FOUNDATIONS PART 5a: The Image of God

"He is the image of the invisible God" Colossians 1:15a

This is enigmatic ... does not all of humanity bear the imago dei? How can an invisible God be visible? Who can see what is invisible?

• The image (Gk eikon - where we get the word icon) of God conjures up thoughts of Genesis 1:27 - "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."
• What is the difference between our "image of God" and that of Christ's? Do we not image forth the invisible God?
• We are created in God's image whereas, Christ is the image of God. When people see humans they see echos of the Divine, reflections of the Creator, but they do not see God Himself. Thus it can be said, "No one has ever seen God..." John 1:18a; or "[No one] has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father." John 6:46
• Therefore, when one sees Jesus, they see the Father since Jesus is not a derivative of the imago dei but the manifestation of the Imago Dei. Philip did not yet understand this, thus he asked of Jesus, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." To which Jesus replied, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip?" John 14:8-9a Think about Jesus' response. Philip asked to be shown the Father. Jesus essentially said, "I am right here." It is like me calling my house and asking to speak with my father, unaware that it was he who had answered the phone, "Don't you recognize my voice?" Jesus makes this clear in the next statement, "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father." John 14:9b. Jesus was revealing to them that he was "the image of the invisible God."
• We can only see the invisible God by way of the visible image - Jesus Christ. But even then ... he no longer walks this earth, therefore, how are we to see God? By faith: "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 For by it the people of old received their commendation. 3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible." Heb 11:1-3
• Now is a life of faith in that which is not fully seen ... there are echoes of the divine ... but we await the day when we shall alas, see him as he is! (1John 3:2)

Decisions Decisions

"Delight yourself in the LORD, and he will give you the desires of your heart." Psalm 37:4

How does one make decisions? I have been asked this recently and given a tape series to listen to by Greg Koukl founder of Stand to Reason. I would recommend his material to anyone desiring a thoughtful and biblical approach to understanding Christianity. The series has me thinking, "How do I make decisions? What is the biblical approach to decision making?" Is there some "secret" will of God for my life that I am to figure out? After all, I do believe in predestination ... so if my life is already "predestined" what freedoms do I really have in making decisions? As I listened to Koukle's series it reminded me of my own method derived from Psalm 37. It was a glories epiphany when I was revealed it. To paraphrase St. Augustine: Love the Lord and do whatever you want. I think this is biblical and a simplified understanding of what Koukl is articulating. When I make decisions I attempt, by God's grace to conform my procedure to Augustine's axiom which I see in Psalm 37:4.

CONTEXT
The passage is written by King David (postscript) in his old age (v. 25). He has observed life and now reflecting upon two categories of people - the righteous and the wicked. David seems to be instructing those who may be "envious of wrongdoers" and are fretting about evildoers (v. 1). He then explains and compares how the wicked live and to what is their end with how the righteous ought to live and to what is their end. In light of this context I want to spend my time on verse 4.

One of the last decisions where I clearly implemented this text (though I am learning to use it in every decision), was when I was contemplating courting a young lady. Should I or should I not? I knew the Bible was not an encrypted book of Daniel Howell's personal decisions. I knew that I could not point to a text and say, "Aha, God has spoken - I am to court her!" No, life is more complex and beautiful. David illuminates to me what I think is a profound guideline for acting (i.e. making decision). "Delight your self in the LORD, and he will give you the desires of your heart." When I first read this I understood it to mean ... Whatever you want, delight yourself in the LORD and he will give it to you, as though God is the means to our wants, not the desire of our wants. This is key. Is God our treasure or the agent by which we receive another treasure? If we fail at making this distinction and see God only as the agent of our treasure then we have failed ... actually, it is worse than that, we have dishonored God. The wicked see God as a means or a myth, thus they do want they want apart from delighting in God. The righteous make God their refuge, thus they do want they want in accordance with their delight in Him. The righteous first delight themselves in the LORD - by trusting him and doing good (v. 2, 5), committing their way to him (v. 5), befriending faithfulness (v. 2), being patient (v. 7), refraining from anger (v. 8), being generous and give (v. 21, 26), turning from evil (v. 27), waiting for the LORD and keeping his way (v. 34). I think these are clues to how we "delight" in him. When God is our delight, he is our treasure, our security, our enjoyment. If we were to take a survey of the world, we would find that "there is nothing on earth that I desire besides [God]" (Ps 73:25). When God is our delight, we no longer have to concern ourselves with the apparent outcomes of other people, namely the wicked who seem to prevail! In a sense, God says, "Leave the wicked to me, I will cut them off. You on the other hand must wait for me and do good. I will deliver you." The question is, do we trust him? If we do then he is our refuge. When we trust in him, we have peace, even when "the wicked plot against the righteous" (v. 12).

