Sermon and Worship Resources

John 8:31-41 · The Children of Abraham

31 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

33 They answered him, "We are Abraham's descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?"

34 Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. 35 Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. 37 I know you are Abraham's descendants. Yet you are ready to kill me, because you have no room for my word. 38 I am telling you what I have seen in the Father's presence, and you do what you have heard from your father. "

39 "Abraham is our father," they answered. "If you were Abraham's children," said Jesus, "then you would 40 do the things Abraham did. As it is, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. 41 You are doing the things your own father does." "We are not illegitimate children," they protested. "The only Father we have is God himself."

Twenty-First Century Reformation

John 8:31-41

Sermon
by Warren Thomas Smith

"So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed." (v. 36)

On October 31, 1517, the eve of All-Saints’ Day, at high noon, Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Castle Church at Wittenberg. (We acknowledge that some scholars consider the story to be a pious legend.) It is easy to over-dramatize the event, but one cannot be unmindful of those hammer blows which echoed around the world. The Reformation had begun!

Precisely, what was Luther doing? Existentially, he was listing 95 reasons why he objected to the sale of Indulgences. His church door was, in reality, the university bulletin board where all announcements were affixed. As a professor he was calling for a debate; he was willing to take on all challengers:

Out of love for the faith and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg under the chairmanship of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us may do so by letter.1

Luther gave his paper a title "Disputation for Clarification of the Power of Indulgences." His immediate purpose was to debate an urgent issue, namely: Can sin be forgiven by issuance of a papal document? The larger intent, and one Luther probably did not see at the time, (he told his friend Staupitz a year later that his real ambition was to find a life of quiet study in retirement), was to call into question the fundamental position of the church and its life and mission in the world. Change was desperately needed. Martin Luther was the man to match the hour. He later described himself accurately: "I have been born to war, and fight with factions and devils; therefore my books are stormy and warlike." He went on: "I must root out the stumps and stocks, cut away the thorns and hedges, fill up the ditches, and am the rough forester to break a path and make ready." He then spoke of an interesting contrast with his fellow faculty member, Philip Melanchthon, "But Master Philip walks softly and silently, tills and plants, sows and waters with pleasure, as God has gifted him richly."2

In truth, there was nothing revolutionary in the way it was all done. Debate was the usual pattern for the academic community - a healthy, logical pedagogical method which had been employed for centuries. It was the invention of movable type, perhaps in Holland, that permitted wide usage of the printed page. To be sure, the Chinese had invented printing centuries earlier, but now type could be set quickly and cheaply, and Johann Gutenberg, in 1456 (or possibly earlier) had issued his magnificent Bible at Mainz. It was this new medium which permitted Luther’s 95 Theses to be given vast coverage. Soon everyone was talking about Luther.

Breaking Old Forms

Wyatt Aiken Smart, late professor at Emory University, told of visiting Hawaii where he climbed a semi-active volcano. For a long time the professor gazed into the crater, a hot boiling mass. He soon noticed a process continuously repeated. As hot lava came to the surface, cool Pacific winds hit it, causing a hardening effect. The entire surface would be covered by a dull gray, comparatively cool crust. No sooner had the crust formed than tiny red cracks appeared at the center of the mass. Slowly there was crumbling as the entire area became red, hot, and boiling. Yet, even as the boiling was taking place, on the sides the cooler gray crust was forming again.

In all institutions this is the eternal process. In any establishment - a political party, a business, a school, a state, or a church - the birth is in freedom and with a liberal outlook, and the institution is small (as small as one human being). We say liberal, because those who give birth to institutions usually regard themselves as liberal in contrast to the establishment. With the passing of time that same, new institution grows cool, fixed, rigid. It becomes organized. Inevitably structure assumes increased importance. Wealth becomes part of the scheme of things, for money is required to maintain structure. Age usually means reluctance to change. It all becomes conservative, taking on a fixed quality. From a small beginning the institution has grown massive and formidable, rich and powerful.

In the course of events there arise the young prophets - not necessarily young in years but young in ideas - who protest the rigidity of the institution. A protest calls into question forms and patterns of the past. Some prophets are more vocal, more emotional and violent than others. Some go too far, destroying rather than reforming. The establishment, hoary in attitude, usually resents the prophet. So it goes: unbending hierarchy vs. zealous prophets.

What was Martin Luther attempting to do? He was making a valid protest in terms of 1517. He spoke to his time, for his time, and in the language of his time. His action was, in Carlyle’s phrase, "the greatest moment in the modern history of man."

We live, not in the sixteenth century, but in late twentieth, looking forward to the twenty-first century. Ours is not an attempt to relive Luther’s reformation - a venture as foolish as it would be impossible - but rather to ask: What of reformation in the fresh, new century soon to be upon us?

An amazing correlation is seen between our day and that of Luther. Let us consider three major areas of contemporary life which need rethinking, revitalization, and reevaluating. Luther speaks pointedly, but we must heed a warning: We dare not pretend that methods and voices almost 500 years old will work miracles today, just because they had power in 1517.

Freedom of the Christian

People the world over are crying for freedom: in Cambodia and Poland, in the Middle East and South Africa, in Latin America and Detroit, in Newark and Watts, in Atlanta and Moscow. Essentially it is a cry for liberation to be a person, a person with dignity. Human beings want to be recognized as individuals, not components of the population explosion.

It is the shriek of the third assistant to the fifth vice president wanting to stand on his desk and yell to heaven, "I am a personality, too! I’m not just an IBM card. I do have a heart, you know!"

It is the seventh grade physical education teacher who blurts out, "Maybe I am low woman on the totem pole, but I am a human. Don’t think you can move me around like a piece of furniture."

It is the young housewife who, while fixing peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, suddenly stops long enough to lean against the refrigerator and sob, "I have a brain and a soul, and I can do more than wash dishes and make beds. I wrote poetry, once." And her mother read Feminine Mystique.

It is the custodian who says, "When it comes to pecking order, I’ve always been at the bottom. Someday, somehow, I’d like to move up."

The pathetic truth is that we moderns struggle with a legalism far more binding than any Mosaic code. We exhaust ourselves trying to get out of legalism - union contracts, deductions for Social Security, sick leave, extra charges if credit cards are used - admitting all the while the letter kills but thus far the spirit has not given much life. We are enslaved. We wear masks. We must have expensive condominiums, foreign cars, designer jeans - all because our friends and business associates possess such. We say what people want us to say; we read books that everybody reads; we go to the same movie; we all watch the same, tired television programs. Why? Because we want to? Hardly! We are conformists. We never reveal our real selves. "If I could only take a deep, deep breath," lamented a middle-aged secretary.

Speaking to the contemporary’s situation - and most of us are in that boat - is the gospel of Jesus Christ. We are free. We can possess that inate dignity for which the human spirit cries. Luther loved the text, "God sent forth his Son ... to redeem those who were under the law" (Galatians 4:4-5). Luther insisted:

We are priests, and thus greater than mere kings, the reason being that priesthood makes us worthy to stand before God, and to pray for others ... Christ redeemed us that we might be able spiritually to act and pray on behalf of one another ... But nothing avails to the benefit of a person who does not believe in Christ. He is nought but a slave; he is always worried ... By contrast, who can fully conceive the honour and the elevation of a Christian? ... he exercises authority over all things ... Thereby it becomes clear that a Christian always enjoys freedom, and is always master.3

As Luther viewed the human situation, the hope of liberation from the tyranny of the world, and the world’s values, lies in Christ. In Christ people are free, free indeed. "But does this apply to the Twenty-first Century?" Luther’s response would be that it applied to the sixteenth. Read our text, from John 8:36; it is all about freedom, about truth, about life. It just might be that we have here the secret to real liberation, and we had better not keep it a secret as we contemplate entering a new century.

Redemption Of The Church

The modern church has become a hot house, nurturing tender plants. Time, thought, and energy of the church are spent, not in going out to save a broken, dying world, but in smoothing ruffled feathers. A minister continually faces the offended: "Please call on the Browns; they are miffed." "Do go by and see the Jones; they say their feelings have been hurt."

"You have never called on us." "But," responded a mystified pastor, "I have been in your home many times." "Oh," came the answer, "that was just to pick up the children and take them to Vacation Church School; we don’t consider that a call."

Deplorably, time must be spent trying to get Christians to come to worship. We plead, prod, offer gimmicks, have contests. To what end? The contemporary disciple must be asked, invited, to come for prayer and praise, for Word and Sacraments. Coming to worship ought to be a joyful part of the Christian’s life - no invitation should be required. Why should disciples of Jesus Christ need to be cajoled to do that which ought to be a natural part of their discipleship? Pierce Harris of Atlanta remarked, "A pastor is one who presides over an adult kindergarten." It is the kindergarten concept which must die. It is graduate school now. Our people need a diet of meat rather than milk. We cannot go on pampering; we must minister. Luther put it aptly:

A preacher is like a carpenter. His tool is the Word of God. Because the materials on which he works vary, he ought not always pursue the same course when he preaches. For the sake of the variety of his auditors he would sometimes console, sometimes frighten, sometimes scold, sometimes soothe, etc.4

No longer seeking to save herself, but rather seeking the lost: This is the need for the church of the twenty-first century. It means that no longer can we spend time trying to pander; we must seek to redeem. Rather than buy members, court them, coddle them, we must respect them as God’s people, mature Christians who are responsible. The membership has quite as much a ministry as the ordained clergy. All are called to share the glad tidings that we "having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness" (Romans 6:18).

When the church is willing to step back that Christ may be exalted, she will be free indeed, and will be empowered to proclaim that same manumission to an enslaved humanity. When the church is filled "with a Christlike tenderness for the heavy-laden and downtrodden" she may indeed discover the cross anew, and new life as well. Too long, as in Luther’s era, has the church been saving her own life, concerned with institutional ongoing.

As youthful Martin Luther, faithful Augustinian monk, made his trip to Rome in 1510, the glories of Renaissance Florence did not impress him. He made no mention of the matchless art treasures. What the thoughtful young monk did remember was "the cleanliness, the efficiency, the courtesy, the intelligence" of the hospital nurses. Godly women were serving. He saw clean sheets on clean beds in bright rooms where loving nuns ministered to sick children. Is this, after all, not the church reborn, at work in the world? When the crushing burden of pain is so heavy upon so much of the world, where must the twenty-first century church be? What must it be doing? How must it be engaged?

Salvation In Christ

"But God shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8). Luther saw the church of his day trying to work its way to heaven. More, Luther himself was trying to do the same. We are still trying to work our way to God, a "works-righteousness" which ends in frustration and sense of hopelessness. Have we not learned from Paul what Luther came to understand, "The righteous live by faith"? (Romans 1:17). We are not saved by our own efforts, goodness, or gifts. Salvation is never earned or deserved. It is given by a gracious God.

Yet we persist in our thinking: we go to church; we give to the United Way; we fast during Lent. What is the motivation behind it? Do we not think we are building an account in heaven, against the day of our death? "We have been so liberal with the church, surely God will not forget." This is exactly what Indulgences were all about: a bank account in heaven.

Luther had a terrific battle within himself. He, like Paul, Augustine, and Wesley, attempted to expiate for his own sins by fasting until he was faint, by praying for hours on end, by refusing his tired body much-needed rest. It was the kindly, far-sighted John von Staupitz who advised, "Look not on your own imaginary sins, but look at Christ crucified, where your real sins are forgiven," and he continued, "and hold with deep courage to God."

We have looked long and wearingly at our sinful condition, and like young Luther thought the answer lay in self-flagellation, hoping this will atone for our misdeeds. My dean at Candler School of Theology, Henry B. Trimble - a man of wisdom and spiritual depth - once advised me, "Tom, do not let your people waste your time and theirs by going over and over their old, worn-out sins."

Luther admonished:

He [the Christian] requires no good works to make him godly or to save him; faith brings everything in abundance to him. If he were so foolish as to think that by good works he would become godly, free, blessed, or a Christian, he would lose both faith and all else.5

In preparing the Smaller Catechism for children, Luther outlined the course: The Ten Commandments should be studied as a basis for awareness of sin. The Apostles’ Creed should be used to illustrate redemption from sin. The Lord’s Prayer was to be memorized as the source of spiritual strength for all believers.

The good news in Christ is that in the Cross we see that God suffered for us. Here we are saved. This is not our doing; it is God’s action. We accept God’s gracious gift through complete surrender. The natural flowering of faith is: "It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me" (Galatians 2:20). Rather than take our spiritual temperature each morning, trying to determine how sick we are, we throw away the thermometer. Our lives are now in God’s hands. Whether we live or die is not the point. We belong to God - that is all that matters. Life is centered on Christ and life is in Christ. This is Luther’s theme for the believer. It is our theme for the coming century.

Our Reformation

Can a Reformation come? Wrong question! When will it come? The hour is at hand. Unless godly prophets arise to call for a change, the ungodly will gladly do so - and with abandon. Modern prophets must be as well-equipped for their task as Luther was for his, if they are to lead powerfully, creatively, fearlessly.

I am one who lives in faith that a Reformation will usher in the coming century. I also live in the faith that all of us may have a part in it.

Perhaps the best tribute ever paid to the great sixteenth-century reformer was by his faithful, understanding, loving wife. Some weeks after Martin’s funeral, Katherine Luther wrote her sister Christina:

Kind, dear sister! I can easily believe that you have hearty sympathy with me and my poor children. Who would not be sorrowful and mourn for so noble a man as was my dear lord, who much served not only one city, or a single land, but the whole world? Truly, I am so distressed that I cannot tell my great heart sorrow to anyone, and neither can I sleep. If I had a principality, or an empire, it would never have cost me so much pain to lose them as I have now that our Lord God has taken from me, and not from me only, but front the whole world, this dear and precious man.6

Indeed, we have all lost that dear and precious man.7

1. Cited in Will Durant, The Reformation (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1957), p. 341.

2. Ibid., p. 349.

3. From "The Freedom of a Christian" cited in Bertram Lee Wolf, Reformation Writings of Martin Luther (New York: Philosophical Library, 1953), I:366-367.

4. From "Table Talk" (Between April 7 and 15, 1532).

5. Wolf, I:367-368.

6. Edwin Prince Booth, Martin Luther: Oak of Saxony (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966), p. 250.

7. See Warren Thomas Smith, "Twentieth Century Reformation" in Pulpit Digest, September-October 1978, portions used by permission.

CSS Publishing Co., Inc., Journey In Faith, by Warren Thomas Smith

Overview and Insights · Jesus is “I Am” (8:31–59)

Overview: Jesus now challenges the depth of the faith of those mentioned in 8:30. It appears that they claim to believe, but their actions don’t support their claim. True disciples will embrace Jesus’s word, which reveals the truth and liberates people from sin (8:31–32). Jesus is the truth and has the power to set people free from their bondage to sin (8:33–36). Many demonstrate their refusal to accept Jesus’s word by trying to kill him (8:37). Jesus now accuses them of behaving like their father, whom he will later identify as the devil (8:38, 41, 44). The heated exchange continues as the Jews claim Abraham as their spiritual father (8:39). Jesus responds that their actions disprove that Abraham is their true father (8:39–41). They deny they are “illegitimate children,” perhaps a cutting…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

John 8:31-41 · The Children of Abraham

31 To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

33 They answered him, "We are Abraham's descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?"

Commentary · The Children of Abraham of the Devil

Jesus discusses Abraham’s true descendants in 8:31–59. The implications of this radical teaching are clear, and controversy is sure to follow. Jesus is overturning the canons of Jewish religion in their entirety! Knowing him who bears this power and authority will bring true freedom (8:32). But again, the Jews understand this in earthly terms: they are free since they are not slaves (8:33). But Jesus is concerned with spiritual slavery (8:34–36), and this they cannot perceive. From here Jesus is engaged in the harshest polemic in the Gospel (8:37–59; cf. Matt. 23:1–39). Verse 35 is key. If the Jews are not sons in God’s household (as Jesus claims), two results follow: their tenure there is limited, and they have another father. Being a descendant of Abraham (8:37) and being a son (8:35, 38) are two different things. Jesus claims that lineage has no effect on spiritual status before God (so Paul, Rom. 2:25–29). But their desire to kill Jesus is telling: they have a spiritual father other than God (8:38–43). At once they see where Jesus is headed: at issue is not only Jewish lineage (8:39) but also their sonship. Jesus is challenging both. The lethal attack is launched in 8:44. The failure of Jesus’s opponents to accept the truth and to hear God’s word (8:47) has led them to desire Jesus’s murder.

The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

The reaction of many of the Jewish authorities with whom Jesus has been speaking is to believe in him (v. 30), and the remainder of the discourse is focused on this group of “believers.” The prediction that they will realize later who Jesus is (v. 28) appears to be coming true even before they lift him up on the cross. It sounds, and it is, too good to be true. Their faith is not genuine (cf. 2:23–25). Jesus has directed their attention toward the future, but they will have none of it. The present is good enough for these “believers,” and they are satisfied with their current relationship to God.

To become real disciples, they need time. Only by continued obedience to Jesus’ message can they know the truth and know what it is to be free (vv. 31–32). The mention of freedom offends them with its implication that they are not already free. As Abraham’s descendants, they are proud of having never been slaves of anyone (v. 33). Jesus explains that he is using slavery as a metaphor for sin and death (vv. 34–36). Descendants of Abraham or not, they are subject to death like everyone else and, in that sense, slaves (cf. Heb. 2:14–15). Jesus’ promise to set them free is a promise of life, an alternative to the grim prospect of dying in their sins (cf. vv. 21, 24). Verse 51 will make the promise explicit without the use of metaphor: I tell you the truth, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.

Two themes—the interplay of life and death, and the significance of being descended from Abraham—are the issues that will drive Jesus and the Jewish “believers” further and further apart and trigger the confrontation with which the temple discourse comes to an end (v. 59). The descent of these “believers” from Abraham is not in question (v. 37), but their conduct belies their heritage. Physically they are Abraham’s descendants, Jesus admits, but neither ethically nor spiritually are they Abraham’s children.

