bread of life

31 July 2010 Leave a Comment

Several months ago, I picked up the little book Food Rules: An Eater’s Manual, by Michael Pollan. Pollan is a journalist who researched what his family should eat in order to be healthy. He recorded some of his journey and learnings in two other books (In Defense of Food and The Omnivore’s Dilemma), but in Food Rules, he distills the wisdom gained from this project into a short book of rules that we can readily apply to our eating habits. These are not all easy, but they are practical and some are downright funny too.

Here’s a sample:

  • Don’t eat anything your great-grandmother would recognize as food.
  • If it came from a plant, eat it; if it was made in a plant, don’t.
  • It’s not food if it arrived through the window of your car.

This is my favorite: “Avoid foods that are pretending to be something they are not.”

In John 6:35, Jesus says, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.” John’s Gospel does not narrate the Last Supper, in which Jesus institutes what we celebrate as Holy Communion, the Lord’s Supper, or the Eucharist, depending on what sort of church you’re involved with. Even though John does not narrate a Last Supper, we should have little trouble seeing that John addresses the sacred meal in the way he brings out Jesus’teaching on being the bread of life here in these verses (John 6:25-59).

With Jesus, we may also assert: “Avoid things that are pretending to be something they are not.” Jesus is the bread of life; he is our true nourishment, so we are to avoid things that are pretending to be something they are not—our Savior, or our Lord.

When it comes to who or what to center our life, our identity, and our worth on, there are plenty of possibilities. Of course there are outright bad things to center our life on. Most of those are represented by and addiction and/or an -ism. And some people do make those choices. But for many of us, that is not as big of a problem as our preoccupation with making good things into ultimate things.

In his short novel on one man’s vision of heaven, C.S. Lewis has his narrator witness a woman unable to understand why her son is so happy and content in God’s heavenly presence. She is jealous for his full attention because she had made her son the complete focus of her life. The narrator asks his guide (each character newly experiencing heaven has a guide) to help him understand the tension here. His guide responds that bronze is more often mistaken for gold than clay is. Translation: It is simpler to distinguish what is bad from what is ultimate than it is to distinguish what is very good from what is ultimate.

Think about that. The great things in life—family, health, success, work we love—these are the very things that are more likely to become substitutes for Jesus Christ in our lives. Why? Because they are so good. The saying, “avoid things that are pretending to be something they are not” is helpful here. Some things (addictions, -isms) pretend outright to be our Savior and/or our Lord. The truth is that regarding the best things, we do the pretending. And when we do we place a burden on things like family, health, success, and work, that they are not capable of carrying. But when we stop our pretending and center ourselves on Christ alone for our identity and worth, we are able to receive those good things for what they are—gifts from him.

“I am the bread of life… Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.” (John 6:35a, 54-56 TNIV)

Filed under Bible, spirituality Tagged with , ,

the good shepherd

27 July 2010 Leave a Comment

Earlier this summer I was a Scripture reader in a cousin’s wedding. It was the first time in some time that I had a role in a wedding other than that of presiding pastor. In the back, prior to the service, one of the pastors (there were three — the bride had several clergy in the family) referred to his wife as his “first wife.” I’ve heard the joke before. But somehow it struck me that the mentality behind the humor—that he’s considering his current wife his first (which assumes that at some point he’ll get around to moving on to a second wife and someday perhaps a third) is not one that a person can hold in their mind while standing at the altar, offering vows to another.

We’re hoping for more. Something inside us desires unconditional and unlimited love. And one thing we discover in life is that we do not find the unconditional, unlimited love we are searching for. On top of this, we also find that we fail to perfectly offer the unconditional and unlimited love that we desire to receive. We encounter this reality in our relationship with our parents at some point, with friends, with mentors, with social circles… The list could go on.

And yet, we feel like an unconditional, unlimited love is “out there” somewhere. It continues to be our standard.

Now, entering John 10:11-18 with this in mind, let’s look at five characters in Jesus’teaching here and their relationship to what we should know about what it means to experience Jesus as “The Good Shepherd.”

First, the thief. He is trying to gain access to the sheep by illegitimate means — by sneaking in some other way than the gate. And his job description is pretty simply stated in verse 10: “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy.” So, he engages the sheep, but only in order to live off of them.