As we delight in the LORD, he first gives us not the object of our wants, but our very wants. But then, he also fulfills the object of those wants. In other words, he puts His desires in us, and then fulfills those desires for us.

So how does this relate to making decisions? St. Augustine said it, "Love the Lord, and do whatever you want." When we have made God our delight, our desires become his desires - we conform our desires to his law, thus to do His will is our delight (Ps 40:8). So, what should you do? Do what you want to do ... it is that simple. There it is. Simple, biblical counsel on decision making. Delight in God. Do what you want.

Ponderosity: Paradigms and Apologetics

“What are we to make of this violence in the Bible? An obvious answer is that the Bible is not a “nice” book that hides the sordid side of life. The bible is a book of thoroughgoing realism. The Bible’s stories of violence demonstrate the depths of depravity to which the human race descends. Paradoxically, though, the nadir of depravity represented by biblical stories of violence is also the climax of the Bible’s story of redemption. The violence of the cross is the pivot point of redemption. The song of the suffering servant in Isaiah 53 hints at this paradox: written in a highly stylized poetic form replete with parallelism and an unusually high degree of patterning, this song uses the resources of artistic form to beautify its portrait of a person subjected to unfair violence for the sake of others.” pg 917 Dictionary of Biblical Imagery

I have begun what I think will be a long and ponderous task of understanding the more sordid and perplexing passages of scripture. About a month ago some friends and I met two atheists at a Panera. We talked for a good hour and a half … One of the atheists, Bob (I have changed his name out of respect) ended up giving me an assignment. He sent me a packet of assorted biblical texts highlighting the darkside of scripture in an attempt to disprove its authority and inspiration. Complete with parallel translations (KJV, RSV, Modern, and Living Bible) and graphic depictions, the pamphlet systematically documented roughly twenty of the most difficult passages. Clearly I had my work cut out, but I am always up for a challenge. If I can’t give credible answers to a nonbeliever then I ought to question my own belief.

I think it is important to unpack that last sentence. I am not saying that the unbeliever is the final determiner of “credibility.” I want to give a reasonable answer to the questions posed. I understand that he (or others) may not agree and even consider my answer incredible. But I am still obligated to give the best answer I can. There may come a point where I will simply have to say, “I don’t know.” And sometimes, that is all anyone can say. My purpose is not to eradicate mystery or uncover the exact meaning behind the passages (that would be pure arrogance, to think that I could solve what has been perplexing to so many great theologians for many years). My desire is to begin to answer these questions for my on inquiry and interest … and to seek to better understand this magnificent and mysterious God.

Paradigms
The interpretive lenses we use to see the world are of utmost importance. A paradigm is a model or pattern. A teacher grades a test using a “key,” which is essentially a paradigm, a model by which all other related actions are measured. Therefore, it could be said that paradigms or interpretive lenses are the “key” to properly seeing the world. How we see the world determines how we live. But the opposite is also true; how we live determines how we see the world. There is an interrelationship between praxis and belief. The paradigms we use are like road maps (from Stephen Covey’s Seven Habits of Highly Effective People). If we attempted to navigate Orlando with a map of Tampa, forget it! The more you use the wrong map the more you will end up lost and irritated. Thus it is important to use the map that properly corresponds to the region you are in. These maps can be categorized in two ways: maps of the way things are (realities), or maps of the ways things should be (values). For instance a road map of Orlando corresponds with reality while a blue print for the new toll road that they are constructing corresponds with value. The wrong map in either case results in the wrong outcome.

The Bible uses both maps and it is important not only to use the proper map, but the proper category of map. Not all the pictures that the Bible portrays are intended to be value maps, that is, they are not intended to be examples of the way things ought to be. The bible does not dodge the dark realities of man’s depravity. Therefore, it is imperative to determine if the Bible is portraying a value or reality. This does not mean that they cannot coexist; certainly I believe that Jesus embodied the perfect union of the two, but there are other instances in scripture that are realities intended to model values. In the words of one of my professors, “Is the passage descriptive (reality) or prescriptive (value)?”

In one sense there is no sense in me getting underway with these passages if my atheist friend refuses to accept God as a reality. Our conversation is then fundamentally incongruent. Therefore before even getting started in this exposition of Biblical texts I need to set forth an argument for the existence of God.