Once again Jesus charges that his hearers are trying to kill him (vv. 37, 40), this time in a context in which his identity is known (contrast 7:19). If their behavior means anything, Abraham is not their father; if he were, they would do the things Abraham did (v. 39). Their deeds give evidence of a very different parentage (v. 41). Jesus links the theme of life and death with that of truth and lies, and both of these with the ancient conflict between God and the devil (vv. 42–47). God is the giver of life, who through Jesus makes his truth known in the world. The devil is the source of death, a murderer from the beginning and the father of lies. The references are to the snake’s denial of God’s truth in the Garden of Eden (Gen. 3:4) and to Cain’s murder of Abel, his brother (Gen. 4:8; cf. 1 John 3:12). Death and falsehood go together as surely as life and truth do. When Jesus charges that you are ready to kill me, he has in mind simply his hearers’ refusal to accept his teaching, the truth that I heard from God (vv. 37, 40). He equates this lie with attempted murder because lies and murder come from the same source and because the one leads inevitably to the other (v. 44). His words are vindicated at the end of the chapter when the “believers” are said to have picked up stones to stone him (v. 59). Though murder was not their intention at the start, Jesus’ words uncover the real import of their actions and attitudes. Their inability to hear God’s words from the lips of Jesus proves that they belong not to God but to the devil and are acting out the devil’s intentions (v. 47).

The fact that those denounced so harshly in this passage are called the Jews (v. 31) has prompted the charge that John’s Gospel is “anti-Jewish” or even “anti-Semitic.” But it should be remembered that these particular Jews had believed in Jesus. It would appear that if they represent anyone beyond themselves, they represent certain groups of Jewish Christians!

The angry “believers” now grope for the ugliest names they can think of to call Jesus: He is a Samaritan (cf. 4:9) and demon possessed (cf. 7:20). These are not measured charges made to stand up in court, but momentary expressions of rage. Jesus leaves his defense, and the passing of judgment on his adversaries, in the hands of his Father (vv. 49–50) and returns to his initial promise of eternal life to those who obey his teaching (v. 51; cf. vv. 31–32). It is like reopening an old wound. Once more Jesus’ claim is rejected by means of an appeal to Abraham (v. 52; cf. v. 33). For Jesus to pretend to give life so that if anyone keeps your word, he will never taste death is to put himself ahead of even Abraham and the prophets (vv. 52–53). Life and death are here conceived in purely physical terms, as if Jesus is promising exemption from physical death.

Without pausing to correct the misunderstanding, Jesus addresses the question Who do you think you are? (v. 53). His answer in verses 54 and 55 counters the appeal to Abraham with an appeal to God himself, the supreme Life-giver and Judge of all. But he adds, Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad (v. 56). Just as there is a specific allusion in 1:51 to Jacob’s Bethel experience (Gen. 28:12), it is natural to look for something specific here as well. The apparent reference is to the promise Abraham received that from his offspring blessing would come to the whole world (Gen. 12:1–3). The promise is assumed to be fulfilled in Jesus (cf. Gal. 3:16), but the beginning of its realization is the birth of Isaac and his deliverance from premature death (Gen. 18, 22). It is probably in connection with one or both of these events that Abraham is understood to have seen Jesus’ day. The narrator may even have in mind the specific moment when “Abraham looked up and there in the thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns” and knew that his son was spared (Gen. 22:13); this incident was regarded by some early Christian interpreters as pointing to the death of Jesus the Lamb of God (e.g., by Melito of Sardis, in his Eclogues; see R. M. Grant, Second Century Christianity [London: S.P.C.K., 1957], p. 72).

In an apparently deliberate misunderstanding, the hostile “believers” respond as if Jesus had said that he had seen Abraham, instead of that Abraham had seen his day (v. 57). Their effort to make his claim sound absurd succeeds only in displaying their own willful ignorance. But Jesus’ reply is serious, and decisive: I tell you the truth … Before Abraham was born, I am (v. 58). With these words, Jesus goes beyond all his previous claims. He has seen Abraham; he was alive in Abraham’s time, and long before. It is as if the earlier instances of the “I am” formula (i.e., 4:26; 6:20; 8:24, 28) have been waiting for this one for their deepest meaning. In contrast to them all, there is no content that can be supplied either from the nearer or more remote context: for example, that he is the Messiah, or the Son of Man, or the One from above, or everything that he has claimed to be. He simply is. I am in this case is God’s formula of self-disclosure, just as it is in the Hebrew scriptures (Heb.: ‘anî hû’, lit., “I he,” but normally translated into Greek as egō eimi, or “I am”). The formula is clustered especially in Isaiah 40–55, where God uses it to proclaim his uniqueness as Israel’s covenant Lord, faithful to his promises and strong to deliver and restore his people (e.g., Isa. 41:4; 43:10–13, 25; 45:18–19; 48:12; 52:6; cf. Deut. 32:39). Its use implies a radical and unqualified monotheism: “Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me” Isa. 43:10b); “I am the LORD, and there is no other” (Isa. 45:18); “there is no god besides me” (Deut. 32:39). For anyone else to use this formula in the same way was blasphemy (Isa. 47:8; Zeph. 2:15). Here for the first time, the implications of Jesus’ use of this formula came through to his hearers; in reaction they picked up stones to stone him (v. 59). There is no doubt that they understood Jesus to be speaking with the voice of God, as if he himself were “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob” (cf. Exod. 3:6).

The use of the “I am” form in relation to Abraham recalls Jesus’ dispute with the Sadducees in the synoptic Gospels, where he defended the belief in a future resurrection (Mark 12:18–27 and parallels). Jesus’ argument on that occasion was that God had said to Moses, “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob,” and that God was “not the God of the dead, but of the living” (Mark 12:27 and Matt. 22:32; Luke 20:38 explains, “for to him all are alive”). Here in John’s Gospel it is Jesus himself who both makes the “I am” statement and claims to be the giver of life (v. 51). It is not to be assumed that the statement, Abraham died (vv. 52–53) necessarily represents the viewpoint of the narrator or Jesus, at least not if it implies death’s usual finality. Jesus’ opponents, wrong about everything else, are wrong about this as well. He who existed before Abraham and promises eternal life to believers is the source of life and hope even for Abraham himself, and for the prophets. The God of Abraham, and of Isaac and Jacob, is Jesus; he is the only giver of life, and Lord of the resurrection (cf. 5:21, 25, 28). Only Jesus can promise his followers, “I will raise them up at the last day” (6:39–40; 6:44, 54), and in this passage even Abraham and the prophets are numbered among his followers. The temple discourse, like the synagogue discourse of chapter 6, ends on the note that God’s life is available to human beings only through trust in Jesus and obedience to his teaching.

The self-disclosure is now complete. As for the immediate hearers, their response is marked by neither trust nor obedience. The “believers” of verses 30–31 are unmasked as unbelievers, once and for all. To them, Jesus’ claim of identity with the God of Abraham is blasphemy. Their attempted stoning of Jesus is a natural and inevitable reaction, ironically fulfilling what Jesus said was their intent all along. They had tried to kill him (cf. 7:19; 8:37, 40), first by rejecting his message, but now literally. Their attempt on his life fails, just as earlier attempts to arrest him had failed (cf. 7:30, 44). The manner of his escape is not told; mysteriously he hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds (v. 59b). He had come out of hiding to make himself known at the temple during the Feast of Tabernacles, and now he goes back in hiding again.

Additional Notes

8:31 The Jews who had believed him. The grammatical construction is different from v. 30 (i.e., “believe” followed by a dative, rather than by a preposition designating Jesus as the object of their faith). But in context the two constructions are equivalents. In this Gospel, to believe in Jesus is to believe what he says, and believing his message means believing in him as God’s messenger. There is no way v. 31 can be made to refer to a less adequate kind of faith than v. 30. In neither verse is it possible to tell from the language that the faith in view is not genuine, even though subsequent events demonstrate that in fact it is not (cf. 2:23–25).

8:31–32 If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. Cf. Jesus’ words in his farewell discourse to those who were genuinely his disciples: “This is to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples” (15:8); “I no longer speak of you as slaves, for a slave does not know what his master is about. Instead, I call you friends, since I have made known to you all that I heard from my Father” (15:15, NAB). Note that in the latter passage freedom, in contrast to slavery, is defined by knowledge of the truth that Jesus brings, just as it is here.

8:33 We … have never been slaves of anyone. The proud spirit of Jewish independence that brought about the Jewish revolt in A.D. 70 can be heard in this pronouncement. The irony sensed by the narrator and his readers is that Israel had lost its independence to Rome almost a century before this statement was made and still had not regained it when the Gospel was written. Though not exactly in slavery, Israel was by no means free of foreign domination.

8:34 A slave to sin: The words to sin are missing in a few ancient manuscripts and versions. It is not hard to see why some ancient scribes omitted these words. The emphasis of the verse is on the metaphor of slavery as such, not on that to which one is enslaved. But the stronger manuscript evidence favors the longer reading. The slavery here is to sin, just as it is in Paul’s letters (e.g., Rom. 6:16, 20). Sin functions as a middle term between the metaphor (slavery) and the reality (death). Jesus’ next pronouncement, “A slave has no permanent place in the family” (v. 35a), carries forward the metaphor in that it realistically describes a typical household in Jesus’ time, yet it also provides a theological interpretation: “slavery” here means death. The Son (i.e., Jesus), on the contrary, has eternal life (v. 35b) and gives that life to those who are dying. In that sense he sets people free (v. 36).

8:38 The Father … your father: There are no possessive pronouns in the Greek. An explicit contrast between Jesus’ Father (God) and his opponents’ father (the devil) is not introduced until v. 41. It is therefore likely that God is the only Father being referred to in this verse: “I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence. Therefore do what you have heard from the Father” (NIV margin).

This translation is supported by the word oun (“therefore”) in the Greek text. It assumes that the last verb do (Gr.: poieite) should be taken as an imperative rather than as an indicative. Jesus is making one last appeal to his opponents to accept his words as words from God the Father, and put them into practice. But his opponents’ answer (v. 39) demonstrates that their Abrahamic descent is more important to them than Jesus’ appeal on his Father’s behalf.

8:39 If you were … you would do: Some ancient manuscripts continue the note of appeal by making the second verb in this sentence an imperative: “If you are Abraham’s children, … then do” (NIV margin). But the beginning of the following verse in Greek (“But now you are trying to kill me”) makes it clear that the conditional sentence in v. 39 is contrary to fact: If the opponents were true children of Abraham, they would do what Abraham did, but in fact they are not. Grammatically, the first verb is present tense where an imperfect might have been expected. The effect of this is to heighten the supposition of reality, an effect that the GNB translators have achieved with their rendering, “If you really were …”

The things Abraham did: lit., “the works of Abraham” (cf. James 2:21–23). In James the reference is to Abraham’s willingness to offer up his son Isaac as a sacrifice (Gen. 22:1–14), but here Jesus apparently has in mind Abraham’s warm welcome of God’s messengers (Gen. 18:1–8). It is to this that he contrasts the hostile behavior of Abraham’s self-proclaimed “children” (v. 40).

8:44 You belong to your father, the devil: lit., “you are of the father, the devil,” or even “you are of the father of the devil” (!). The end of the verse (he is a liar and the father of lies) could also conceivably be read as a reference to the devil’s father (i.e., “even his father is a liar”). Such possibilities may have provided a basis for later Gnostic speculation about the devil’s origins, but in the absence of any such speculations elsewhere in John’s Gospel or Epistles, it is virtually certain that the meaning implied by the NIV translation is correct. The first clause of the verse might be paraphrased, “You are ‘of the Father,’ all right, but your ‘Father’ is the devil!” The last clause is lit., “he is a liar, and the father of it” (i.e., of the first lie [“you will not surely die,” Gen. 3:4] and therefore the father all subsequent lies).

8:52 Abraham died and so did the prophets. The statement superficially recalls Jesus’ own words in 6:49 (“Your forefathers … died,” cf. 6:58), but its function in the narrative is different. In chap. 6, Jesus’ implication was that God had judged the generation that long ago died in the desert (cf. 1 Cor. 10:5), while those who ate the Bread of life Jesus now offered would live forever. Those who died, he told his opponents, were “your forefathers.” Here, however, Jesus’ point is that his opponents are not Abraham’s true descendants (cf. v. 39), nor are they children of the prophets. The pronouncement that Abraham and the prophets are dead is their pronouncement, not that of Jesus or of the narrator. The righteous have seen Jesus’ day—and they will live! (cf. v. 56, Mark 12:27; note also that Abraham is assumed to be alive in God’s presence in Luke 16:22–31).

For an example of Judaism’s struggle with the notion that even such a great man as Abraham finally had to face physical death, see The Testament of Abraham, trans. M. E. Stone (Missoula, Mont.: Society of Biblical Literature, 1972).

8:56 Your father Abraham: Contrast v. 39, where Jesus denies that Abraham is their father. Here in ad hominem fashion, he mockingly throws their own claim in their face (cf. v. 54; “my Father, whom you claim as your God”).

The thought of seeing my day: Ancient Jewish literature testifies to the belief that God revealed “the end of the times” to Abraham (4 Ezra 3:14; cf. also the late rabbinic commentary Genesis Rabbah 44, 22 [Midrash Rabbah (London: Soncino Press, 1961), vol. 1, p. 376] on Gen. 15:18). The reference here, however, is probably not to Abraham’s vision in Gen. 15 but to the promise of a son and to the birth and deliverance of the promised offspring.

8:57 Not yet fifty years old: It is precarious to argue from this round number, as some have done, that Jesus was approaching fifty years of age (e.g., Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1.22.6) or that he looked almost that old (according to Luke 3:23 he was “about thirty years old” when he began his ministry). Compared to the many centuries since Abraham, even an overly generous fifty-year span sounded like only a moment and served well to make the point.

Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by J. Ramsey Michaels, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Abraham

Abram is a well-known biblical character whose life is detailed in Gen. 11:25 25:11. Abram’s name (which means “exalted father”) is changed in Gen. 17:5 to “Abraham,” meaning “father of many nations.”

The narrative account in Genesis details one hundred years of Abraham’s life and moves quickly through the first seventy-five years of events. In just a few verses (11:26–31) we learn that Abram was the son of Terah, the brother of Haran and Nahor, the husband of the barren Sarai (later Sarah), and the uncle of Lot, the son of Haran, who died in Ur of the Chaldees. The plot line marks significant events in Abraham’s life chronologically. He left Harran at the age of 75 (12:4), was 86 when Hagar gave birth to Ishmael (16:16), 99 when the Lord appeared to him (17:17) and when he was circumcised (17:24), 100 when Sarah gave birth to Isaac (21:5), and 175 when he died (25:7). In summary, the biblical narrator paces the reader quickly through the story in such a way as to highlight a twenty-five-year period of Abraham’s life between the ages of 75 and 100.

The NT features Abraham in several significant ways. The intimate connection between God and Abraham is noted in the identification of God as “the God of Abraham” in Acts 7:32 (cf. Exod. 3:6). The NT also celebrates the character of Abraham as a man of faith who received the promise (Gal. 3:9; Heb. 6:15). Abraham is most importantly an example of how one is justified by faith (Rom. 4:1, 12) and an illustration of what it means to walk by faith (James 2:21, 23).

Those who exercise faith in the living God, as did Abraham, are referred to as “children of Abraham” (Gal. 3:7). Regarding the covenant promises made to Abraham in the OT, the NT writers highlight the promises of seed and blessing. According to Paul, the seed of Abraham is ultimately fulfilled in Christ, and those who believe in Christ are the seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:16, 29). In a similar way, those who have Abraham-like faith are blessed (3:9). The blessing imparted to Abraham comes to the Gentiles through the redemption of Christ and is associated with the impartation of the Spirit (3:14).

Bondage

There are numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized as following a servant-master model. These included service to the monarchy (2 Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in the temple (1 Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also see extensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:1 11; Lev. 25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concerned with the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelines for their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaves who had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of six years. On the seventh year, known also as the Sabbath Year, they were to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent away empty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s “threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slaves also had certain rights that gave them special privileges and protection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, were allowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays (Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their master permanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also, severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death (Exod. 21:20–21).

Slavery was very common in the first century AD, and there were many different kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in an extended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they might choose to sell themselves into this situation (1 Pet. 2:18–25). Although slavery was a significant part of society in the first century AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery. Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obedience for slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25; 1 Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1 Pet. 2:18–21). Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves (Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned by the apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1 Tim. 1:10–11).

Jesus embodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled the role of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servant predicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in the Gospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve (Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5). Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).

The special relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured in the servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’s letters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses not so much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegiance and honor owed to Christ Jesus.

Family

People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:6 17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.

Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).

Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.

Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60 percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.

Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.

Sin

Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’s commandment to the contrary (2:16 17), Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. When Adam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete. They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaves were inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with their attempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent, Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).

In the midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways that sin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised to put hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of the woman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blow upon the offspring of the woman, the offspring of the woman would defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequate covering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implication is that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adam and Eve, covering their sin.

In one sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holy God satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationship with human beings without compromising his justice? The short answer is: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), who eventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemed them from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought them to Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated on obedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant was the sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided as a means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrifices made for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year to atone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement the high priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies and sprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took a second goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness. . . . The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barren region; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev. 16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinful people, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.

During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longing for God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last, when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it was revealed that he would “save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, John the Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereas both Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to be the obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation (Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13; Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also the Suffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45; cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrath of God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. With his justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify all who are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). What neither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, Jesus Christ did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).

After his resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers began proclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus did and calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins” (Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness, they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned against them (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believers continue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal. 5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23). The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the new heaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse (Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).

As even this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesis to Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’s plot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative; it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved in order for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.

Word

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:16 17; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.

