewish leaders are angry because He claims to be equal with God. Rather than say “No, that’s not what I meant,” He says “Indeed, and here’s the proof.” Seems good to know.

3. John 5:39 is a little fun in the Greek. The verse could be translated as the KJV does: “Search the Scriptures,” or as the NASB does “You search the Scriptures.” It could be a command or an observation on their behaviors. I’m inclined to think the ambiguity is actually correct. Jesus could be affirming their diligent searching of the Scriptures while also commanding they go look again. Of course, many make the argument that all of the dialogue would have been originally in Aramaic, so Greek nuances take on different questions.