There are generally three approaches to apologetics: Classical Apologetics, Evidential Apologetics and Presuppositional Apologetics. Here is a grossly simplified explanation: Classical attempts to argue for the existence of God in the order: philosophical arguments (i.e. the ontological argument) à proof of God; Evidential argues: scientific evidence à existence of God; Presuppositional argues: presuppose God à evidence demonstrates existence.

In the next post I hope to argue my position.

Food For Thought: John 6:35 Revisited

Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst." John 6:35

In the previous post I explored the hypothetical scenario that would result if we did not hunger or thirst anymore. In my fallen (yet redeemed) state I know that I would misuse the "freedom" of perfect satiation. Today I want to reflect upon the paradox of Jesus' words: those who do come and believe still "hunger" and "thirst" ... why is that? What does he mean?

'Agia Pneuma come ... illuminate the word that I may know the Son ... that I may see the Father ... that I may glorify the Trinity, the eternal community of Mono Theos.

What does it mean for Jesus to say that if we come to him and believe in him that we will be satisfied?

Earlier in the context the Jesus had fed a multitude through miraculous multiplication. The people attempted to make him king, but Jesus withdrew. Upon finding him again, the Jesus reprimanded them for seeking him not for "signs" but because they had eaten their fill from the loaves. In other words, they were "coming" to Jesus solely to satisfy the physical discomfort of hunger. Jesus tells them to "work" for another kind of food. A food that He alone can give. "What is this work?" the people inquire. "Believe in me," responds Jesus. In sum, we are to do the hard "work" of believing in Jesus. That's it. But this is not a human initiative or humanly powered, for Jesus gives us this "work," that is he grants us the faith to believe.

I begin there, because I think it works like this. We are to work at believing in Jesus ... this work/faith is given to us enabling us to believe. As we grow in our faith, Jesus becomes more satisfying. Why am I still "hungry?" It is because I lack faith. I do not believe in Jesus, thus I need him to give me this work/faith/food that I may be filled (by the food), strengthened (by the faith) and zealous (for the work). Christ must become our greatest treasure. This is the only way we can be satisfied and so bring God the greatest glory and us the greatest joy!

Food For Thought: John 6:35

"Jesus said to them, 'I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.'" John 6:35

Has this text ever disturbed you? This ought to catch our attention, especially if we are believers. Jesus makes an audacious claim, "Come to me and say goodbye to hunger. Believe in me and you'll never be thirsty."

I have come to Jesus, but I still hunger.

I have believed in Jesus, but I still thirst.

What's the deal? Is Jesus lying? It sounds great though ... man, what I wouldn't give to never have to be hungry or thirsty again. Think of it. 1) I could save thousands of dollars from no food bill, 2) I could "freely" give away my food and drink to others sine I would have no need, 3) I would never have to suffer the pangs of hunger or the parched lips of thirst, and 4) I would have so much more time to do what I want. These all sound great. But behind each one is hidden an idolatrous self-glorifying attitude.

Savings!
I could save money! But whose money? And for what purpose? Why is economic affordability the standard by which I judge the worthiness of an item or action? "Can I afford it?" becomes the rubric of my commerce and not "Does this glorify God?" Sure, I believe that we are to be good stewards of God's money, but for whose end? There is a connection between God's glory and our joy, do not misunderstand me, but how often do I use "God's glory" as a cover for satisfying my own wants apart from consulting Him? Or how often do I use "I cannot afford it because I need to be a good steward" when, in fact, I could buy it but I am choosing not to because I want to purchase something else or feel secure with a padded account? To put it blatantly, I end up serving Mammon under the cloak of "God's glory." When I do this, I am serving the wrong master.

So how does this relate to the text? I don't want to eat so that I can have more money ... but why? Because then I could spend it more on myself. This does not have to be the case, but when I test my motives I find this to be the case.

Freely Give
I could give to others more luxuriously. But what reward is there in that. It is easy to give something away that you no longer love. It does not take an unbeliever to know this or to do it! In essence, I would be robbing myself of the opportunity of genuine sacrifice which in turn would not bring God the greatest glory. God is most glorified not in gifts skimmed from our riches, but in gifts mined from our poverty. If we give our food, when we are hungry, then the world looks on in wonder. Then they will ask why ... and then we can say, "because I have another kind of bread that is far more satisfying, let me tell you about Jesus."

Never to Suffer
To never suffer sounds so good and in fact, is one of the promises of the new world under Christ's rule. But until then we are called to suffer. Not as narcissists but as servants of the Lord who go "outside the city" to endure the reproach that Christ endured. How can this be? Because of two realities: 1) God is far more satisfying than suffering and 2) God receives far more glory when we suffer joyfully for his name.