The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1 John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

Works

The Bible has much to say about works, and an understanding of the topic is important because works play a role in most religions. In the most generic sense, “works” refers to the products or activities of human moral agents in the context of religious discussion. God’s works are frequently mentioned in Scripture, and they are always good. His works include creation (Gen. 2:2 3; Isa. 40:28; 42:5), sustenance of the earth (Ps. 104; Heb. 1:3), and redemption (Exod. 6:6; Ps. 111:9; Rom. 8:23). Human works, therefore, should be in alignment with God’s works, though obviously of a different sort. Works in the Bible usually reflect a moral polarity: good or evil, righteous or unrighteous, just or unjust. The context of the passage often determines the moral character of the works (e.g., Isa. 3:10–11; 2 Cor. 11:15).

Important questions follow from the existence of works and their moral quality. Do good works merit God’s favor or please him? Can good works save at the time of God’s judgment? When people asked Jesus, “What must we do to do the works God requires?” he answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent” (John 6:28–29). Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). The people from the OT commended in Heb. 11 did their works in the precondition of faith. Explicitly in the NT and often implicitly in the OT, faith is the condition for truly good works. God elects out of his mercy, not out of human works (Rom. 9:12, 16; Titus 3:5; cf. Rom. 11:2). Works not done in faith, even if considered “good” by human standards, are not commendable to God, since all humankind is under sin (Rom. 3:9) and no person is righteous or does good (Rom. 3:10–18; cf. Isa. 64:6). Works cannot save; salvation is a gift to be received by faith (Eph. 2:8–9; 2 Tim. 1:9; cf. Rom. 4:2–6). Even works of the Mosaic law are not salvific (Rom. 3:20, 27–28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2; 5:4). Good works follow from faith (2 Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; 1 Thess. 1:3; James 2:18, 22; cf. Acts 26:20). The works of those who have faith will be judged, but this judgment appears to be related to rewards, not salvation (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2 Cor. 5:10; cf. Rom. 14:10; 1 Cor. 3:13–15).

Direct Matches

Jew

In the NT, “Jews” (Ioudaioi) is an ethnic and religious term to describe the people of Judah. In Jesus’ day, Jews were distinguished from Samaritans (John 4:9, 22). Gradually the term began to be used more in a religious than in an ethnic sense, and it has come to represent the descendants from Abraham as a whole and religious converts who regard the Mosaic law and customs as the inalienable religious foundation for faith and practices (Mark 7:3; John 2:6).

The Gospels

In the Synoptic Gospels the term “Jews” is used largely in the phrase “the king of the Jews” with reference to Jesus (Matt. 2:2; 27:11, 29; Mark 15:2, 9, 12, 18; Luke 23:3, 37). Born as the king of the Jews, Jesus claimed to have come to fulfill the law of Moses instead of abolishing it (Matt. 5:17). He emphasized the importance of practicing the law in obedience (Matt. 7:24–27), and he rebuked the Pharisees and the scribes for teaching the law without carrying it out (Matt. 23). They opposed him, not only because they rejected his claim to be the Messiah, but also because they viewed his teaching and practices as destabilizing their religious status quo (Matt. 12:1–8; John 5:10; 11:48).

The Jews are represented in the Gospels by both the upper class (e.g., Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, chief priests) and the lower classes (the crowds). Usually the religious upper class would not accept Jesus’ teaching and challenged him by asking questions or denying his authority (Matt. 15:1; 16:1). The crowds generally accepted Jesus’ teaching and experienced his power to heal and other benefits. The Synoptic account of the opposition by the upper class is contrasted with the widespread opposition to Jesus by the “Jews” in general in John’s Gospel. But Matthew and Luke also highlight Jesus’ lament of the unrepentant Jewish cities (Matt. 11:20–24; Luke 10:12–15), indicating that resistance to Jesus’ teaching was a common phenomenon among the Jews.

Jesus responded to the unbelieving Jews with strong rebuke and condemnation (Matt. 12:30–32; 21:33–46). When Jesus healed a servant of a Roman centurion and marveled at the amazing faith of this Gentile (8:5–13), Jesus predicted that “the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness” because of unbelief, whereas the Gentiles will come to eat with Abraham in the kingdom of heaven (8:11–12). In spite of the unbelief of the Jews, the privilege to hear the gospel was given to them first. Jesus sent out the twelve disciples, instructing them that they should not go anywhere among the Gentiles or enter the towns of the Samaritans, but instead go “to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 10:6 [cf. Rom. 1:16]).

The term “Jews” occurs only four times in the Synoptics outside the phrase “king of the Jews,” but seventy-one times in the Gospel of John. John uses the term especially as a technical one for those Jews who were hostile to Jesus and his followers. Whereas the Synoptics focus on the Jewish leaders’ rejection of Jesus’ messianic actions, John focuses on their rejection of his teaching that he is the Son of God in unique relationship with the Father. Jesus in John is not only the “one and only” (monogenēs) of God (1:18), but also the fulfiller of what the temple signifies and all the Jewish tradition and customs represent. John thus describes the Jewish opposition to Jesus as much more widespread and intense than that in the Synoptics, presenting the Jews as opposing Jesus’ teaching because of their loyalty to Jewish tradition (5:15–18; 6:41; 7:1–2, 13; 8:31–57; 9:22; 10:31–33; 19:7–12, 38; 20:19).

Acts and the Pauline Letters

In the book of Acts the term “Jews” (eighty-one occurrences) is used especially with reference to the Jewish people who oppose Paul’s law-free gospel (9:23; 13:45, 50; 14:2, 4; 17:5; 18:12, 14; 20:3; 21:11; 22:30; 23:12; 24:9).

In his letters, Paul refers to “Jews” primarily in an ethnic and religious sense without connoting that they have theological antagonism against the gospel. The Jews are thus contrasted with the Gentiles in that they are “the people of Israel”: “Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises” (Rom. 9:4). While Paul acknowledges the continuity of Jewish identity through their lineage from Abraham, he distinguishes true Jews from false Jews in terms of Jesus’ accomplishment of redemption. Paul says, “A person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code” (2:29). This distinction of true Jews from false Jews resonates with his distinction of true Israel from false Israel (9:6). The redefinition of the group of spiritual Israelites is the result of Jesus’ death and resurrection according to the OT prophecies. Those who believe in Jesus are reckoned as “children of Abraham” according to the gospel announced in Gen. 12:3 (Gal. 3:7–8).

Paul’s presentation of spiritual Jews is foreseen in Jesus’ statement that the Jews who do not believe in him are not Abraham’s children but rather the children of the devil (John 8:30–44). In 1 John the children of God are defined in terms of love rather than ethnic lineage (3:10). According to the book of Revelation, those “who say they are Jews” are not, but are a “synagogue of Satan” (2:9; 3:9). These passages show that salvation is obtained through faith in Jesus rather than through the ethnic lineage of Abraham and observances of the Mosaic law (Rom. 3:20–28).

These polemics against the Jews and Jewish law do not necessarily make the NT teachings anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic. What the NT polemicizes is neither the Jewish nation nor Judaism but rather the unbelief of the Jews who rejected Jesus, inasmuch as Jesus is the Messiah, who has come in flesh and fulfilled the prophecies of the OT.

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because John 8:31-41 is mentioned in the definition.

Bastard

A person of uncertain or questionable parentage (used figuratively in Zech. 9:6 to speak of foreigners as “a mongrel people” [NIV, NRSV]). Bastards were excluded from the assembly of the Lord, even to the tenth generation of descendants (Deut. 23:2 KJV, RSV). They were therefore marginalized and often considered to be under divine condemnation (1 En. 10:9). The unusual circumstances behind Jesus’ birth perhaps made him vulnerable to this accusation (Mark 6:3; John 8:41), which opponents of Christianity made later (Origen, Cels. 1.28, 32; Gos. Thom. 105). The author of Hebrews appropriates the concept to explain why God disciplines his legitimate children (Heb. 12:8).

Bible Texts

Bible Texts and Versions The NT and the OT have considerably different but partially overlapping textual histories. For clarity, it is best to begin with a survey of the NT manuscripts and versions.

Greek texts. Although no autographs of the NT books survive, there exist more than five thousand Greek texts covering anywhere from a portion of a few verses up to the complete NT. Traditionally, these texts have been classified into five groups: papyri, uncials, minuscules, lectionaries, and quotations in patristic texts. The most important manuscripts are listed below.

The earliest texts of the NT are those written on papyrus. Ninety-eight of these manuscripts have been identified, and they are represented by a “P” with a numerical superscript. The earliest of these papyri is P52, which contains parts of four verses in John 18 and dates to the early second century. For substantial portions of the NT text, the most important papyri are found in the Chester Beatty and Bodmer collections. P45, P46, and P47, all from the Chester Beatty collection, are from the third century and contain large sections of the four Gospels, eight of the Pauline Epistles, Hebrews, and Revelation. Within the Bodmer collection in Geneva are four very important codices. P66 dates to around AD 200 and preserves most of the Gospel of John. P72 dates to the third century and contains the earliest copies of 1–2 Peter and Jude, which are preserved in their entirety, as well as Greek translations of Pss. 33–34. P74 dates to the seventh century and contains portions of Acts, James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, and Jude. Finally, P75, which dates to the early third century, contains most of Luke and John 1–15. It is the oldest extant copy of Luke. Among the remaining papyri, forty-three have been dated to the early fourth century or before.

The second category of manuscripts is the uncials, which usually were written on parchment and span the fourth through the tenth centuries. About 270 uncials are known, and they range from a few verses up to complete copies of the NT or even the entire Bible. Uncials originally were denoted by capital letters, but when the number of manuscripts grew beyond these limits, a new system was employed whereby each manuscript was given a number always beginning with zero. However, the most important uncials are still usually known by their letter. Among the most important uncials are the following five manuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus (designated by the Hebrew letter à) dates to the fourth century and is the only uncial that contains the entire NT. It also has almost all of the OT as well as the early Christian writings the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. Dating from the fifth century, Codex Alexandrinus (designated as A) contains the OT, most of the NT—lacking only portions of Matthew, John, and 2 Corinthians—and 1–2 Clement. Along with Sinaiticus, the most important uncial is Codex Vaticanus (designated as B), which dates to the fourth century. It contains almost all of the OT and the complete NT, except for substantial portions between Hebrews and Revelation. It has been in the Vatican’s library for over five hundred years. The fourth important uncial is Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (designated as D), which contains Greek and Latin copies of the four Gospels, most of Acts, and a few verses from 3 John. It dates from the late fourth or early fifth century. The fifth important uncial is Codex Washingtonianus (designated as W), which dates to the early fifth century and contains virtually all of the four Gospels.

The third category of NT manuscripts is minuscules. These texts date from the ninth century and later and comprise approximately 2,800 manuscripts, which are denoted by a number not beginning with zero. Among the more important minuscules are Codex 1, Codex 13, and Codex 33, which, along with their relatives, are considered reliable witnesses to early families of texts such as the Caesarean (1) or the Alexandrian (33). Codex 13 and its relatives are noteworthy for having the story of the adulterous woman at the end of Luke 21 instead of in John 8. The final two groups of NT manuscripts, the lectionaries and quotations in patristic sources, are not manuscripts in the strict sense of the term, but their use of portions of the NT presents important witnesses for the practice of textual criticism.

Versions. With the spread of Christianity during the time of the Roman Empire, the NT was translated into the language of the native peoples. These versions of the NT are important both for textual criticism of the NT and for the interpretive decisions that are reflected in how the text was rendered into a new language. Among the most important early versions of the NT are the following.

As Latin began to displace Greek as the dominant language of the empire, there was a need for a Latin version of the Bible. The earliest translation, known as the Old Latin or Itala, was made probably in the late second century, though the oldest manuscript (Codex Vercellensis) is from the fourth century. With the proliferation of Latin texts a standardized Latin translation became desirable, and in AD 382 Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damasus to provide a new translation known as the Vulgate.

Another family of NT versions is the Syriac texts. Around the late second century the four Gospels were translated into a version known as the Old Syriac. It is extant in two incomplete manuscripts that are probably fifth century. The translation that became the standard Syriac text is the Peshitta, which was produced in the early fifth century. It does not contain 2 Peter, 2–3 John, Jude, or Revelation because these were not considered canonical among the Syriac churches.

Other important versions of the NT from antiquity are the Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, and Ethiopic translations.

Old Testament

Hebrew texts. The text that has served as the basis for most modern editions and translations of the Hebrew OT is the Masoretic Text (MT), named after the Masoretes, the Jewish scribes who transmitted the text and added vocalization, accentuation, and notes to the consonantal text. The most important Masoretic manuscripts date from the end of the ninth century to the early eleventh century. Notable among these is the Leningrad Codex (AD 1008), denoted as L, which is the earliest Masoretic manuscript of the entire OT. Also important are the Aleppo Codex (c. AD 925), denoted as A, which preserves all of the OT except for most of the Pentateuch; the British Museum MS Or. 4445 (c. AD 925), denoted as B, which contains most of the Pentateuch; and the Cairo Codex (c. AD 896), denoted C, which contains Joshua through Kings and also the Prophets.

Although these manuscripts are much later than the biblical period, their reliability was largely confirmed with the discovery of the DSS beginning in 1947. Among the Qumran library are many manuscripts of biblical books as well as biblical commentaries, apocrphyal and pseudepigraphal works, and sectarian literature. All the OT books are represented among the scrolls that were found except Esther and Nehemiah, though the latter is usually presumed to have been at the end of Ezra but has not survived. The books with the most manuscripts are, in order, Psalms, Deuteronomy, and Isaiah. One of the striking characteristics of these scrolls is that they reflect a diversity of text types. For example, there is a copy of Jeremiah that is close to the Masoretic version, but also a manuscript of Jeremiah similar to the much shorter version found in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT).

Another Hebrew text of the OT is that of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which is the text transmitted by the Samaritans. It is similar to the MT in some respects but also has differences that reflect theological interests. The main manuscripts for the Samaritan Pentateuch are from the twelfth century.

Versions. Between the third and first centuries BC, the entire OT was translated into Greek. This version, known as the Septuagint (designated by the abbreviation LXX), became the main version of the OT used by the early church. Due to its adoption by the church, the LXX has been preserved in numerous manuscripts, including Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus. By the late first century BC or early first century AD, there were two revisions of the Greek text: the Proto-Lucianic version and the Kaige recension. The latter aimed to revise the Greek toward closer conformity with the Hebrew text and derives its name from its peculiar tendency to translate the Hebrew word gam (“also”) with the Greek work kaige. In the second century AD three other Greek translations were made by Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus, all of which revised the Kaige recension back toward the MT.

Another important early version of the OT consists of the Targumim, which are Aramaic translations or paraphrases (and sometimes extensive elaborations) of OT books. The official Targumim for Judaism are Targum Onqelos for the Pentateuch (c. second century AD), which is quite literal, and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan for the Prophets (sometime before the fourth century AD), which ranges from being quite literal to somewhat paraphrastic. Unofficial Targumim for the Pentateuch include Targum Neofiti and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. There are also various unofficial Targumim for the Writings section of the OT, except for Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah (which are already written partly in Aramaic).

Besides the Greek and Aramaic translations, there are other important versions of the OT. Sometime in either the third or fourth century AD, the Peshitta of the OT was produced, though there is evidence that there were earlier Syriac translations of some books already circulating. Also important is a group of Latin translations known collectively as the Old Latin. These versions were produced sometime during the second century AD and were primarily made from already existing Greek translations rather than Hebrew texts. As with the NT, a later Latin translation was made by Jerome for the Vulgate.

Bible Versions

Bible Texts and Versions The NT and the OT have considerably different but partially overlapping textual histories. For clarity, it is best to begin with a survey of the NT manuscripts and versions.

Other important versions of the NT from antiquity are the Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, and Ethiopic translations.

Old Testament

Binding and Loosing

Binding can mean physically restraining a person or people (Judg. 15:13; 2 Kings 25:7; Job 16:8; Pss. 119:61; 149:8), mending, as with a wound (Isa. 61:1; Ezek. 34:16; Hos. 6:1), or taking a legally constraining oath (1 Sam. 14:27–30; Neh. 10:29; Jer. 50:5). The opposite of binding is loosing or setting free, which can describe literally being freed from bonds (e.g., Acts 16:26) or the release from something that is binding.

The law, a binding covenant between Israel and God, is to be literally bound on one’s forehead as a reminder (Deut. 6:8; 11:18). Non-Israelites who wish to identify with the God of Israel can bind themselves to his laws (Isa. 56:6). In Num. 30:6, 9, 13, an oath taken by a young woman still in her father’s house will be binding only if the father is not against it. If he is against it, it is not binding and she is loosed from it (30:5). This is the same in the case of a married woman, whose approval has to come from the husband. However, for widows or divorced women, all pledges they make are binding since there are no men in their lives to void the pledges (30:9).

While contracts were binding, some had time limits. For example, the seventh year and the fiftieth year (Jubilee) allowed for cancellation of such binding contracts as slavery or land ownership (Lev. 25:10–54; 27:24).

The binding of Isaac (Gen. 22), traditionally known as the Akedah, has theological significance for both Christians and Jews. It is interpreted as a form of resurrection, a coming from the dead for Isaac after Yahweh had instructed his father, Abraham, to sacrifice him (Heb. 11:17–19). God inquires of Job whether he can “bind the chains of the Pleiades” or “loosen Orion’s belt” (Job 38:31).

The book of Proverbs encourages the wise to metaphorically bind love and faithfulness around their necks (3:3) and their parents’ commands and teachings to the heart (6:21) and the finger (7:3); it also talks of folly being bound up in the heart of a child (22:15), perhaps alluded to by Paul in Rom. 11:32 when he says that God has bound all people to disobedience that he may have mercy on them.

Introducing his ministry in Luke 4:18, Jesus quotes Isa. 61:1, which talks of binding up the brokenhearted, a reference to his healing ministry. Further, binding and loosing are found in Jesus’ commissioning of his disciples (Matt. 16:19; 18:18; cf. John 20:23), where it may be referring to the binding of demons and loosing of demoniacs bound or oppressed by demons (cf. Mark 3:14–16; 6:7; Luke 13:6). Since Jesus has the power to bind and loose (John 8:36), he chooses to empower his followers to do the same. Binding Satan is the subject of the ultimate eschatological battle in Jewish lore (T. Levi 18:11–12) and becomes central in Christianity. Jesus encounters satanic forces embodied in humans and looses such people from the chains of Satan (Mark 5:3; Luke 13:12, 16). Ultimately, Satan is to be bound for a millennium and loosed only for eternal damnation (Rev. 20:1–3).

Paul invokes Jewish law about marriage by claiming that one is bound in marriage only as long as one’s partner is alive (Rom. 7:2). In this way, Paul explains how Christians are dead to the law, because Jesus has died on their behalf, thus setting them free from the law (Rom. 7:4–6; cf. Heb. 9:15). To the Corinthians also he talks of the binding nature of marriage but with a caveat: if the marriage is between a believer and a nonbeliever, and if the nonbeliever leaves, then the believer is not bound (1 Cor. 7). But for Paul, being set free from sin (Rom. 8:2) means being bound to God (6:22).

Greek Language

The OT was written in Hebrew, with some parts in Aramaic, but the NT comes to us exclusively in Greek. Greek developed from an Indo-European language spoken by the people referred to in the Iliad as the Achaeans. It is suggested that primitive Greek speakers migrated from the area north of the Black Sea and began to settle in the Aegean Sea area around 2000 BC. These people groups called themselves “Hellenes.” Later the Romans called them “Greeks.”

Classical versus Koine

Classical Greek is commonly dated to the years 900–330 BC. Although three notable dialects of Greek were prevalent (Doric in the west, Aeolic in the north, and Ionic in the east), a dialect of the Ionic family known as Attic, the language of Athens and the great writers Thucydides, Herodotus, Plato, Aristotle, and Demosthenes, eventually gained supremacy. It was this form of Greek that Alexander the Great took with him on his conquests.

Koine (lit., “common”) Greek became the new lingua franca in the years 330 BC–AD 500. Koine Greek, which itself was influenced by the Hebrew and Aramaic of the OT, was closely related to the language of the LXX. This common form of Greek is in part the result of the imposition of Greek upon nonnative Greek speakers. The Koine Greek of the NT reflects the style of writing found in the papyri and ostraca discovered in the Egyptian desert. These writings are more a nonliterary Koine—found in wills, deeds, receipts, and private letters—and not the polished Greek of the literary works. While the literary writers of the day tried to imitate the Attic models by means of an artificial literary tradition, the Greek of the NT has much more in common with the spoken Greek of the average person.

One of the distinctive elements of Koine Greek at the time of the NT was the tendency toward greater simplicity. Although this is a natural occurrence within a language over time, it became accelerated when the Greek language was forced upon nonnative Greek speakers. The Koine Greek of the NT, then, may be characterized by the relative absence of subtle nuances among words, the replacement of complex forms by simpler ones, and the almost complete disappearance of the optative mood. Other changes include the increase in the use of pronouns as subjects, more adverbs, pronunciation and vocabulary differences, and the tendency toward more-explicit expressions.

Features of Biblical Greek

Greek is a highly inflected language. Inflection refers to changes that words undergo in accord with their grammatical function in a sentence. With regard to verbs, the changes reflect the word’s aspect (similar to the English tense [see below]), voice (active or passive), and mood (generally speaking, mood refers to the author’s attitude toward the kind of reality behind the statement: whether the action actually took place or whether it is merely a potentiality). For nouns and adjectives, these changes reflect the word’s gender (masculine, feminine, or neuter [similar to the English pronouns “he,” “she,” “it”]), number (singular or plural), and case (nominative, genitive, dative, and accusative [technically, a fifth but rarely used case is the vocative]). It cannot be overstated that grammar is always secondary to context. Thus, one should not seek to find too much meaning in the form of a word, or the meaning of a word, without contextual warrant.

Verbs: tense, aspect, and mood. Whereas English verbs employ tense (past, present, future, past perfect, etc.), which strongly links the action of the verb to a time, Greek verbs reflect a verbal aspect. Aspect primarily refers to the way the action of the verb is viewed by the author. Consequently, the time (past, present, future, etc.) is secondary at best. This distinction is especially important for verbs that are not in the indicative mood (the mood utilized by an author to speak in terms of reality rather than potentiality). In the indicative mood, the aspect generally reflects the time of the event.

For years, one of the most debated features of biblical Greek was the verb in the aorist tense (aspect). It often was suggested that the aorist reflects a onetime event that occurred in the past. Modern scholarship is nearly unanimous today that the aorist serves instead as the default aspect. That is, authors used the aorist when not wishing to make any specific pronouncement regarding the action of the verb. The aorist functions as the simple or undefined aspect. Therefore, in biblical Greek the statement “I studied Greek,” if in the aorist, would have been the author’s way of simply stating that this event occurred. The use of the aorist alone would not have made any assertion about the duration of the action (I studied for ten minutes, months, or years) or as to whether this act was completed (I know Greek well). Thus, John 11:35 says, “Jesus wept.” The use of the aorist here does not tell us how long he wept. Some have argued that since the aorist is used in reference to Christ’s death (Rom. 5:6), it means that Jesus died once and for all. Although this conviction is true, its truth derives not from the use of the aorist, but rather from the context of Scripture.

Two other aspects occur in the Greek NT. The imperfective aspect regards an action as a process or as habitual. The perfective aspect views the action as completed with ensuing results (I have studied Greek [and still remember it]).

Biblical Greek employs two moods. The mood of a Greek verb indicates whether the author viewed the action as one that actually occurred or one that was merely potential. Greek verbs in the indicative mood tend to suggest that the author viewed the action as something that either has happened, is happening, or will happen. It is very important to note that in the Greek NT verbs consistently have temporal relations only in the indicative mood. The potential mood in biblical Greek displays a variety of potentialities. The subjunctive mood often expresses a contingency, a hope, or a desire for the event to occur. The optative mood, which was prominent in Classical Greek but had fallen almost completely out of use by the time of the NT, expresses a possibility or a wish. The imperative mood is the mood for a command or prohibition.

Nouns and adjectives: case. Nouns and adjectives are inflected by means of various cases, depending on the function of the noun or the adjective in the sentence.

The nominative case is used primarily for the subject of a Greek sentence. In the absence of a noun or noun phrase in the nominative case, the subject of the Greek sentence is found in the pronominal suffix of the verb. Pronouns in the nominative, though much more common in biblical Greek than in Classical Greek, are not grammatically necessary, and thus they often express a degree of accent or stress (cf. the use of “you” and “I” in the Greek text of John 7:8, 28, 34, 36, 47; 8:14, 15, 22, 23, 31, 38, 41, 44, 46, 47, 49, 54).

The genitive case is the most varied in its use. Generally speaking, it is the case of possession, source, or separation. Nouns and adjectives in the genitive case are often translated into English by adding the preposition “of.” The ambiguity inherent in the genitive case is evidenced even in English. Note, for example, Rev. 1:1: “The revelation of [NIV: “from”] Jesus Christ” (in Greek, “Jesus Christ” in the genitive case). Does this mean that the revelation is from Jesus Christ or about Jesus Christ?

The dative case is used to indicate location, instrumentality, accompaniment, or reception, as well as for the indirect object of the verb. Nouns and adjectives in the dative case are often translated into English by adding the preposition “to” or “for.”

The accusative case serves as the primary case for the direct object of the verb. This case generally connotes the ideas of extension or limitation of an act or movement.

A fifth case, less common than the others, is the vocative. The vocative is reserved for the purpose of direct address. It often serves as a discourse marker, as in “My dear children” in 1 John 2:1, 12, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21.

Word order. One of the important by-products of the inflections found in biblical Greek is the measure of freedom afforded to authors in regard to word order (the order of words in a sentence is referred to as syntax). This relative freedom allows authors to emphasize words or phrases by means of their location in the sentence.

Jewish

The Gospels

Acts and the Pauline Letters

Jews in the New Testament

The Gospels

Acts and the Pauline Letters

Redeem

The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More than a simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the grace of the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classical texts use the Greek word apolytrōsis (“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given to release a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. The group of words based on the Greek term lytron (“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. The corresponding Hebrew word padah is a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.

Old Testament

The experience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religious significance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included the dedication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13). Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), was redeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up to describe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continued to broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance from all Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included the whole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or the new age to come).

Another Hebrew term, ga’al, generally relates to the kinsman-redeemer. In the case of a person who had sold property due to poverty or even gone into slavery to pay a debt, a kinsman could become a redeemer by buying back the property (Lev. 25:25–28) and/or purchasing freedom from slavery (25:47–49). The book of Ruth describes this, detailing the relationship between the impoverished Ruth and Boaz, the kinsman-redeemer. The prophets and the psalms apply this understanding to how God redeems Israel (Isa. 43:1–3; Ps. 19:14; cf. Job 19:25). God, however, does not pay ransom to anyone (Isa. 52:3–4); rather, he causes redemption by his power (45:13).

The awaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’s ultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’s continued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant, God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon. Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was if God would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. This longing for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As the persecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamental period (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT and the NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianic hope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people from Greek and Roman oppression.

New Testament

The NT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). When Jesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slavery of sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many (Matt. 20:28 // Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the cross accentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17; 7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christian idea of ransom followed the accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death (Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with a ransom (Col. 1:13–14). The predominance of apolytrōsis in the NT, compared to common Greek literature of that period, underscores its significance for early Christian conceptualization.

Without reflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made an issue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlight Jesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12; cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need of the redeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of the redemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from one sphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another. Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted of monetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1 Pet. 3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of those he redeemed (antilytron hyper [1 Tim. 2:6]). God still did not pay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.

The OT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in the present, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills the NT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’s theological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’ redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from the slavery of sin (1 Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matter of ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already but not yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption is evidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).

Although redemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future (Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1 Cor. 15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions of redemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expects redemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption is universal; it restores the relationship between creation and the Creator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).

Redeemed

Old Testament

New Testament

Redeemer

Old Testament

New Testament

Redemption

Old Testament

New Testament

Showing 1 to 50 of77 results

1. Athanasian Creed

Illustration

Brett Blair

Athanasian Creed: Athanasius, known as Athanasius of Alexandria, was the 20th bishop of Alexandria. His intermittent episcopacy spanned 45 years, of which over 17 encompassed five exiles. He is traditionally thought to be the author of the this Creed named after him. It was created to guard Nicene Christianity from the heresy of Arianism. It is widely accepted as orthodox and some abbreviated versions of it are still in use today. And yes, the intro and outro are actually part of the original text.

Whoever desires to be saved should above all hold to the catholic faith.

Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally.

Now this is the catholic faith:

    That we worship one God in trinity and the trinity in unity,
    neither blending their persons
    nor dividing their essence.
        For the person of the Father is a distinct person,
        the person of the Son is another,
        and that of the Holy Spirit still another.
        But the divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one,
        their glory equal, their majesty coeternal.

    What quality the Father has, the Son has, and the Holy Spirit has.
        The Father is uncreated,
        the Son is uncreated,
        the Holy Spirit is uncreated.

        The Father is immeasurable,
        the Son is immeasurable,
        the Holy Spirit is immeasurable.

        The Father is eternal,
        the Son is eternal,
        the Holy Spirit is eternal.

            And yet there are not three eternal beings;
            there is but one eternal being.
            So too there are not three uncreated or immeasurable beings;
            there is but one uncreated and immeasurable being.

    Similarly, the Father is almighty,
        the Son is almighty,
        the Holy Spirit is almighty.
            Yet there are not three almighty beings;
            there is but one almighty being.

        Thus the Father is God,
        the Son is God,
        the Holy Spirit is God.
            Yet there are not three gods;
            there is but one God.

        Thus the Father is Lord,
        the Son is Lord,
        the Holy Spirit is Lord.
            Yet there are not three lords;
            there is but one Lord.

    Just as Christian truth compels us
    to confess each person individually
    as both God and Lord,
    so catholic religion forbids us
    to say that there are three gods or lords.

    The Father was neither made nor created nor begotten from anyone.
    The Son was neither made nor created;
    he was begotten from the Father alone.
    The Holy Spirit was neither made nor created nor begotten;
    he proceeds from the Father and the Son.

    Accordingly there is one Father, not three fathers;
    there is one Son, not three sons;
    there is one Holy Spirit, not three holy spirits.

    Nothing in this trinity is before or after,
    nothing is greater or smaller;
    in their entirety the three persons
    are coeternal and coequal with each other.

    So in everything, as was said earlier,
    we must worship their trinity in their unity
    and their unity in their trinity.

Anyone then who desires to be saved
should think thus about the trinity.

But it is necessary for eternal salvation
that one also believe in the incarnation
of our Lord Jesus Christ faithfully.

Now this is the true faith:

    That we believe and confess
    that our Lord Jesus Christ, God's Son,
    is both God and human, equally.

     He is God from the essence of the Father,
    begotten before time;
    and he is human from the essence of his mother,
    born in time;
    completely God, completely human,
    with a rational soul and human flesh;
    equal to the Father as regards divinity,
    less than the Father as regards humanity.

    Although he is God and human,
    yet Christ is not two, but one.
    He is one, however,
    not by his divinity being turned into flesh,
    but by God's taking humanity to himself.
    He is one,
    certainly not by the blending of his essence,
    but by the unity of his person.
    For just as one human is both rational soul and flesh,
    so too the one Christ is both God and human.

    He suffered for our salvation;
    he descended to hell;
    he arose from the dead;
    he ascended to heaven;
    he is seated at the Father's right hand;
    from there he will come to judge the living and the dead.
    At his coming all people will arise bodily
    and give an accounting of their own deeds.
    Those who have done good will enter eternal life,
    and those who have done evil will enter eternal fire.

This is the catholic faith:
one cannot be saved without believing it firmly and faithfully.

This ecumenical creed (428 A.D.) is probably unknown to most Christians because it is seldom, if ever, used in worship services. It is probably not used because of its length. The Nicene Creed has eighteen printed lines, whereas the Athanasian has 69. It is difficult for congregations to use because of the creed's intricate and complex terms.

Though the creed carries the name of Athanasius, he did not write it. It was the product of the church of his time. The creed was named after him to honor him for his brave and forceful defense of the Trinity. Athanasius (289-373) was a bishop in Alexandria, Egypt.

The creed deals primarily with the Trinity and Jesus as the Son of God. At this time, the heresy of Arius was prominent. He taught that Jesus was not fully human or divine and that the Holy Spirit was not God but only a divine influence. The Athanasian Creed denounced these false teachings and upheld the doctrine of the Trinity. Luther's high regard for this creed was expressed: "I doubt, since the days of the Apostles, anything more important and more glorious has ever been written in the church of the New Testament."

2. A Mother Is Waiting

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

John Todd was born in Rutledge, Vermont, into a family of several children. They later moved to the village of Killingsworth back in the early 1800s. And there, at a very young age, both John's parents died. The relatives wondered what they would do with so many children, how they could parcel them out to other friends and relatives. One dear and loving aunt said she would take little John. The aunt sent a horse and a slave to get John, who was only six at the time. The slave, Caesar, came and put the little boy on the back of the horse. On the way back an endearing conversation took place:

John: Will she be there?

Caesar: Oh, yes, she'll be there waiting up for you.

John: Will I like living with her?

Caesar: My son, you fall into good hands.

John: Will she love me?

Caesar: Ah, she has a big heart.

John: Will I have my own room? Will she let me have a puppy?

Caesar: She's got everything all set, son. I think she has some surprises, too.

John: Do you think she'll go to bed before we get there?

Caesar: Oh, no! She'll be sure to wait up for you. You'll see when we get out of these woods. You'll see her candle shining in the window.

When they got to the clearing, sure enough, there was a candle in the window and she was standing in the doorway. She reached down, kissed him, and said "Welcome home!" She fed him supper, took him to his room, and waited until he fell asleep. John Todd grew up to be a great minister of the gospel. But it was there at his aunt's, his new mother, that he grew up. It was always a place of enchantment because of his aunt. It awed him that she had given him a second home. She had become a second mother to him.

Years later, long after he had moved away, his aunt wrote to tell him of her impending death. Her health was failing and she wondered what was to become of her. This is what John Todd wrote her:

"My Dear Aunt,

Years ago I left a house of death not knowing where I was to go, whether anyone cared, whether it was the end of me. The ride was long but the slave encouraged me. Finally, he pointed out your candle to me, and there we were in the yard and you embraced me and rook me by the hand into my own room that you had made up. After all these years I still can't believe it—how you did all that for me! I was expected; I felt safe in that room—so welcomed. It was my room.

Now it's your turn to go, and as one who has tried it out, I'm writing to let you know that Someone is waiting up. Your room is all ready, the light is on, the door is open, and as you ride into the yard-don't worry, Auntie. You're expected! I know. I once saw God standing in your doorway—long ago!"

3. Living in the Past

Illustration

William B. Kincaid, III

On the television show M*A*S*H, Dr. Charles Emerson Winchester III made it clear what separated him from everybody else. "I'm a Winchester," he was heard to say more than once. For him, it was his family name that made him superior to everyone else. Other people carry other burdens. One woman received her education at Harvard and found a way to work Harvard into every conversation. Congregations fall victim to the same problem. Churches become satisfied with their pasts to the point that they do not make the changes necessary to live in the present with the same degree of faithfulness shown in prior years. It's one thing to be proud of certain things, but it is possible to lean too heavily on a good past and live too scantily in the precious present.

That's what John the Baptist was dealing with in this lesson. In scripture's continuing assault on the religious people of the day, John the Baptist was completely unimpressed with the very thing that the Jewish people had built their lives upon. They were the "children of Abraham." That was their birthright and, they felt, it would never be taken from them.

Then comes John the Baptist. He tells them that just because they are children of Abraham doesn't mean that the requirements have been eased or that they can slack off. We hate to hear John the Baptist say that because we know how it translates to our situation. We can hear him now. "Just because you are members of the church, just because you give your weekly offerings, just because your great-grandparents were in this church, just because you are an officer, just because you are the minister, doesn't mean it is time to relax and take it easy and give in to this temptation of thinking this matter of being Christian is under control." In other words, don't presume your past has taken care of your present.