More Time
This is similar to the first one. More time or what? And whose time? All that I am and have belongs to God ... not just my possessions, but my time. A few days ago I went to complete an exam that was sent to us via the Internet. I had taken about 2-3 hours on the exam and had only two questions remaining. I "saved" the work and then came back to it later. When I returned I discovered that the computer had eaten my file rather than saved it. I was ticked to say the least. As I was fuming about all my time that was "wasted," the Lord convicted me with the question, "Whose time was it?" If God wishes to use (not waste) his time by me doing the exam over, then that is his prerogative ... and my pleasure (well, I'm trying to learn this).

So, it is good that we still hunger and thirst ... but Jesus says that we will be satisfied. What does he mean?

Food For Thought: Matthew 5:6 & John 6:26-7

"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied (chortadzo)." Matthew 5:6

"Jesus answered them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill (chortadzo) of the loaves. Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.'" John 6:26-7

I was meditating on John's passage yesterday and it struck me that the same Greek term in used in Mat 5:6. As I was thinking about the connections these came to mind:

1. The makaroi or blessed ones are they who hunger for righteousness/justice. They are given the promise of satisfaction though its time is not revealed. It is placed in future. This could be tomorrow or as distant as the next life. The emphasis is not on its time but of its certainty. Therefore, one should not assume that hunger necessitates immediate satisfaction. What is it that will bring us satisfaction?

2. The people in John's story come to Jesus because they were satisfied. But that satisfaction was fleeting for it was in the physical loaves. They lived for the contentment that came with a full belly ... in other words, they made their bellies or appetites their god. But this form of satisfaction is fleeting. Jesus instead offers them "real" food that will satisfy their desires forever.

3. "What must we do, to be doing the works of God?" This was the question of the people. Yet Jesus told them plainly ... work for it. So he expounds, "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent" (John 6:29). "Work of God" ... does this mean this is the work that God is doing or this is the work that God requires us to do? I think it is a combination of both: God works in us both to will and to work for his good pleasure (Phil 2:13). First, we are to "work for the food that endures to eternal life" knowing that it is ultimately God doing this work in us. Second, this "working for" is not a meritorious work, that is, we are not earning eternal life. It is a work that demonstrates that we are children of God. Thus Jesus does not "pay" us with this food, he "gives" us this food.

4. Only Jesus can give this food. The people at least had one thing right, they came to Jesus ... the problem was that they were asking the wrong questions - they came with faulty motives. The people were looking for bread, and Jesus was willing to give it to them for a time, but now he was offering them the Bread which was "true food" (John 6:55). In sum, Jesus was offering himself, but they did not receive it. One can give only what one has ... Jesus is the only one who can give himself and he is the "true bread from heaven" (John 6:32).

5. On what do I satisfy my desires? Righteousness? Justice? Jesus??? or do a satisfy myself with the constant nibbling of the crumbs from the world's table? Which is my "food?" Which is my satisfaction?

FOUNDATIONS PART 5: To what end is life moving toward?

The Christo-Teleology of Theology
The word "telos" comes from Greek and literally means "end." Teleology is a philosophy that holds that that "phenomena are guided not only by mechanical forces but that they also move toward certain goals of self-realization" ... thus saith Random House. Therefore Christianity has a Christo-telic theology, that is, all of life is pointing to Christ, he is the focal point of all of history and the purpose for which it was made. This is the most absurd saying if one really takes time to ponder its implications. "Everything," snaps the critic, "what about suffering, sin, and evil?" A Christo-telic theology defined as I have done so is problematic at best and heretical at worst if it is not true. Where do I get off making such an ostensibly rash statement? Is there any scriptural support?

"[Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities - all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross." Colossians 1:15-29

"For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering." Hebrews 2:10

"For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen." Romans 11:36


"Behold, I am doing a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? I will make a way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert. The wild beasts will honor me, the jackals and the ostriches, for I give water in the wilderness, rivers in the desert, to give drink to my chosen people, the people whom I formed for myself that they might declare my praise." Isaiah 43:19-21

"Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist." 1 Corinthians 8:6

"All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." John 1:3

"One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all." Ephesians 4:6

"The LORD has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble." Proverbs 16:4

There is so much here that it would be too much to attempt to unpack it all in one post. Over the next couple of weeks I hope to go through each of these texts and demonstrate why I believe in a Christo-telic theology that says EVERYTHING was, is, and will be made for the purpose of Christ. Either I am insane or the authors of Scripture are insane or I am not understanding them or I am.