4. Juicy Spiritual Fruit

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

Of course, like all preachers, John didn't get through to everybody. Some who came to the Jordan with no intention of getting taken in by this man stuck to that determination pretty fiercely. The religious leaders provided John the opportunity to cut loose with his strongest language."Sneaky snakes!" John fairly howled! "Somebody set the field on fire and out slithered you all! Well, I'm here to tell you that the days of resting on your laurels are over. Don't whip out your Members Only temple gold card your theological credentials cut no ice with me! Don't tell me about your spiritual lineage or that you are Abraham's children because if God wanted more children of Abraham, he'd turn the stones into a whole bunch of them. But that's just the problem, isn't it? Your hearts are as dead as stone already. God wants living trees producing juicy spiritual fruit. If I were you, I'd get serious about that because I'm here to lay the groundwork and clear a path for Somebody big and strong who is coming any minute now. He's coming with a very sharp axe in his hand and he will chop down and burn to ashes dead trees like you all!"

5. Trifling with the Trinity

Illustration

Brett Blair

There's a trend on social media to cancel peoples livelihood for even the slightest offenses that the person attacking them doesn't like. It's been billed the "cancel culture." It's an evil behavior often by anonymous sources. But it's not new. More prevalent but not new. And it certainly has been in the church for a long time. Let's use the acrostic CCC: Christian Cancel Culture.

A religious weight loss program called Weigh Down created in 1992 by a woman named Gwen Shamblin grew from a small business conducted out of a home garage to a multimillion-dollar Nashville corporation with over 30,000 churches and organizations participating. But last year the whole movement was threatened and her business placed in jeopardy when Shamblin, on August 10th made comments regarding her beliefs in the Trinity. Here is what she said, "As a ministry, we believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. However, the Bible does not use the word "trinity," and our feeling is that the word "trinity" implies equality in leadership, or shared Lordship. It is clear that the scriptures teach that Jesus is the Son of God and that God sends the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does not send God anywhere. God is clearly the Head."

Her comments sent shockwaves through her community of followers and business partners. She was removed from the Women of Faith Web site, influential evangelical churches dropped her program, even some key employees left. Thomas Nelson, her publisher, quickly canceled the publication of her book that was then scheduled for release in one month. All of this because she trifled with the Trinity.

If you are confused as to why her words got her into so much trouble, that is quite understandable. The church has struggled to explain how God can be both One God and three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Where Mrs. Shamblin went wrong was in her statement that God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit were not equal in leadership. In an interview, she agreed that Jesus was both Lord and God but she maintained that Jesus held only a secondary and unequal relationship to the Father.

If you are still confused, let me ask you this: What is the conclusion of such a statement? It is this: Jesus is not fully God. This cuts at the heart of the church's historic teaching that Jesus Christ, in his very nature, was both fully God and fully man. It's a mystery which we accept through faith. Yet Shamblin tries to argue her point by saying that Christians grieve Jesus if they adhere to doctrines not found in Scripture. She says, "If God wanted us to refer to Himself, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit as the 'trinity,' He would not have left this word completely out of the Bible."

We must tread carefully when these kinds of claims are made. Just because a word is not in the bible doesn't mean that it is unbiblical. There are a lot of words that we use in the church that are not found in the Bible. In fact, the word Bible is not in the Bible.

Now we find ourselves this morning, on Trinity Sunday, struggling with this ancient doctrine. What are the essentials of our faith and why is the Trinity one of them? And how can we safeguard our pursuit of truth?

6. It’s a Mystery, and Always Will Be

Illustration

James C. Leach

Garrison Keillor, modern American prophet from the radio show "A Prairie Home Companion," said of love, "We should not think that we have figured this out, because it is not a problem, it's a mystery and always will be."

"It is not a problem, it's a mystery, and always will be." Doesn't that offend you just a little — the suggestion that there are those things in life we have not, and furthermore, will not ever, figure out? Now that we've become so advanced that we send ourselves videos back from Mars, we are not really open to the suggestion that there are those things that always have been and always will be mysteries to us. We assume that our only limitations are time and energy, and, given enough of the two, there is really nothing we can't ultimately know.

So when we come to a doctrinal matter like the Trinity, the temptation is to want one neat analogy that will make it all clear, one concise statement on the Trinity that will settle it for us and allow us to move on to the next problem. Well, I hate to disappoint you so early in my sermon today, but if that is what you are expecting I suggest that you join those of your friends who are already daydreaming this time away. You see, it's just not all that easy. It's not so simple to describe the Trinity in any meaningful way. The Trinity just isn't one of things we can settle in short order.

Maybe if we can't figure out the Trinity in these few brief minutes (and, given that the church in two thousand years hasn't been able to get it straight, it's a fairly safe bet we won't have the last word on it today,) if we can't settle the issue today, maybe we can at least try to point to what the doctrine of the trinity is attempting to say about God and how we experience God.

7. The Trinity - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

A preacher proudly boasted that he does not preach doctrinal sermons. They are boring he asserts and people do not understand or relate to them. Further, he claimed, I am a preacher and not a theologian. I get down do the practical issues and simply preach Christ crucified.

His thinking is faulty at several points. First, he is wrong when he says that he is not a theologian. The fact is that everyone to a certain extent is a theologian. Theology is nothing more than what you think about God. Well, shouts one person, I don't believe In God. That then is your theology. I would also take issue with him when he claims that he does not preach theology but gets down to practical issues. In my thinking there is no difference in good theology and good practice. Good, solid theology gets down to the very core of our existence.

Finally, I would disagree with him when he says that we should only preach Christ crucified. I know that is what the Apostle Paul said but this preacher doesn't mean what Paul meant. He is saying that he only preaches about the cross and saving the sinner. I submit to you that the cross is not central in Paul's theology; rather, it is Christ. It has always puzzled me why some ministers preach the message of salvation to people who have been sitting in the pews all their life when they need so much more of Christ's teaching on life's other issues. There are many strings on a guitar. To make beautiful music all of them must be played and not just one. That is why in the United Methodist Church we honor the lectionary and the seasons of the church year. That insures a witness to the whole Gospel of Jesus Christ. How can one go through the season of Advent and not touch upon the doctrine of the incarnation. How can one go through Lent without touching upon the doctrine of the resurrection? Likewise, how can we embark upon the season of Pentecost, as we did last week, without mentioning the doctrine of the Trinity?

Today is Trinity Sunday. This is a day that has been celebrated in the Christian church since the 10th century. It is on this occasion that ministers around the world address themselves to the subject of the triune God.

Let me begin by saying that the doctrine of the Trinity does not attempt to explain God. It only explains to us in a very elemental way what God has revealed to us about himself so far. To describe the tip of the iceberg above the water is not to describe the entire iceberg. So we Christians affirm the Trinity, not as an explanation of God, but simply as a way of describing what we know about Him.

The idea of the Trinity is not emphatically stated as a doctrine in the scriptures. Yet, by implication, it is stated many times. The early Christians soon discovered that they simply could not speak of God without speaking of the three ways in which he had revealed himself to them. This does not mean that there are three separate Gods. It means that there is one God who has shown himself in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Let's look at these this morning:

1. First, we affirm God the Father.
2. Secondly, we affirm belief in the Son, Jesus Christ.
3. Finally, we affirm belief in the Holy Spirit.

8. Overcoming and Achieving

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

Some of the world's greatest men and women have been saddled with disabilities and adversities but have managed to overcome them.

Cripple him, and you have a Sir Walter Scott.
Lock him in a prison cell, and you have a John Bunyan.
Bury him in the snows of Valley Forge, and you have a George Washington.
Raise him in abject poverty, and you have an Abraham Lincoln.
Subject him to bitter religious prejudice, and you have a Benjamin Disraeli.
Strike him down with infantile paralysis, and he becomes a Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Burn him so severely in a schoolhouse fire that the doctors say he will never walk again, and you have a Glenn Cunningham, who set a world's record in 1934 for running a mile in 4 minutes, 4.4 seconds.
Deafen a genius composer, and you have a Ludwig van Beethoven.
Have him or her born black in a society filled with racial discrimination, and you have a Booker T. Washington, a Harriet Tubman, a Marian Anderson, or a George Washington Carver.
Make him the first child to survive in a poor Italian family of eighteen children, and you have an Enrico Caruso.
Have him born of parents who survived a Nazi concentration camp, paralyze him from the waist down when he is four, and you have an incomparable concert violinist, Iczhak Perlman.
Call him a slow learner, "retarded," and write him off as ineducable, and you have an Albert Einstein.

9. Great Events On Small Hinges

Illustration

Unknown

Great events turn on small hinges.

The Gospel was first introduced to Japan through a portion of the Scriptures that floated ashore and was picked up by a Japanese gentleman. Afterwards he sent for a whole Bible and was instructed by the missionaries.

When the Queen of Korea lost her little child by death, a slave girl in the palace told her of heaven where the child had gone, and the Savior who would take her there. Thus the Gospel was first introduced to Korea by a little captive maid.

The success of the mission in Telugu in the state of Andhra Pradesh in India depended on the fact that John Cloud had studied engineering when he was at college. Therefore he was able to take the contract for the building of the canal during the famine and provide the employment of thousands of laborers to whom he preached everyday on the text, John 3:16. The result of this work was the baptism of 10,000 converts in one year.

The battle of Bennington was gained, it is said, because a little lame boy in Vermont set a shoe on Col. Warren's tender-footed horse, and thus enabled the Colonel to lead up his regiment just in time to save the day. The victory of Bennington decided the Battle of Saratoga, which decided the Revolutionary War.

The hunger of the son of Columbus led him to stop at the monastery in Andalusia and ask for bread. The Prior of the monastery, who had been the confessor of Queen Isabella, heard the story of the adventurous navigator, and brought about an interview with the Queen, which resulted in the sailing of Columbus for the discovery of America. It all hinged upon the hunger of the boy.

Robert Bruce took refuge in a cave from the pursuer who was seeking his life. A spider at once wove a web across the mouth of the cave, and when the pursuer came by, he saw the web and took it for granted that no one had entered. The destiny of millions of people hinged upon that little spider's web.

10. Lay Down Your Entitlements

Illustration

Timothy Owings

Our greatest Advent challenge seems to be the need to face the truth about ourselves. Both Isaiah and John tell us some very unflattering things about who we are and what we are capable of doing. Truth be told, all of us some of the time and some of us all of the time are in radical denial about the situation of our planet, our nation, and our lives. For example, like the people who heard John, we can claim an entitlement that keeps us from becoming the prepared and faithful people God calls us to be. The folks in John's crowd were tempted to say, "We have Abraham as our father." Meaning what? Meaning we can coast through life as the entitled ones refusing to face the demands that being Abraham's children require of us.

We do the same thing. Put your own entitlement in the blank. "We are Americans." Or, "We are Baptists." Or, "We have a rich worship tradition in our Church," Or, "We have _______." For God to prepare us for God's coming in Jesus Christ, we must lay down our entitlements, our selfish "rights," anything that may indicate a sense of ownership, and confess that God has the gift of God's Kingdom, and we cannot receive the gift until we first admit we deeply and honestly need it. Justice, righteousness, peace, and dozens of other gifts all come into our needy lives, not from our own bankrupt professions or clichéd confessions. Advent is about receiving God's judgment on all our self-protecting behaviors so we can finally, at last, receive God's gift of uncommon grace.

11. Harriet's Dream

Illustration

Michael B. Curry

This day we are commemorating the witness of Harriet Beecher Stowe, a woman who used her words to set the captive free. I’ll say more about her later, but right now I want to note that in 1943-44 her witness was celebrated in a Broadway play titled “Harriet.”

It was Helen Hayes who played the part of Harriet Beecher Stowe. At the end of the play Beecher Stowe’s family stands around Harriet and sings the words of “The Battle Hymn of the Republic,” affirming the Christian witness of this brave and bold woman. . .

Harriet Beecher Stowe was born in 1811 into a devout family committed to the gospel of Jesus and to helping transform the world from the nightmare it often is into the dream God intends. She is best-known for a fictional work titled “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.”

In this fiction, she told the truth. She told the story of how chattel slavery afflicted a family, afflicted real people. She told the truth of the brutality, the injustice, the inhumanity of the institution of chattel slavery. Her book did what YouTube videos of injustices and brutalities do today. It went 19th-century viral. It rallied abolitionists and enraged vested interests.

The influence of that book was so powerful that Abraham Lincoln is reputed to have said, upon meeting Harriet Beecher Stowe for the first time, “So this is the little lady who started this great war!”

A woman of her era was supposed to write nice stories, not stories that would disturb the conscience of a nation. She was supposed to marry well, raise well-bred children, participate in a few charitable activities and be fondly remembered by all who knew her. That was the life she was supposed to have.

But she had been raised in a family that believed that following Jesus means changing the world from the nightmare it often is into the dream that God intends.

12. Understanding the Trinity

Illustration

King Duncan

This is Trinity Sunday. God in three persons--Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Do we fully understand this wonderful doctrine? No, but some of us will fight for it.

You may remember that ancient story about St. Augustine. One day he took a break from writing about the Trinity to take a walk along the seashore. There he came across a child with a little pail, intently scooping up a pail full of water out of the ocean, then walking up the beach and dumping it out into the sand, then going back down to scoop out another pail of water to pour into the sand, etc.

Augustine asked the child what he was doing, and the child explained that he was "emptying the sea out into the sand."

When the Bishop tried to gently point out the absurd impossibility of this task, the child replied, "Ah, but I'll drain the sea before you understand the Trinity."

Okay, so, maybe the child didn't say exactly that, but there's truth to that comment. We don't understand the Trinity, but we're ready to go to war to defend it. Well, maybe not anymore. But there was a time when battles were fought over church doctrine, and even today churches are being split over whose interpretation of the Word is correct. And it's tragic.

13. WASHED ANY FEET LATELY?

Illustration

John H. Krahn

As Jesus and his disciples gathered in the upper room, something seemed to be wrong. Although it is not explicitly stated in the narrative, we can surmise what it might have been. But first let us set the stage. In the Lord’s day when people gathered for a meal, it was the slave’s duty to wash the people’s feet before the meal began. The Lord and his disciples were poor; therefore the disciples probably took turns washing off the dust of the roads from the sandaled feet of the little brotherhood. Normally they did it willingly as a matter of course. But tonight, all of them sat stubbornly in their places and would have none of the menial duty. Perhaps on their journey to the upper room they continued to argue with each other as to whom would have the position of honor when Jesus ushered in the kingdom of God. Perhaps with ruffled tempers and with sore feelings, they trooped into the upper room like a group of sulking schoolboys, not one among them willing to see the pitcher and basin and towel set out for their use. And so, for once, the customary little courtesy was not carried out, and they began their meal with feet still travel-stained. An uncompromising spirit prevailed.

Wanting to clear the air and cleanse this childishness out of their hearts, the Lord took the role of the servant, rose and carried through his dramatic action. The disciples were shocked, as clearly demonstrated by Peter’s challenging the appropriateness of the Lord’s action. In the foot washing, Jesus demonstrated his earlier words spoken just before he entered into Jerusalem, "Whoever would be great among you must be your servant ... even as the Son of man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

Have you washed any feet lately? I am not referring to your own, although good personal hygiene is laudable. Have you been like the Lord, humbled yourself and done an act of servanthood that was uncalled for, unexpected, yet very Christlike? An act like shoveling the sidewalk of a neighbor who often lets his dog run all over your property. An act like continuing to speak well of someone who constantly knifes you in the back. Continuing to love your kids when they do things that make you dislike them. Coming to the church to help paint twice in one week when you notice that many of your fellow parishioners did not care enough to pitch in once. It means giving the extra needed ... be it forgiveness, monetary offerings, service, or what have you ... because you have been touched by Jesus and have felt his love for you.

The Lord of the universe has knelt at our feet, has been our slave, our brother, our friend, and our salvation. Are any of us better than he? Are we more important than he? Should our knees be deprived of the opportunity of touching the floor in order that we can also be in a position to do a little foot washing?

14. My Friend

Illustration

Ronald Love

Frederick Douglass approached the front door of the White House, seeking admission into Abraham Lincoln's Second Inaugural Ball. Just as Douglass was about to knock on the door, two policemen seized him, barring the black man's entrance. Douglass, a large, powerful man, brushed the officers aside and stepped into the foyer. Once inside, two more officers grabbed the uninvited guest, all the while uttering racial slurs.

As Douglass was being dragged from the hall, he cried to a nearby patron, "Just say to Mr. Lincoln that Fred Douglass is at the door!" Confusion ensued. Then suddenly the officers received orders to usher Douglass into the East Room. In that beautiful room, the great abolitionist stood in the presence of the esteemed President. The place quieted as Lincoln approached his newly arrived guest, hand outstretched in greeting, and speaking in a voice loud enough so none could mistake his intent, the President announced, "Here comes my friend Douglass."

The President had called Frederick Douglass friend. Who dared demean Douglass if he was a friend of the President?

Jesus Christ, the Lord of the universe, has called us his brothers and his sisters. God has called us His own children. But not only us. Also the person who lies stripped and beaten by the side of the road. He " or she " is our friend, our neighbor. So we pause and we help, because once there was a man who paused on a cross for us.

15. Give To God The Things That Are God's

Illustration

Phyllis Faaborg Wolk

"Tell us what you think, Teacher. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?" When the Pharisees asked Jesus that question, he responded with a request, "Show me the coin used for the tax," and someone handed Jesus a coin embossed with the head of the current Roman emperor, Tiberius. Engraved around his head was the inscription, "Tiberius Caesar, majestic son of the majestic God, and High Priest." "Whose image is on this coin?" Jesus asked. "The emperor's," they responded. "Well then," Jesus said, "give to the emperor what belongs to the emperor." The image of the emperor was embossed on the coin, therefore the coin belonged to him.