Objection!!!!!
To close I wish to address a possible philosophical objection: EVERYTHING CANNOT MEAN ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING SINCE THAT WOULD INCLUDE CONTRADICTIONS SUCH AS "Everything includes 'NOTHING' which means nothing at all." This is a linguistic problem or philosophical quandary ... yes, I must qualify "EVERYTHING." Everything does not include contradictions in the logical sense, but it does include paradoxes or anomalies (apparent contradictions that in reality are not). For example (using Aristotelian logic), a logical contradiction would be me saying, "I am a man. I am not a man" when the same standard/definition for "man" is used. These "contradictions" only exist in theory and not in real life. I may say, "I am a man. I am not a man" and think that I have created a contradiction, but I have simply made a false statement, for it is impossible for me to be a man and not be a man at the same time where "man" means the exact same thing. But this is a philosophical problem ... I do not wish to quibble about philosophical issues. My attempt is to conform my mind to the "logic" and teachings of scripture. This does not mean that all my conclusions will be right. I believe that if there is error it resides in me, not in the Bible. I must conform to the Word of God, not visa a versa.

Summary
So in summary, I believe in a Christ0-telic Theology which makes the audacious claim "All things that were, that are, and that are to come are created from Him, through Him, to Him and for Him. He is the beginning and the end of all things." I will then attempt to support this statement through scripture over the next few weeks.

FOUNDATIONS PART 4: What is my purpose in life?

"I will say to the North, 'Give up,' and to the South, 'Do not withhold; bring my sons from afar and my daughters from the end of the earth, everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made." Isaiah 43:6-7

I am a Christian Hedonist and for some, this is a new term so allow me to explain. The most succinct definition is given by John Piper, pastor for preaching at Bethlehem Baptist church, "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him." That is, God's glory and my joy are not in competition but are complimentary. Another way of putting it is using the short Westminster Catechism which asks the question: What is the chief end of man? To glorify God and enjoy him forever. Or to tweek it with a slight Christian Hedonist flare to it ... to glorify God by enjoying him forever. God is not interested in emotionless or passionless worship. Why? Because God is after our hearts and our affections, thus he is after our joy and happiness. To love God with a begrudging and dull heart is no love at all and it does not glorify him. We glorify that which we treasure, therefore Christ must be our greatest treasure. The glorious news is that Christ is infinitely worthy of such praise and adoration that rather than depleting us of joy and life it sustains us and invigorates us. My hope is that everyone would become a Christian Hedonist.

Returning to the main topic. What is my purpose in life? Why do I exist? The Lord tells us that HE created us and that HE called us so that WE may glorify him (Isa 43:6-7). Therefore I exist for him. I am his and not my own for I was purchased by God that I may glorify him in my body (1Cor 6:19-20). Clearly stated:

I exist to spread a passion for the supremacy of God in all things for the joy of all peoples through Jesus Christ

I say it this way ... in part because this is how John Piper summarizes it ... but I have adopted it as my own credo. I will spend some time over the next few weeks to touch on each of the words because in a statement like that, every word counts.

Evangelism and Predestination

"I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd." John 10:16

Who is Jesus speaking to?
Jesus had just healed a blind man who was later expelled from the synagogue for acknowledging that Jesus came from God. Jesus finds the man and asks him if he believed in the Son of Man? The man replied, "'And who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?' Jesus said to him, 'You have seen him, and it is he who is speaking to you.' He said, 'Lord, I believe,' and he worshipped him. Jesus said, "For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.' Some of the Pharisees near him heard these things, and said to him, 'Are we also blind?' Jesus said to them, 'If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, "We see," your guilt remains.'" (John 9:35-41)

This is the immediate context for the primary passage. Jesus is speaking to obstinate and arrogant Pharisees about the characteristics of the Good Shepherd. Often this section is focused on verse ten, “I came that they may have life and have it abundantly.” I think this is a key text, but I have yet to hear a sermon revealing the more profound announcement of Jesus, that he was the prophesied shepherd spoken of in Ezekiel 34 and Zechariah 11.

The OT context to John ten is the Lord’s condemnation of Israel’s shepherds and the promise that he, in turn, would then become their shepherd (Eze 34:11-12; 15) and make his servant David a shepherd (v. 23). Therefore, Jesus telling the Pharisees that he is the Good shepherd is more than a cute analogy, he is fulfilling a messianic prophecy. Jesus is claiming two things: 1) He is the Lord who claimed he would become Israel's shepherd, and 2) he is the Lord's servant David. The Pharisees were not idiots, they knew their scriptures and they realized his claims.

Jesus had come for judgment that the blind may see and the seeing may become blind. The blind man becomes the paradigm for all believers. All are blind and those who are given sight will believe and worship Jesus. This is the setting for the next illustration, the Good shepherd and his sheep.

Who are the sheep?
This one is important to understand for there are different sheep. Not all sheep belong to the Good Shepherd (Jesus). "The sheep hear [the shepherd's] voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice." (vv 3-4) There are some sheep that are his own and others that are not by implication. The text does not say that he calls all the sheep or that he brings out all the sheep, but that only those who are his own come to the shepherd and follow.

How are the sheep distinguished?
Those who belong to the Shepherd know the Shepherd (v. 14), know the voice of the Shepherd (v. 4), hear the voice of the Shepherd (v. 3, 16, 27), and follow the Shepherd (v. 4, 27). This reminds me of Jesus' words to Pilate, "I have come into the world to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens (akouo) to my voice (phones)." (18:37) These are the same Greek words that Jesus uses to describe the response of the sheep to the shepherd's voice. Jesus knows his own sheep and his own know him (v 14).

Jesus calls the sheep by name. Jesus knows his own by name and they know him by his voice. It is like a father calling to his children on the playground, he calls them by name and they recognize the voice of their father and come to him.

Who receives Jesus?
This question takes us out of the current context and causes us to return to the beginning of the book. “[Jesus] came to his own, and his own did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” (1:11-13) This appears problematic. It seems as though the order of operation is that first a person receives Jesus and then God gives them the right to become his children. Is this true? Which is the cause and which is the effect? I went on a hunt within John to see how he uses lambano or paralambano (to receive).

John 1:11-12 “He came to his own, and His own did not receive him (paralambano). But to all who did receive him (lambano) who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God”
John 3:11 Jesus to Nicodemus “We … bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony.”
John 3:27 “A person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given him from heaven.”
John 3:32-33 John to his disciples “[Jesus] bears witness to what he has seen and heard, yet no one receives his testimony. Whoever receives his testimony sets his seal to this, that God is true.”
John 5:43 “I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me. If another comes in his own name, you will receive him.”
John 12:48 “The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.”
John 17:8 “For I have given them the words that you gave me, and they have received them and have come to know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me.”

Who can receive Jesus? I think John the Baptist answers it clearly when he says, “A person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given him from heaven.” Receiving Jesus is the effect of God giving them the right (exousia) to become children of God. If a person receives Jesus they show that they have been given this right. Thus, only those who have been given the ability to receive Jesus, can believe in his name. The rest of 1:13 highlights this – the rightful children are not born of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but born of God.

The rightful children are born of God and so receive Jesus. If they are not of God then they will not receive Jesus. This is further supported later when Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees and explains to them why they do not receive him, “Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God” (John 8:47). Notice the order, he did not say, “You are not of God because you do not hear,” but because you are not of God you do not hear.

Those who are not of Jesus’ flock will not believe in him. “Jesus answered them, ‘I told you, and you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock” (10:25-26). One must be of God before they can believe in Jesus. This begs the question, “How does one become God’s?” One must be born of God. This is not of a man’s will but of God. Just as a person did not will to live but was the product of another’s will, so to are all who are born of God.

Does this mean that everyone who is given the ability to receive Jesus will believe in him and will remain in Jesus?
So maybe there are some who do hear and do receive Jesus but then reject him and leave the fold? Those who receive Jesus, remain in him because he keeps them faithful. “And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that [the Father] has given me, but raise it up on the last day” (John 6:39). Jesus says, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand” (John 10:27-29).

Who are the sheep that are "not of this fold?"
The "this fold" refers to Israel, since that is the audience of this teaching. Therefore, those of another fold must refer to Gentile believers. Later when Jesus is praying to the Father he says, “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word” (John 17:20). There are other sheep who will come to believe in Jesus through the words of the apostles. This is how they will “listen to [his] voice” and so become one flock.

Application
Jesus is the Good Shepherd (10:11, 14)
The sheep belong to the Father (10:29; 17:9)
The sheep have been given to the Shepherd by the Father (10:29)
His sheep are distinguished in that they hear his voice and follow (10:27)
Only those who are drawn by the Father can come to the Shepherd (6:44)
Those who are not of the Shepherd’s flock will not believe (10:26)
Those who are of the Shepherd’s flock will not be cast out (6:37) or snatched away from his hand (10:28) or his Father’s (10:29).
The Shepherd has other sheep that are not of this fold (10:16)
The other sheep will believe in the Shepherd through the words of his faithful sheep (17:20)

Therefore we are to speak the words of the shepherd … those who are his will believe and follow and those who are not his will remain hostile to the gospel (18:37).