But in answering the Pharisees' question, Jesus didn't stop with the issue of taxation. He continued, "and give to God what belongs to God." As Jesus spoke the words, "give to God what belongs to God," standing right before him were those on whom the image of God had been embossed. The Pharisees, teachers of the law of Israel, children of Abraham whom God had claimed as his own, had been created from the very beginning in the image of God. In the image of himself, God had created them. They belonged to God. Those in whose eyes Jesus looked as he spoke were the coins of God. "Give to God what belongs to God," Jesus said. But when he spoke those words, the Pharisees left him and went away.

Should we pay taxes to the government? Yes, Jesus would say. But again, Jesus wouldn't stop there. Today he looks you in the eye and says, "Give to God what belongs to God." And as he looks at you, Jesus sees the image of God. In the beginning God created you and embossed his image upon you. In the waters of baptism, God marked you with the cross of Christ forever. God has given himself to you and has promised to love you and be with you forever.

Mrs. Detweiler was created in the image of God. She worked at Murray Elementary as the special education teacher. It didn't take her students long to recognize the image of God within her which made them feel special and loved. Even though she was a special education teacher, the students of Murray Elementary considered it a privilege to be invited to Mrs. Detweiler's room. The walls of her small classroom were covered with stars made out of bright yellow construction paper. Neatly written in black permanent marker on the star at the top of each row was the name of one of her students. As soon as a student finished reading a book, the title of that book was placed on another star that soon appeared directly beneath the star bearing the student's name. The more books a person read, the more stars accumulated under the name. Whenever her students finished a book, Mrs. Detweiler made them feel like stars, themselves. Her ability to make her students feel special and important was a mark of the image of God shining through her.

Mrs. Detweiler bore the image of God. She loved her students -- that was the image of God. She gave of herself by teaching them to read -- that was the image of God. She believed in her students -- that was the image of God. But even as one created in the image of God, Mrs. Detweiler would be the first to say that she had her faults. There were times when she let her students down; times when she lost her patience; times when her mood affected her ability to respond to her students enthusiastically. Mrs. Detweiler wasn't perfect, but she had been created in the image of God, claimed as God's child through her baptism and renewed each day with the gift of forgiveness. As she gave God what belonged to God by giving of herself to her students, Jesus worked through her. Through Mrs. Detweiler, God's love, acceptance and encouragement was shown to many students as they grew and matured into the people God had created them to be. As she gave God what belonged to God, God continued to give himself to her, revealing his love again and again through the sparkle in her students' eyes.

You are God's. His image has been placed within you. When I look at you, I see the image of God. I see the image of God in your faces as you greet one another before worship. I see the image of God each time you pray for each other and share one another's concerns. I see the image of God when I go to the nursing home and watch you hug and hold and gently speak with those who reside there. I see the image of God when I watch the Sunday school staff relate with the children -- so often God's love is given and received in the simple interactions they share. I see the image of God in the church kitchen, as members of this congregation work side by side to prepare a meal after a funeral or before a fellowship event. I see the image of God every time one of you gives to the Lord's work in a generous and cheerful way, sharing with others the blessings God has given you. God's image shines when you invite and welcome your neighbors to church -- not only those who are like you, but those who bring different perspectives and talents and needs to this body of Christ. I see God's image as this congregation reaches beyond itself to support missionaries and relieve world hunger. Whenever you give of yourself to others, the image of God within you is being revealed.

You are the bearers of God's image. Jesus said, "Give to God the things that are God's." You are God's. Jesus says, "Give yourself to God." But before you can even respond to Jesus' call to give yourself to God, God gives himself to you. Even before you have a chance to respond to Jesus' command, Jesus goes to the cross. Jesus goes to the cross to give to God what belongs to God. Jesus goes to the cross to give you to his Father in Heaven, who then blesses you with salvation and eternal life. Jesus goes to the cross for you and gives you life.

Give to God the things that are God's. When you give yourself to God, God will nurture his image within you. Jesus who now lives in you will give himself to others whenever you give of yourself to those in need. Jesus will use you to reveal God's love and forgiveness, to show all God's children how special they are to God, and to proclaim salvation to all who have been created in the image of God. Give to God things that are God's, remembering that Jesus has already given himself for you. Amen.

16. An Admirer of Jesus

Illustration

Brett Blair

There were two brothers in Georgia during the 1950's. One decided that in opposition to the dominant culture of the day, he was going to participate in the formation of a desegregated community. The other worked as an attorney for a prominent law firm. Both were Christians and attended church regularly. As the community formed and social pressure forced the community into court proceedings, the one brother asked his attorney brother to help them with the legal work. The brother refused, saying that he could lose his job. He pressured his brother to help with a reminder that he was a Christian. The lawyer responded, "I will follow Jesus to his cross, but it is his cross. I have no need to be crucified." To this his brother replied, "Then you are an admirer of Jesus, but not his disciple."

King Herod is like this attorney. He greatly admired this prophet from God, John the Baptist, but not enough to become his disciple, not enough to risk his own honor and prestige to protect him.

Another similarity occurs in the first part of our text. The people had heard about Jesus. They knew of his great work. They heard about his powerful teaching. They admired him, but they came to the wrong conclusions about him. These people knew about Jesus, but they did not follow him.

17. Lovejoy's Martyrdom

Illustration

Brett Blair & Paul Simon

That great American hero, editor, school teacher, and Presbyterian clergyman Elijah Lovejoy left the pulpit and returned to the press in order to be sure his words reached more people. The Civil War might have been averted and a peaceful emancipation of slaves achieved had there been more like him. After observing one lynching, Lovejoy was committed forever to fighting uncompromisingly the awful sin of slavery. Mob action was brought against him time after time; neither this nor many threats and attempts on his life deterred him. Repeated destruction of his presses did not stop him. "If by compromise is meant that I should cease from my duty, I cannot. I fear God more than I fear man. Crush me if you will, but I shall die at my post..." And he did, four days later, at the hands of another mob. Not one of the ruffians was prosecuted, indicted or punished in any way for his murder. On the contrary, some of Lovejoy's defenders were prosecuted! One of the mob assassins was later elected mayor of Alton!

So where's justice? Was his blood ever avenged? There was one young man around who heard of these events which took place 80 miles from his home. He gave a speech referencing needless mob violence. He didn't refer to Lovejoy specifically, he didn't need to, everyone knew what he was talking about, when he said:

Accounts of outrages committed by mobs form the every-day news of the times. They have pervaded the country from New England to Louisiana; [these stories of mobs] are neither peculiar to the eternal snows of the former nor the burning suns of the latter; they are not the creature of climate, neither are they confined to the slave-holding or the non-slave-holding states. Alike they [or, these mobs] spring up among the pleasure-hunting masters of Southern slaves, and the order-loving citizens of the land of steady habits. Whatever, then, their cause may be, it is common to the whole country.

So the Speaker chose to address mob rule in broader, national, context. To warn that living our lives by the whims of mobs is a recipe for national disaster. This speech was given to a local chapter of the American Lyceum Movement (which was a public education movement) in Springfield, Illinois in 1838. The speaker was 28-years-old at the time. His name was Abraham Lincoln

Lincoln was deeply moved by Lovejoy's martyrdom. And carried the memory of it, as a horrible illustration of the outcome of mob rule, into his presidency and into the emancipation of slavery that his presidency affected.

Note: the brackets in the Lincoln quote are added to help the listeners understand what the proper antecedent is.

A Source: Some of the information for this illustration gleaned from http://abelincolnhistory.com/speeches/lyceum-address.htm. There's other tidbits as well from this site that would be helpful, such as, Lincoln felt that all laws should be obeyed, even the laws of slavery, until such time that they could be changed; otherwise, societies descend into governance by mob rule.

18. The Laughter Of Faith

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

God called Sarah, too! We talk so much about God's call to Abraham that we can easily forget that God called Sarah as well. The story is told in Genesis 17. This old story begins with God's call to Abraham. It then moves to Sarah. "As for Sarah," God says, "she shall no longer be called Sarai but Sarah shall be her name." "I will bless her ..." God promises, "and she shall give rise to nations; kings of people shall come from her" (Genesis 17:16).

We can only imagine the solemnity of the moment when God made this promise to Abraham and Sarah. Abraham broke the solemnity. He fell on his face laughing at the very thought of God's promise. "Can a child be born to a man who is 100 years old?" Abraham laughed to himself. "Can Sarah, who is 90 years old, bear a child?" Abraham's laughter, it turns out, is the laughter of unbelief. He doesn't believe that God can keep this promise. The Lord has to scold Abraham a bit for his unseemly laughter. "No," God says firmly, "your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall name him Isaac" (Genesis 17:19). The Lord, it seems, also has a sense of humor. The name Isaac means: "he laughs."

Very soon thereafter the Lord visited Abraham in the guise of three messengers. Abraham and Sarah scurried around like mad making their home suitable for a visit from the Lord. They put on their finest spread. As the meal begins we hear that the Lord has made this appearance in order to speak with Sarah. "Where is Sarah your wife?" the Lord said to Abraham. Abraham had laughed off God's promise to Sarah. But the Lord perseveres. The Lord speaks the promise again in Sarah's hearing. "I will surely return to you in due season and your wife Sarah shall have a son" (Genesis 18:10).

This time it was Sarah who laughed. "After I have grown old, and my husband is old, shall I have pleasure?" she mused (Genesis 18:12). Sarah joined her husband in the laughter of unbelief. For the Lord, however, this was not a laughing matter. The Lord was angry with all this laughter of unbelief. "Is anything too wonderful for the Lord?" the Lord says in reprimand of Sarah's laughter. Sarah protested. "I did not laugh," she said to the Lord in fear. "Oh yes you did laugh," the Lord replied (Genesis 18:14-15).

Now a little laughter cannot dissuade the Lord. The Lord had made a promise to Sarah. The Lord kept that promise. The Lord means what the Lord says! Sarah did conceive and bear a son. What joy this son must have brought into the life of Abraham and Sarah! They named him "laughter," Isaac, as the one who promised had instructed them.

But we're not done with the laughing. Now it was Sarah's turn to laugh. "God has brought laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh with me," Sarah said. "Who would ever have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have born him a son in his old age" (Genesis 21:6-7). Sarah's laughter here is clearly a sign of her faith. At least that's how the author of the book of Hebrews understands the story. Sarah's laughter has turned from the laughter of unbelief to the laughter of belief. She has heard the promise. She has conceived. She has given birth. She has believed it all. And she has laughed about it all. As Sarah is our witness, what better response can be given to this promise-making, promise-keeping Lord?

19. The Evening News

Illustration

Frank G. Honeycutt

Imagine for a moment that Jesus is watching television with his twelve disciples. They're on furlough from teaching and healing, taking it easy in the living room of Peter's mother-in-law, doing a little mindless channel surfing. Maybe they catch a little of an NCAA Tournament game, March Madness. These are guys, you know, just relaxing from a demanding schedule.

But eventually the evening news comes on. They put down the popcorn and listen intently to the day's tragedies. One disciple says, "Hey, Jesus, that horrible bombing over in France where that guy drove a bus into a crowd of people. Do you think that because these people in Paris suffered in this way, they were worse sinners than the rest?" It was a popular question in Jesus' day. Still is. If something bad happened, it must have been for a reason. Jesus scratches his beard for a moment. "No, they didn't die because of anything they did. It was a purely random thing. But let me tell you something. Unless you guys clean up your acts, you'll die just as tragically."

There is a low murmur in the room. The disciples look at each other like Jesus has missed his morning medication. As two begin to leave to find a bathroom, the newscaster reports another catastrophe, this one halfway across the world. Jesus pipes up this time. "Hey, guys," he says, "those people over in El Salvador. What about them? The earthquake that hit there killed hundreds of people. Does that mean that these Salvadorans were worse sinners than their neighbors in Guatemala?" Jesus waits for his question to sink in. "No, the tragedy had nothing to do with their morals. Those people were just in the way when an earthquake hit." The disciples breathe a sigh of relief, gladdened to know that God doesn't work that way. But then Jesus looks at them all. "Let me tell you something, though. Unless you people start going in the right direction, you will share a similar fate as those Salvadorans and it will seem like a building falling on your head to crush the life out of you." I believe somebody got up and changed the channel after that.

20. Family Tree

Illustration

Dr. Ray Pritchard

Do you remember the TV mini-series Roots? It was the story of how Alex Haley, a black man, set out years ago to discover his family’s history. All he knew was that his family had descended from an African slave named Kinte who landed in America at a place called “napolis.” He also remembered bits and pieces of the stories his aunts and grandmothers used to tell him when he was a child. With that meager information, he began to put the story together. Across the generations, a few syllables of the original African language had been repeated. He went from one linguist to another, repeating those few syllables, asking if they knew what language they came from. No one seemed to know, until one day he met someone who identified the words as belonging to a tribal language from the small West African country of Gambia. After more research, he discovered that “napo-lis” stood for Annapolis, Maryland, entry point for thousands of African slaves. When he went to that area, he found the name Kinte in the breeding records of a family that had owned slaves a century and a half earlier.

Eventually Alex Haley made the trip to Gambia. There he visited tribe after tribe, listening to the tribal historians tell their stories. These were old men who had memorized hundreds of years of birth, death, marriage and war. One day he sat for hours listening as a man told the story of his tribe. “So-and-so was the first. He married so-and-so. They had so-many children and lived so-many years.” On and on it went, the story of one African tribe spanning the centuries. Then it happened: “So-and-so married so-and-so. They had a son. In such-and-such a year he was taken away and never seen again.” What was the name of the son? Kunta Kinte. The year was 1752. Alex Haley said, “I had what they call a peak experience.” It was one of those moments of revelation that you have once or twice in a lifetime. He said, “I realized then that I had roots. I had history. My family came from somewhere.”

21. The Power of God Is Real

Illustration

Paul van Dine

In David Dunn's book entitled "Giving Yourself Away," he tells of a lesson he learned from a bus driver whom he once had met.

Riding the bus this day, Dunn noticed a driver who was exceptionally cheerful in every imaginable circumstance. There was a kind and happy word from him for everyone who stepped on the bus, and again for everyone who left.

As he was about to get off, Dunn told the driver he was the happiest bus driver he had ever seen and wondered what the reason was. "Well," the driver said, "to be honest, I read in the paper a few months ago about a man who died and left a lot of money to a bus driver who was nice to him. So, I thought maybe I would try it myself. But (now) I've enjoyed myself so much being nice to people, I don't care whether anybody ever leaves me any money (anyway).'

I would suggest to you the doctrine of the Trinity tells us something about God which is akin to that. If you would know Him, you cannot fully know Him with your mind. There must be the discovery of the spirit of it all somewhere living within you.

There must come that point in your life when you know both of the love and power of God are real, and they are true--not because you have run up against God's authority and fear to do otherwise, nor even because you have seen His love expressed and feel attracted to that in return. For to know God is to have chosen for yourself to live like that, simply because the spirit of it has become your own.

Trinity! Does it say very much to us of God? Perhaps not very much, as only a word --not very much at all.

But, if you mean by "Trinity," this reality of how men and women have to come to know God in their own lives, if they know Him at all, then Trinity is surely a word we can scarcely do without.

22. The Pastoral Search Report

Illustration

James Kegel

A pastoral report: "We have been unable to find a suitable candidate for this congregation though we have one promising prospect. We have followed up the recommendations from church members with interviews or calling at least three references. This is a confidential report on the prospective candidates:

ADAM: Good man but has had problems with his wife and children. He and his wife have been known to walk around outside without wearing clothes.

NOAH: Former pastorate of 120 years with no converts. Prone to unrealistic building projects.

ABRAHAM: References reported that he once offered to share his wife with another man.

JOSEPH: Big thinker, but brags, believes in dream – interpretation and has a prison record.

MOSES: Modest and meek man but a poor communicator. Stutters. Known to blow his stack and act rashly. Left an earlier position under a murder charge.

DAVID: The most promising leader of all. Very musical. We discovered he had an affair with his neighbor's wife.

SOLOMON: Great preacher but our parsonage wouldn't hold all his wives and children. Has grandiose tastes.

ELIJAH: Prone to depression; collapses under pressure.

HOSEA: A tender, loving pastor but his wife is a floosy or worse.

DEBORAH: Pushy female.

JEREMIAH: Emotionally unstable, alarmist, negative, always lamenting things.

ISAIAH: Claims to have seen angels. Has trouble with his language.

JONAH: Refused God's call until he was forced to obey when he was swallowed by a fish. He said the fish spit him out on the shore. We hung up.

AMOS: Backward and unpolished. Would only fit in a poor rural congregation.

JOHN: Says he is a Baptist but doesn't dress like one. Has slept outdoors for months on end, eats a weird diet. Doesn't work well with others – we suggest he become a camp director instead of a pastor.

PAUL: Powerful CEO type and fascinating preacher. Short on tact. So long-winded he has been known to preach all night.

JESUS: Popular at times, but once his church grew to 5000 he managed to offend them all and his church dwindled to 12 people. Seldom stays in one place every long. And of course, he is single.

JUDAS: His references are solid. A steady plodder and good money manager. Conservative and well-connected with the community and religious leaders. This is the candidate we recommend to the congregation..."

23. Finding Financial Freedom

Illustration

Brett Blair

Some of you may have read a remarkable short story sometime during your school years by D. H. Lawrence titled, “The Rocking‑Horse Winner." I wonder if you remember how the story begins?

It is a haunting tale about a family living above its means. The mother is considered by friends and neighbors to be the perfect mother, in spite of the fact that deep down she knows she has difficulty loving her three children. It's important to the husband to keep up the pretense of success the large house, staffed with servants but they are living on the edge, just like many families today. Listen as D. H. Lawrence describes this family's life situation:

“And so the house came to be haunted by the unspoken phrase: ‘There must be more money! There must be more money!' The children could hear it all the time though nobody said it aloud. They heard it at Christmas, when the expensive and splendid toys filled the nursery. Behind the shining modern rocking-horse, behind the smart doll's house, a voice would start whispering: ‘There must be more money! There must be more money!' And the children would stop playing, to listen for a moment. They would look into each other's eyes, to see if they had all heard. And each one saw in the eyes of the other two that they too had heard. ‘There must be more money! There must be more money!'