Food For Thought

"Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for dikiasyne (righteousness or justice), for they shall be satisfied." Mat 5:6

Everyone hungers, well, everyone that is healthy. I was sick last week with a cold and all day on Wednesday I was subject to coughdrops and kleenex not to mention confined to my bed. It is amazing how one is reminded of health in the midst of sickness. By Thursday I was able to eat a "tasty" meal, not because the food was exceptional but because I could actually taste it! Colds have a way of making food taste like rubber. The worst was that I was also fighting a nauseous stomach ... that makes food detestable. I was not hungry on Wednesday, but with a good nights sleep my hunger returned in the morning. I had to watch what I ate. I wanted it to stay down. When recovering from a sickness it is amazing how strict you become with eating habits. No junk! All healthy! And the the water flow? I was an ever flowing fountain (which was part of the reason I kept getting up Tuesday night).

Come Thursday, health returned ... and so did my hunger. How does one hunger for righteousness or justice? Does one need to be deprived of it in order to long for it? No, though we can easily lose our appreciation for it. How does one remain hungery for righteousness and justice? By remaining healthy. If I am not eating the word of God on a regular basis then I will grow spiritually weak and lose the appetite for righteousness. I will get hungery, but if I fail to fill my soul with the meat of Gods word then I will fail to long for justice. People will be trampled, misused, even killed ... but when my meal is paltry, my desire to stop this injustice will be pathetic. In fact, if to feed my shallow appetite I must trample a few people I may even justify the injustice. So often my wealth and ease is at the expense of others ... though I am too hungry to care, too hungry for food that is perishing. O that I may learn to hunger for real food ... righteousness and justice.

FOUNDATIONS PART 3: Where Am I Going?

So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood. 13 Therefore let us go to him outside the camp and bear the reproach he endured. 14 For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come. (Heb 13:12-14)

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. 2 And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. (Rev 21:1-3)

By God’s grace I hope that I am going to live forever in the city that is to come and in the presence of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. This world is not my home … but neither is heaven. My home is the New Jerusalem which will descend from heaven (thus heaven is not my home) and be established upon this new earth (thus this current world is not my home either).

But that is a teleological answer … that is, this is the final destination. But where am I to go now? Hebrews tells me that Jesus went “outside the gate.” That is where Jesus went to suffer for and sanctify a people. Therefore, since that is where Jesus is, I want to be where he is so my life must move from the safety and comfort of this earthly city to go outside … to risk even life itself to be where he is. I am to join him in the reproach … the slander … the mistreatment … the persecution … and not to see this as loss, but as gain! To rejoice, knowing that great is my reward in heaven (Mat 5:11-12).

Therefore, Jesus does not offer me a life of hardship but of deep and enduring joy! For the joy set before him he endured the cross (Heb 12:2). And for the joy set before me I am to “go outside the camp and bear the reproach he endured.” For this is not my home … this is not the end of the story. There is a lasting city and that is where I am going. Oh come Lord Jesus, come.

FOUNDATIONS PART 2: From Where Do I Come?

"Man is obviously made to think. It is his whole dignity and his whole merit; and his whole dut is to think as he ought. Now, the order of thought is to begin with self, and with its Author and its end. Now, of what does thte world think? Never of this, but of dancing, playing the lute, singing, making verses, running at the ring, etc., fighting, making oneself king, without thinking what it is to be a king and what to be a man." -- Pascal, Pensees, 2.146

“The LORD God formed the man (adam) of dust (aphar) from the ground (adamah) and breathed (naphach) into his nostrils the breath (neshamah) of life (chay), and the man (adam) became a living creature (chay nephesh). And the LORD God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed.” (Gen 2:7-8)

First, let it be said that I come from God. God formed me and breathed into me life. He is the active agent. I am the passive clay.

Being a descendant of Adam, I too was created from the dust from the ground. The fundamental material makeup of my being is dirt. A humble beginning for sure. In fact, it is from this truth where we get the word “humility.” The term is derived from the word humus which mean earth. One who is humble is lowly … like a servant that must bow his head to the earth when in the presence of a superior, so we to are lowly creatures. We must never forget our humble beginnings lest we attempt to foolishly throw off our servant-hood and attempt to become our own master’s and makers. So I am dirt and dust … a non-glorious material. In fact, a piece of property cannot depreciate beyond its worth in land … dirt is dirt and it is as low as you can go. I am also fashioned from dirt that was outside of the garden, thus I was made in the wilderness. I am a “wild” creation made from wild dirt!

But we are also made up of a second element … breath, or spirit. The divine breaths into us life. The fundamental immaterial makeup of my being is breath. This is strange … I am a combination of both dirt (lowly) and spirit (divine). I do not signify by “dirt” that it is less grand or base for God is its creator, thus there is within it a beauty and worth that is extrinsic because it is God’s.

I come from God. He made the earth from which I was made. I am a humble convergence of matter and spirit. My value is that of dirt and spirit. On one level this is very little, but in the eyes of God, it is extremely valuable, for I am his creation.

FOUNDATIONS PART 1: Presuppositions

Alas, I have decided to begin a blog. There are a number of reasons why … 1) I want to archive my thoughts, 2) improve my thinking and articulation, 3) provide an avenue for distributing my reflections, and 4) just write. I have journaled for over a decade and though I do not intend to extinguish this habit, I think a blog will ameliorate my writing and thinking skills … plus I hope to meet other contemplative bloggers.

Most of my reflections will be based on Biblical passages or theological points (this is what I honestly think about most often), though I will not limit my locus to the Holy Scritpures, I believe that God’s creation is another book into which I want to probe and ponder. There will also be moments where I will address issues arising from other sacred texts and their relationship to the Bible. Since the reader may not espouse to my faith tradition I think it only proper to air my presuppositions, keeping in mind that this is merely a snippet of my beliefs. After all, this blog is intended to be a perpetual unpacking of my philosophical and theological reflections.

Disclaimer: These thoughts are not petrified. I will continue to develope my beliefs for the rest of my life. This is just the beginning.

Presuppositions
- I believe in the existence of the Judeo-Christian God as revealed in the Protestant Bible.
- I believe in the historicity, inerrancy, and authority of the Bible as the primary source for understanding truth and salvation (all revelation as it pertains to salvation must be tested by the Bible)

Based on these presuppositions I come to the following conclusions …

How do we know truth? (Epistemology)
I believe in two forms of truth 1) absolute immutable truth, and 2) relative temporal truth. Truth is more than an abstract concept, it is a person, the God-man (1 Timothy 2:5) Jesus of Nazareth (John 1:45). All truth is derived from the Truth (John 14:6), therefore to reflect upon truth is to reflect upon some aspect of Jesus Christ. This is an audacious claim, I know, but I am not the one who made it. Scripture reveals that he is the measure and Judge of all that is true (John 5:30; 8:16; 12:48; Acts 17:31), thus no truth exists outside of him “for by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities – all things were created through him and for him” (Col 1:16).

"I am not your teacher"
How then do we know Truth (Jesus)? On the first day of class, I often give an illustration to my students. “I am not your teacher,” I say. At that point the students look at me with cocked heads. “wha?” “I am not your teacher,” I repeat. “I will not be teaching you anything this year. Rather it the environment will be your teacher. I will simply be your guide and facilitator on this journey of learning.” The kids are now totally confused. “Let me explain.” I hold out my fist and ask, “What is in my hands?” A few misfits shout out some absurd item, but most have a dumbfounded look on their face. “How are we supposed to know with you hand closed,” one girl comments from the front row, echoing the sentiments of the class. “Right you are,” I respond, “And no matter how hard you look you will never know unless the environment reveals itself to you.” I then have everyone close their eyes and ask with an open hand, “What do I have in my hand now?” Again I receive the usual murmurings and chuckles until someone shouts the obvious, “We can’t see, so how are we to know?” “Right you are again,” I say, “and though the environment could reveal itself all day, if you have closed yourself off to it, then you will never know. So, two things must be active in order for us to learn: 1) the environment must reveal itself to us and 2) we must open our eyes to that revelation.”

I use this illustration here because I think that it applies to how we know Truth (Jesus). First, we could “search” for him all we want, but if He does not reveal himself to us, we will never know him. And second, He could reveal himself to us in the flesh at this very moment, but if we have closed our eyes, we will never see him and believe. This is one reason why Jesus came into the world. To give sight to the blind that they may see him and believe in him, the way, the truth, and the life (John 9:39). Those who hear his voice are of the truth (John 18:35-37), thus if a man does not listen to his voice he does not know truth. I placed “search” in quotations because in reality, non of us initiate a search for God and Truth apart from divine inititive. Jesus came into the world as light, the revelation of truth, yet we did not receive him. But all who do receive him, who believe in his name, he gives the right to become children of God, who are born, not of blood nor of the will (this contradicts free will) of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God (John 1:11-13).

So I repeat, how do we know Truth? Jesus must 1) reveal himself to us and Jesus must 2) open our eyes that we may see him. Therefore I believe in revelatory epistemology, that is, I believe that I can only know truth that has been revealed to me by the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:10).

I hope to touch on these next questions in the proceeding days ...

Where do I come from?

Where am I going?

What is my purpose in life?

To end is all of life building?

What is the purpose of suffering?