“It came whispering from the springs of the still-swaying rocking-horse, and even the horse, bending his wooden, champing head, heard it. The big doll, sitting so pink and smirking in her new pram, could hear it quite plainly, and seemed to be smirking all the more self-consciously because of it. The foolish puppy, too, that took the place of the teddy-bear, he was looking so extraordinarily foolish for no other reason but that he heard the secret whisper all over the house: ‘There must be more money!'"

That's the family backdrop to the story of “The Rocking‑Horse Winner." Quite an extraordinary picture: “There must be more money! There must be more money!"

I wonder if there are any homes in our community today that are haunted in that same way: “There must be more money!"

Let's talk about financial freedom. Jesus said on one occasion: “No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money."

Here is the challenge for today: We want to break the grip money has on our lives. We want to affirm that Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is our god, and our only god. We want to affirm that the God who manifested Himself in Jesus of Nazareth is our god. This is who we are. That is why we are here in this room at this time. “Thou shalt have no other gods before me." We want God to be our god, not material possessions.

24. Remember the Duck

Illustration

Steven Cole

Richard Hoefler's book, Will Daylight Come?, includes A homey illustration of how sin enslaves and forgiveness frees. A little boy visiting his grandparents was given his first slingshot. He practiced in the woods, but he could never hit his target. As he came back to Grandma's back yard, he spied her pet duck. On an impulse he took aim and let fly. The stone hit, and the duck fell dead.

The boy panicked. Desperately he hid the dead duck in the woodpile, only to look up and see his sister watching. Sally had seen it all, but she said nothing. After lunch that day, Grandma said, "Sally, let's wash the dishes." But Sally said, "Johnny told me he wanted to help in the kitchen today. Didn't you, Johnny?" And she whispered to him, "Remember the duck! So Johnny did the dishes.

Later Grandpa asked if the children wanted to go fishing. Grandma said, "I'm sorry, but I need Sally to help make supper." Sally smiled and said, "That's all taken care of. Johnny wants to do it." Again she whispered, "Remember the duck." Johnny stayed while Sally went fishing.

After several days of Johnny doing both his chores and Sally's, finally he couldn't stand it. He confessed to Grandma that he'd killed the duck. "I know, Johnny," she said, giving him a hug. "I was standing at the window and saw the whole thing. Because I love you, I forgave you. I wondered how long you would let Sally make a slave of you."

25. I Am Counting with You

Illustration

Mark Trotter

Robert Drake is a Tennessean who writes stories about growing up in that part of the country a generation ago. He told a story about Miss Caroline Walker, who was a music teacher. She had been doing it for as long as anybody could remember. She was something of a legend in her county in Tennessee.

She had two goals in teaching. One was to teach her girls to be ladies. So she taught them manners as much as she taught them music. She also taught them to play one piece perfectly for the May recital. She rehearsed them and drilled them all year long to play that one piece perfectly, including instructions on how to sit on the piano bench, to spread your skirt as you sit down, and how to announce the song by standing straight and holding your hands together at your waist.

The night of the recital came. It was held in the high school auditorium. Ten pupils of Miss Caroline's were there waiting for their turn. Ann Louise's turn came. She was terrified. She thought she was going to faint. She knew she would never make it, but it was her turn, so she moved forward to the wings where Miss Caroline was waiting.

She could see how nervous Ann Louise was. Her body had become stiff and rigid. Miss Caroline put her hands on Ann Louise's shoulders, and bent down to whisper in her ear, "You have worked hard. You know this piece. You have nothing to fear. And remember, I am counting with you all the way."

With a little shove she pushed Ann Louise out onto the stage where, all of a sudden, she was facing this large audience of everybody's relatives, including her own. She announced her piece, then spread her skirt, and sat on the bench. She noticed that she was much calmer than she thought she would be. She noticed that Miss Caroline was still there in the wings. She remembered the last words that she said to her, "I am counting with you all the way." She didn't say, "I am counting on you." She said, "I am counting with you."

And Drake wrote this. "She felt that they were held together by something beyond either of them alone. Teacher and disciple were as one. She realized that it was this that she had been preparing for all year long, this test. And the music, at her command, came cascading out of the baby grand into the darken auditorium full of joy and full of life, right on cue."

I will not leave you comfortless; I will come to you.

So let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid.

26. Mary Had the Little Lamb

Illustration

Marv & Marbeth Rosenthal

Mary Had The Little Lamb

Mary had the little Lamb, who lived before His birth;
Self-existent Son of God, from Heaven He came to Earth.
Micah 5:2

Mary had the little Lamb; see Him in yonder stall
Virgin-born Son of God, to save man from the Fall.
Isaiah 7:14

Mary had the little Lamb, obedient Son of God;
Everywhere the Father led, His feet were sure to trod.
John 6:38

Mary had the little Lamb, crucified on the tree
The rejected Son of God, He died to set men free.
1 Peter 1:18

Mary had the little Lamb men placed Him in the grave,
Thinking they were done with Him; to death He was no slave!
Matthew 28:6

Mary had the little Lamb, ascended now is He;
All work on Earth is ended, our Advocate to be.
Hebrews 4:14-16

Mary had the little Lame mystery to behold!
From the Lamb of Calvary, a Lion will unfold.
Revelation 5: 5,6

When the Day Star comes again, of this be very sure:
It won't be Lamb-like silence, but with the Lion's roar.
Psalm 2:12
Revelation 19:11-16

27. The Communion of Life with Life

Illustration

Gene Bartlett

"The best way to send an idea," said scientist J. Robert Oppenheimer, "is to wrap it up in a person." The theological word for all of that is incarnation, meaning "in the flesh." Jesus was the incarnation of God. Jesus was the way that God sent His "idea" to humanity; there was and is no better way! One of the early church fathers whose name was Ignatius explained that "by the Incarnation, God broke His silence." Less scholarly as an explanation but equally to the point was the remark of a little girl who said, "Some people couldn’t hear God's inside whisper and so He sent Jesus to tell them out loud." The Gospel of John declares dramatically, "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us." The Word, that living expression of God, tells out loud His truth and sees to it that we are in touch with the power and glory at the heart of Creation. We are brought into the personal presence of the lover of our souls. How great that blessing! How wonderful that gift!

28. God in Three Persons

Illustration

King Duncan

St. Augustine, one of the most astute thinkers the Christian Church has ever produced, was walking along the seashore one day while pondering the doctrine of the Trinity - Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost. He seemed to hear a voice saying, "Pick up one of the large sea shells there by the shore." So he picked it up. Then the voice said, "Now pour the ocean into the shell." And he said, "Lord, I can't do that." And the voice answered, "Of course not. In the same way, how can your small, finite mind ever hold and understand the mystery of the eternal, infinite, triune God?

Many Christian churches will be celebrating today the doctrine of the Trinity. It is one of the most prized truths of the Christian faith. "God in three persons, blessed Trinity...."

29. Blah, Blah, Blah, Love

Illustration

King Duncan

Dr. James B. Lemler was preaching one time about the Trinity. He told about a couple of parents who had gone home from his church and during Sunday lunch were talking about his sermon. In the midst of their conversation, their second-grade daughter sitting at the table chimed in. "Oh, Father Lemler's sermons, they're always the same," she said, "You know . . . blah, blah, blah, . . . love . . . blah, blah, blah . . . love."

Dr. Lemler said he was amused and thought to himself, "Hey, this little girl really got it . . . the message, the repetition, the core, the redundancy."

"And so it is with the Holy Trinity," says Dr. Lemler, "Over and over again . . . blah, blah, blah, love . . blah, blah, blah, love . . ."

"God the Creator . . . I love you . . . blah, blah, blah . . . and give you life.

"God the Redeemer . . . I love you and . . . blah, blah, blah . . . embrace you in that love forever.

"God the Spirit . . . I love you . . . blah, blah, blah . . . and warm your heart and your soul with my love.

"Blah, blah, blah love . . ."

I wish that is what the people heard that day when the voice spoke from heaven, "Yada, yada, yada, love " But John described it like this: "The crowd that was there and heard the voice said it had thundered . . . "

30. The Nicene Creed

Illustration

Staff

The Nicene Creed is a statement of belief widely used in Christian liturgy. It is called Nicene because it was originally adopted in the city of Nicaea (present day İznik, Turkey) by the First Council of Nicaea in 325.

We believe in one God,
      the Father almighty,
      maker of heaven and earth,
      of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
      the only Son of God,
      begotten from the Father before all ages,
           God from God,
           Light from Light,
           true God from true God,
      begotten, not made;
      of the same essence as the Father.
      Through him all things were made.
      For us and for our salvation
           he came down from heaven;
           he became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary,
           and was made human.
           He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate;
           he suffered and was buried.
           The third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures.
           He ascended to heaven
           and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
           He will come again with glory
           to judge the living and the dead.
           His kingdom will never end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit,
      the Lord, the giver of life.
      He proceeds from the Father and the Son,
      and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified.
      He spoke through the prophets.
      We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.
      We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
      We look forward to the resurrection of the dead,
      and to life in the world to come. Amen.

The Nicene Creed (325-381 A.D.) provides a fuller explanation of the Christian faith. It is called Nicene because a general council of the church, similar to Vatican II held in the 1960s, met in the city of Nicaea in Asia Minor. The Council was called to deal with the heresy of Arianism, which was a denial of the Trinity. The Nicene Creed goes into more detail than the Apostles' Creed on the Trinity and the person of Jesus.

A final version of the creed was formulated by another Council which met in Constantinople in 381 A.D. The creed is and has been from the start a topic of contention. In 598 a provincial church council meeting in Toledo, Spain, added the "filioque clause" which says that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father "and the Son." This added clause was accepted by the Western but not the Eastern church. It became one of the causes of the schism between East and West in 1064 A.D. Today the clause is still proving to be a stumbling block to closer relations with the Eastern Orthodox church. The Nicene Creed is familiar to most churchgoers in liturgical churches, because it is used in the worship service on festivals and certain seasons such as Advent, Christmas, Lent, and Easter.

31. That Little City of David

Illustration

Wade T. Burton

Some of you are familiar with the name, Phillips Brooks. Phillips Brooks was a big preacher both physically and mentally. Standing 6 feet 6 inches behind the pulpit of the Holy Trinity Episcopal Church in Philadelphia, he would speak powerful sermons at the rapid rate of 250 words per minute. Although he was a giant of a man, and a bachelor, he loved children dearly.

It was December, 1868 and Dr. Brooks was laboring over a Christmas sermon. He could hear his organist, Lewis Redner, rehearsing Christmas carols in the sanctuary. While thinking of a recent trip to the Holy Land, he decided to write a Christmas song for his Sunday School children. After he had composed the words, he took them to Mr. Redner and asked him to compose some music to fit the words. Redner carried the poem in his pocket for several days, and then, on the night before Christmas, he awoke with a melody running through his mind. Later he said the music seemed to “come down from Heaven.” He got out of bed and wrote the notes down, and that Christmas morning in 1868 the children of Holy Trinity Church sang for the first time “O Little Town of Bethlehem.”

I can’t express my sentiments as poignantly as Phillips Brooks, but my imagination is captured by that little city of David as well. It was never a city as we think of a city. Never would it rival Jerusalem or Rome or Athens or any of the other great cities of its day. Still it was there, in fulfillment of an ancient prophecy, that the Messiah was born.

32. Why 153 Fish?

Illustration

Brett Blair

It is so easy to get caught up in trivial interpretations of scripture and miss the point.

Take a look at John 21:11: "Simon Peter climbed aboard and dragged the net ashore. It was full of fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn." Now, why in heaven's name was there 153 fish? Have you ever wondered about that? No? Well others have.

Cyril of Alexandria in the 5th century said that the 100 represented the fullness of the gentiles, the 50 symbolized the remnant of Israel and the three of course was there for the Trinity.

Augustine’s theory (5th century) was a little more complicated. He said, there are 10 commandments and 7 is the perfect number of grace and that’s 17 right? Now if you add all the numbers from 1 to 17 together, you know 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 all the way up to 17 you’ll get 153. And not only that but if you were to arrange them with 17 fish in the first row, and 16 in the next row, and 15 in the next row, all the way down to a row of 1 you get a perfect triangle which of course symbolizes the Trinity.

Jerome, he also lived in the 5th century, suggested that there were 153 different types of fish in the sea and it was symbolic of the church reaching all the people in the world.

Personally I have my own theory, want to hear it? I think that it’s mentioned because there were 153 fish in the net.

Here's another theory of mine: they had to divide them somehow, and so Peter being the Skipper he got 21% or 32 fish, and John being mate got 16% that’s 25 fish, and the other five got 10.5 % each or 16 fish. You see we can get so caught up in really trivial stuff and miss the point that we need to be obedient to Christ, today.

Adapted from the sermon "Live for Today" by Denn Guptill, 1999.

33. Three Gods, yet One God

Illustration

Brian Stoffregen

Frederick Houk Borsch, since 1988, has been Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles. I don't remember where I first read this quote on the Trinity, but my notes indicate that when he wrote it, he was a religion Professor of Religion at Princeton University and Dean of the Princeton University Chapel.

There are probably a number of people who imagine that the idea of the Trinity was thought up by ivory-tower theologians who, typically, were making things more complicated than they needed to be and were obscuring the simple faith of regular believers. In fact, it seems that the process worked pretty much the other way around. Practicing believers and worshipers were driven by their experiences of God's activity to the awareness that God related in several different ways to the creation....

Thus what these believers came to insist upon was that God had to be recognized as being in different forms of relationship with the creation, in ways at least like different persons, and that all these ways were divine, that is, were of God. Yet there could not be three gods. God, to be the biblical God and the only God of all, had to be one God. This complex and profound faith was then handed over for the theologians to try and make more intelligible. They have been trying ever since.

34. Eternity and Trinity

Illustration

Larry Powell

Clarence Macartney tells of a certain Canadian river which flows through a forbidding chasm. Looming on either side of the river are rugged, uninviting crags which bear the names "Eternity" and "Trinity." Macartney suggests that the opposing crags invite an analogy (you understand of course, that to a preacher, most everything invites analogy). "Inseparable from any true conception of God," he says, "are always the two doctrines of God's eternity and God's trinity ... The threefold experience of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit." The great preacher then goes on to conclude that both doctrines lie helplessly beyond human comprehension.

35. Deferential Joy

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

Some while ago three other drivers and I all arrived at a Four Way Stop intersection at virtually the same moment. Although altogether too many drivers seem unaware of this fact, the rule at Four Way Stops is that drivers take turns in a clockwise fashion or according to whoever got to the intersection first. In this case, the four of us arrived simultaneously and so there was no logical starting point for even a clockwise rotation. What happened instead is that each of the four of us was making hand gestures to encourage someone to go first. After being momentarily stuck with no one moving, the next thing you knew, all four of us crept forward a bit at the same moment! Again we all stopped and again we all encouraged each other to go first. After lots of silly grins and even laughter among us four strangers, eventually we managed to get someone to go first. It was the complete opposite of what often characterizes road rage—we were terminally deferential! But it was hilarious and wonderful at the same time.

I think that something of that kind of deferential joy must characterize the interior life of God. There is something wonderful about a shared love and a shared enthusiasm one person for the other that is so intense, it results in a never-ending dance of affirmation and celebration. This Trinity Sunday lection from John 16 is pretty brief. Yet packed into this short section is the animating energy and verve and effervescence that exists at the bright center of the universe: that holy community that just is God in three persons, blessed Trinity!

36. It’s Like Water

Illustration

Thomas Tindell

I was probably about twelve when I was in my church confirmation class, and I remember asking my pastor about the Trinity. I couldn't get how one and one and one, can be One, and not three, and I definitely couldn't get why it was important to say that God is three and God is One, if it was something that by definition was a mystery, something we can't understand.

The answer I remember well. I was told that the Trinity is like H20 – it can be ice or water or steam, but it's all water. Well, that makes sense – there's no contradictions there! The illustration of water, steam, and ice brought some clarity of this to me. It's so simple. The only difference between them is the amount of energy each molecule of H20 has. Otherwise, they're the same. God is just like that.

Ice isn't steam and no one wants steamed soft drinks. When you ask for a coke with your burger they don't put a cup under the cappuccino machine and hit it with a few seconds of really hot steam. Here's your cup of steamed coke.

And when we want ice, nothing else will do.

And when you're ironing clothes or cleaning the carpets, you need steam. Just plain water causes problems.

But in the shower, I don't want steam and I certainly don't want ice. Something in-between is what I'm looking for.

Steam isn't ice isn't water. But all three are states of exactly the same molecules. That's only an analogy of what the God we worship really looks like. But like many, I still sometimes have a hard time understanding it, much less explaining it.

37. The Hidden Incarnation

Illustration

J. I. Packer

Without God's explanatory word, God's redemptive action could not be recognized for what it was. The clearest revelation of God (the incarnation) is nevertheless the most opaque to man.

38. The Puzzle of Baptism

Illustration

George Hermanson

The baptism of Jesus was an important feast in the early church, more important than Christmas. Like Epiphany, which was one of the three important feasts, it is a celebration of the true nature of the incarnation of God. It is a feast of light which illuminates God's nature. Baptism celebrates our identity as being formed by the aim of God, being light and novelty to the world, and our role in living in the light - what God wishes us to be.

So this Sunday we celebrate the Baptism of Jesus. I suspect that for many Christians there is a puzzle about baptism. There is something curious and almost antiquated about the act of baptism. If you ask people why they want their children baptized they would be hard pressed to say why, other than, "That's the way we've always done it." Those of us who attend church faithfully would be hard pressed to say what their baptism meant to them. Do we do it for the grandparents? Is it a cultural act? Is it a beginning to form our children in what is most basic to us - a sense of God who loves all of creation?

39. O Little Town of Bethlehem: A Story of Faith

Illustration

Keith Wagner

One of my all time favorite Christmas hymns is "O Little Town of Bethlehem." It has been around since 1868. It is packed with emotion, a song about the Christ Child, born to Mary, a song filled with the creative power of God intervening in history with the gift of a savior. It's a story where the divine and the human come together in an amazing but humble way.

What might surprise you is how this great hymn came to be. It was written by Phillips Brooks, Episcopal priest. Brooks was serving the Holy Trinity Church in the City of Brotherly Love (Philadelphia, PA). He had just returned from a trip to The Holy Land which inspired him to write the words. "When he returned to America he still had Palestine singing in his soul." (from Stories of Christmas Carols by Ernest K. Emurian, Baker Book House Co., page 97)

Brooks was a bachelor. His church organist and Sunday School superintendent, Lewis Redner was also a bachelor and Brooks gave the words to him and asked him to create a tune for the upcoming Christmas celebration. Redner procrastinated and struggled with the creation of a tune to go with the 5 stanzas that Brooks had written. It wasn't until the night before the celebration that Redner got inspired in the middle of the night and created the song as we know it. The following day a group of 36 children and 6 Sunday school teachers introduced the song created by the 2 bachelors. That was on December 27th, 1868. It wasn't published as an official hymn of the Episcopal Church until 1892. The following January, Phillips Brooks died, never knowing the magnitude of the hymn that he created.

For some reason the 5th stanza has been dropped from the original score."Where children pure and happy Pray to the blessed Child, Where misery cries out to thee, Son of the mother mild; Where charity stands watching And faith holds wide the door, The dark night wakes, the glory breaks, And Christmas comes once more." The stanza includes the line, "And faith holds wide the door."

This hymn, like the story of the annunciation of Mary in the gospel of Luke, is a story about faith.

40. God Leads a Pretty Sheltered Life

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

Billions of people were scattered on a great plain before God's throne. Some of the groups near the front talked heatedly--not with cringing shame, but with belligerence. "How can God judge us?" said one. "What does He know about suffering?" snapped a brunette. She jerked back a sleeve to reveal a tattooed number from a Nazi concentration camp. "We endured terror, beatings, torture, death!" In another group a black man lowered his collar. "What about this?" he demanded, showing an ugly rope burn. "Lynched for no crime but being black! We have suffocated in slave ships, been wrenched from loved ones, toiled till death gave release." Far out across the plain were hundreds of such groups. Each had a complaint against God for the evil and suffering He permitted in His world. How lucky God was to live in heaven where there was no weeping, no fear, no hunger, no hatred! Indeed, what did God know about what man had been forced to endure in this world? "After all, God leads a pretty sheltered life," they said.

So each group sent out a leader, chosen because he had suffered the most.

There was a Jew, an African American, an untouchable from India, an illegitimate, a person from Hiroshima, and one from a Siberian slave camp. In the center of the plain they consulted with each other. At last they were ready to present their case. It was rather simple: before God would be qualified to be their judge, He must endure what they had endured. Their decision was that God should be sentenced to live on earth-as a man!

But because He was God, they set certain safeguards to be sure He could not use His divine powers to help Himself: Let Him be born a Jew. Let the legitimacy of His birth be doubted, so that none would know who is really His father. Let Him champion a cause so just, but so radical, that it brings down upon Him the hate, condemnation, and efforts of every major traditional and established religious authority to eliminate Him. Let Him try to describe what no man has ever seen, tasted, heard, or smelled-let Him try to communicate God to men. Let Him be betrayed by His dearest friends. Let Him be indicted on false charges, tried before a prejudiced jury, and convicted by a cowardly judge. Let Him see what it is to be terribly alone and completely abandoned by every living thing. Let Him be tortured and let Him die! Let Him die the most humiliating death--with common thieves.

As each leader announced his portion of the sentence, loud murmurs of approval went up from the great throngs of people. But when the last had finished pronouncing sentence, there was a long silence. No one uttered another word. No one moved. For suddenly all knew ... God had already served His sentence.

41. A Man of One Book

Illustration

Michael B. Brown

John Wesley wrote in 1730: "I began to be 'homo unius libri' (a man of one book). I began to study (comparatively) no book but the Bible." In his preface to Sermons On Several Occasions (1746), he proclaimed again his intention to be "a man of just one book." This, of course, does not mean Wesley decided to become illiterate or uninformed where other writings were concerned. His personal records indicate that he had read from at least 1,400 different authors (with nearly 3,000 separate titles among them). What it did mean (as Albert Outler put it) was that "Wesley lived in the Scriptures and his mind ranged over the Bible's length and breadth and depth like a radar tuned into the pertinent data on every point he cared to make." Or, as Evelyn Laycock and James Holsinger state: "The Bible was his first and final norm for the validation of any theological discussion. His religion was a religion of the Bible."4

Those who have read Leader Keck's wonderful book The Bible In The Pulpit or have heard Fred Cradock lecture about remaining in The Word understand the intent of this thesis. Christians genuinely are (or should be) a people of The Book. Statistics consistently indicate that near the top of most visitors' checklists is not: "What will this church teach me about current issues or popular psychology or church history?" but rather, "Will this church share with me the truths of scripture?" Growing churches positively address that question from the pulpit, in the Sunday school classroom, in mid-week study groups, in cottage prayer meetings, in Disciples or Trinity Bible study courses. Growing churches place a high priority on teaching the Bible. As Elton Trueblood used to say, "We cannot have fruits without roots!"5 The Christian's roots have always been securely fastened to the Word.

42. Illustrations on the Trinity

Illustration

Brett Blair

The Fathers of the Church used examples to explain the Trinity. They said: Look at a tree if you want to try to understand God. There is the root, the trunk and the fruit. The root is like God the Father, invisible but you know it's there, the trunk is like God the son, sent forth by the Father, visible and tangible, the branches and fruit is like the Holy Spirit. We are connected to Christ through the Spirit dwelling in us and by the power of the Spirit we bear fruit in the world.

Or look at a steam: the water rises from a source, but usually that source is hidden, the source of the stream is like God the Father, the stream which we can see and touch is like God the Son, visible because it flows from the one who sends Him, but the water as it flows into the fields, irrigating the plants and giving them life, allowing them to bring forth a harvest is like the Holy Spirit.

Or look at the light. The light comes from the sun, the source of light, but we see the light most clearly when it pierces through the clouds as a sunbeam. When we are sitting in a room and the light shines in and touches us, we are warmed and can feel the light. So, the sun is like the Father, the beam like the Son and the warmth like the Holy Spirit.

What each of these illustrations has in common is that they are all analogies, God isn't the tree or the stream or the light but like them. All our language about God can only hint at the reality never grasp or contain God in one image.

43. Which World?

Illustration

Michael P. Green

William Kelly was an outstanding student of the Bible whose scholarship and spirituality made him a real power for God in Great Britain at the close of the last century. Kelly had once helped a young relative prepare for Trinity College in Dublin and in this way came to the attention of the professors there. They urged him to take up work at the college and thus distinguish himself. When Kelly showed a compete lack of enthusiasm for their suggestion, they were nonplussed. One of them asked in exasperation, “But Mr. Kelly, aren’t you interested in making a name for yourself in the world?”

To which Kelly adroitly replied, “Which world, gentlemen?”

44. A John the Baptist Christmas Card

Illustration

Darrick Acre

I love receiving Christmas cards. I especially like Christmas cards with good Christian artwork on the cover. The lion with the lamb; the three wise men and the message, "Wise Men Still Seek Him;" the Madonna and child; or the star piercing the darkness over stable and manger; all are beautiful depictions of the Christmas story. Again, I am positive that as a group we have all perused thousands of Christmas cards like these. Yet I do not recall ever receiving one with John the Baptist preaching in the desert. Do you? I can picture it in my mind: a card front marred by the dead, barren wilderness of Judea out by the Jordan River, with this animated, prophetic figure as the focal point. But I have never read one that even closely resembles such a scene. Have you?

John the Baptist is totally inappropriate for the way we celebrate Christmas. Christmas is about the birth of Jesus as Matthew and Luke report that holy night many years ago. Mary, Joseph, angels, manger, shepherds, wise men; a child is born unto us. Glory to God in the highest! That is what Christmas is all about. Jesus is the reason for the season. So we honor sweet, little Jesus boy, get warm fuzzies, and hug our family members. What does John the Baptist have do with Christmas?

For Mark, everything. Instead of Bethlehem and choirs of angels, he begins the story of Jesus' coming with a prophet blaring and baptizing in the wilderness of Judea. In so doing, he adds a new figure to the good news about the incarnation and coming of the Christ. It is John the Baptist. Throughout the centuries the church has recognized Mark's unique contribution through its observance of Advent in preparation for the celebration of Christmas.

45. In the Know

Illustration

Michael Horton

One of the earliest and most potent threats to early Christianity came from the heretical group known as the Gnostics. Blending elements of Christianity, Greek philosophy, and oriental mysticism, the Gnostics denied the orthodox view of God, man, and the world, and Christ. The apostle John included them in the camp of the Antichrist.

The Gnostics were so called because of their view of revelation. The word gnosis is the Greek word for "knowledge." In many cases the Gnostic heretics did not make a frontal assault against the apostles or against the apostolic teaching of Scripture. In fact, many of them insisted that they were genuine, Bible-believing Christians. It wasn't that they rejected the Bible; they just claimed an additional source of knowledge or insight that was superior to or at least beyond the knowledge of Scripture. The "Gnostikoi" were "those in the know." Their knowledge was not derived from intellectual comprehension of the Scripture or by empirical research, but was mystical, direct, and immediate. God "revealed" private, intuitive insights to them that carried nothing less than divine authority.

Here is a typical Gnostic statement: "We cannot communicate with God mentally, for He is a Spirit. But we can reach Him with our Spirit, and it is through our Spirit that we come to know God….This is one reason God put teachers (those who are really called to teach) in the church to renew our minds. Many times those who teach do so with only a natural knowledge that they have gained from the Bible and other sources. But I am referring here to one of the ministry gifts. Those who are called and anointed by the Spirit to teach. God has given us His Word, and we can feed upon that Word. This will renew our minds. But He also puts teachers in the church to renew our minds and to bring us the revelation of the knowledge of God's Word." (Kenneth E. Hagin, Man on Three Dimensions (Tulsa, Okla.: Faith Library, 1985), 1:8,13.)

Notice that this quotation does not include a direct assault on the Bible. The Bible is recognized as God's word. But in order to understand the Bible we need something beyond our natural mental ability. We need the Spirit-anointed teachers to "bring us the revelation of the knowledge of God's Word." This is a typically Gnostic statement, but the quote is not from Valentinus or any of the other early Gnostics. It is from the pen of a modern missionary of Gnosticism, Kenneth E. Hagin. It is from Hagin's Man on Three Dimensions. Hagin's theology echoes the tripartite epistemology of early Gnosticism (man as having three separate entities: body, soul, and spirit).

Robert Tilton also claims a direct pipeline to divine revelation: "God showed me a vision that almost took my breath away. I was sucked into the Spirit . . ., caught away . . . and I found myself standing in the very presence of Almighty God. It just echoed into my being. And he said these words to me. . . exactly these words . . ."Many of my ministers pray for my people, but I want you to pray the Prayer of Agreement with them" . . . I have never seen the presence of God so powerful. This same anointing flooded my Spirit-man . . . It's inside of me now, and I have supernatural faith to agree with you. From that day forth, as I have been faithful to that heavenly vision, I've seen every kind of miracle imaginable happen when I pray the Prayer of Agreement with God's people." (Robert Tilton, newsletter from Robert Tilton Ministries, Word of Faith World Outreach Center, Box 819000, Dallas, TX75381.

It seems that in Robert Tilton the church is blessed with a twentieth-century apostle whose visions of revelation exceed that of the apostle John and whose miracle powers surpass that of the apostle Paul. If we are to believe Tilton's astonishing claims, there is no reason we should not include his writings in the next edition of the New Testament.

Paul Crouch of the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), has revelatory dreams and has warmly embraced the neo-Gnostic dogma. His network has become a prime distribution center for the growing movement. Kenneth Copeland also receives phrases from God in "his spirit."

46. God the Diver

Illustration

Raymond Cannata

C.S. Lewis has this really helpful illustration. He says that in the incarnation, Jesus was like a diver. He is God in heaven looking down into this dark, slimy, murky water. That's our sinful, polluted world. God dives in, He gets himself wet. And then God came up again, dripping, but holding the precious thing he went down to recover. That precious thing was Zacchaeus, and you and me. All those sinners who have trusted in Christ. That's how we get out of the slime of tax collecting, or cheating, or lusting, or hating, or whatever other self-destructive sin we are buried in. God in Christ descended down into the slime and rescued us. Resolutions and vows to be better won't help by themselves. We don't have the power to keep them. We are stuck on the sea bottom. We have no power of our own to get up or out. All we can do is cry out for God's grace to lift us up, to rescue us.

47. Let Him Play

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

In a large stone cathedral in Europe there was a large, magnificent pipe organ. It was a Saturday afternoon, and the sexton was making one final check of the choir and organ loft high in the balcony at the back of the church. He was startled to hear footsteps echoing up the scone stairway, as he thought the doors were all locked and no one was around. He turned to see a man in slightly tattered traveling cloches coming coward him. "Excuse me, sir," the stranger said. "I have come from quite a distance to see the great organ in this cathedral. Would you mind opening the console so that I might get a closer look at it?" The custodian at first refused, but the stranger seemed so eager and insistent that he finally gave in. "May I sit on the bench?" That request of the stranger was met with absolute refusal by the cathedral custodian. "What if the organist came in and found you sitting there? I would probably lose my job!" But again the stranger was so persistent that the sexton gave in. "But only for a moment," he added.

The custodian noticed that the stranger seemed to be very much at home on the organ bench, so he was not completely surprised when he was asked by the stranger to be allowed to play the organ. "No! Definitely not!" said the custodian. "No one is allowed to play it except the cathedral organist." The man's face fell, and his deep disappointment was obvious. He reminded the custodian how far he had come and assured him that no damage would be done. Finally the sexton relented and told the stranger he could play the instrument, but only a few notes and then he would have to leave. Overjoyed, the stranger pulled out some stops and began to play. Suddenly the cathedral was filled with the most beautiful music the custodian had ever heard in all his years in that place. The music seemed to transport him heavenward.

In what seemed all too short a time, the dowdy stranger stopped playing and slid off the organ bench, and started down the stairway. "Wait!" cried the custodian. "That was the most beautiful music I have ever heard in the cathedral. Who are you?" The stranger turned for just a moment as he replied, "Mendelssohn." The man was none other than Felix Mendelssohn, one of the greatest organists and composers of the nineteenth century!

The cathedral sexton was alone now in that great stone edifice, the beautiful organ music still ringing in his ears. ''Just think," he said softly, "I almost kept the master from playing his music in my cathedral!"

Each one of us has the opportunity to have a personal relationship with the Master of the universe, Jesus Christ. Let's not keep Him from "playing His music" and being Master of our lives!

Keyword: Christ (see also Atonement, Christmas, Incarnation)

48. Lewis on the Importance of Salvation

Illustration

John Piper

C. S. Lewis, the brilliant English scholar and Christian writer died the same day President John Kennedy did. Even today his books on the Christian faith are being reprinted by the thousands. One of the reasons I think God so greatly blessed the ministry of C. S. Lewis, and still blesses it, is that Lewis never had an elitist, artsy love for fine literature or fine music or fine culture in any form, though he himself was a great artist. In his life everything is subordinate to the salvation of lost sinners.

I find what he says a tremendous inspiration to keep the perishing before our eyes as we do our work and pray how God would use us to wake them up. Listen to Lewis for the sake of your own ministry:

"It is hardly possible for [us] to think too often or too deeply about [the glory] of our neighbor. . . It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations. It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics. There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilization these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit immortal horrors or everlasting splendors." (The Weight of Glory, pp. 14f.)

So he says of his own scholarly discipline:

"The Christian will take literature a little less seriously than the cultured Pagan. . . The Christian knows from the outset that the salvation of a single soul is more important than the production or preservation of all the epics and tragedies in the world." (Christian Reflections, p. 10)

This tips us off to what C. S. Lewis' life was really devoted to. In 1952 and American liberal theologian criticized Lewis for using simple analogies to try to shed some light on the Trinity. Lewis' response was passionate and shows where his heart really was in all his work:

"Most of my books are evangelistic, addressed to [those outside]. I was writing to the people not to the clergy. Dr. Pittinger would be a more helpful critic if he advised a cure as well as asserting many diseases. How does he himself do such work? What methods, and with what success, does he employ when he is trying to convert the great mass of storekeepers, lawyers, realtors, morticians, policeman and artisans who surround him in his own city?" (God in the Dock, pp. 181-3)

49. Bathtime Baptism

Illustration

Author Unknown

It is said that in the early days of missions in Korea a page or two of the Gospel story found its way up into a remote mountain village. The people read such of the story as was found there, believed, and accepted the message. They would establish a church group and perhaps one would come who could instruct them further, for they knew only what the few meager pages contained. As far as they were able to understand, they fulfilled the conditions until it came to baptism, and they did not know just how it should be done. They talked it over, and after prayer and discussion they went home and each took a personal, private bath in the name of the Trinity. Who would dare say that the Lord of Heaven did not accept and honor their interpretation of that symbol of a cleansed life?

50. What Is Your Creed?

Illustration

Staff

C.H. Spurgeon first words in the pulpit of the Metropolitan Tabernacle, London:

I would propose that the subject of the ministry of this house, as long as this platform shall stand, and as long as this house shall be frequented by worshipers, shall be the person of Jesus Christ. I am never ashamed to avow myself a Calvinist; I do not hesitate to take the name of Baptist; but if I am asked what is my creed, I reply, "It is Jesus Christ."

My venerated predecessor, Dr. Gill, has left a [theological heritage] admirable and excellent in its way. But the [legacy] to which I would pin and bind myself forever, God helping me,...is Jesus Christ, who is the arm and substance of the gospel, who is in Himself all theology, the incarnation of every precious truth.

Showing 1 to 50 of 77 results