Second, the stranger. The stranger, mentioned in vs 5, is not necessarily adversarial toward the sheep. The stranger’s distinguishing feature is that he is unknown to the sheep. He has no credibility. He does not seem to have poor intent, but he has no relational foundation from which to call the sheep.

Third, the hired hand. Like the thief, but unlike the stranger, the hired hand engages the sheep and even has some measure of responsibility for them. But his sense of obligation has limits. When danger threatens, he disappears.

Fourth, the Good Shepherd. The Good Shepherd is loving, caring, and self-giving. He knows the sheep and cares for them deeply and strongly. And the sheep know him too. They recognize him and can pick out his voice.

So what character remains to be fifth? I suggest it is the sheep themselves. And since the sheep represent us, they’re an important character to note. They are passive in Jesus’teaching. Interestingly, their relationship is the one in focus for each of the other characters in the passage: thief, stranger, hired hand, shepherd. All of these characters respond differently to the sheep, but it is the same sheep all along.

So what explains the difference in how the sheep are treated?

It seems to be none other than the personal character of the various persons. The thief is devious, the stranger is indifferent, the hired hand is self-interested. The Good Shepherd is self-sacrificially loving. He seems to love not because these are such lovable sheep but rather because love is who he is. Are they excellent sheep? Are they terrible sheep? Jesus offers no commentary to this effect because it is irrelevant. They are just sheep. No characteristics to recommend them for the best shepherd available. No, they are just ordinary sheep, nothing special in and of themselves that the Good Shepherd would care for them so much.

We are the sheep; Jesus is the Good Shepherd. Does he love us because we are special, wonderful, exceptional, A-plus, first-team, first-chair, rising star, super-qualified sheep? Far be it from me to contradict your mother (or mine) and say you’re not special, but our qualities or lack of them has absolutely no bearing on the love of the Good Shepherd toward us. Are we excellent sheep? Are we terrible sheep? It is irrelevant — the Good Shepherd loves and cares for us regardless.

C.S. Lewis sums it up well: “God loves us not because we’re lovable, but because he is love.” Why not trust a Good Shepherd like that?

Filed under Bible, spirituality Tagged with , ,

the gate for the sheep

24 June 2010 4 Comments

There’s an SUV commercial from several years ago that resonates with me. The vehicle makes it way up a semi-rough mountain path to bring the driver to a gorgeous vista. Then the slogan… “Ford: No Boundaries”! I like it for two reasons. First, I’m a fan of the big outdoors. I love hiking, camping, and canoeing. If a vehicle is promising to deliver me into the semi-wild outdoors, I’m listening. Second, I like this idea of having no boundaries. After all, I want to stretch my wings, to get out of the box, to get loose from anything that might limit or hinder me. An SUV touting it’s capacity to deliver me to the realm of “no boundaries” seems like a good deal indeed. It sounds like the fullest life would be the one without limitations. But is this true? “No Boundaries” sounds enticing, but is it realistic? Does it deliver on its promise?

In the first half of John 10, Jesus is speaking the Pharisees and using the image of a shepherd, sheep, the sheep pen, and the threats to the sheep. The majority of the passage (John 10:1-21) is dominated by the comparison of Jesus to the shepherd of the sheep. We’ll talk about Jesus’saying, “I AM the Good Shepherd,” from parable next week. For now, let’s look at a brief caveat in the passage, John 10:7-10, in which Jesus uses the metaphor of a gate for the sheep pen: “I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved… The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” (10:9-10 TNIV)

It seems from this teaching of Jesus that the fullest life we can live is one within the sheep-pen called God’s kingdom, entered into by a gate called Jesus. In other words, to live life “to the full,” we must first limit ourselves to life in God, which excludes certain things from our life.

I once met a woman who had been recently released from prison and was beginning life with her young children again. She had gotten too close to a man involved in using and dealing drugs. She was spiritually alive, hungry for God’s Word, and attentive to the work of God’s grace in her life. Part of her life had been stolen from her because she, at one time, had not had the right boundaries around her life. “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy…”

An example from the other direction also illustrates the point. While in seminary I was introduced to the music of Christopher Parkening, one of the world’s leading classical guitarists. While a young boy he so fell in love with classical guitar music that he committed himself to practice two hours before school and two hours after school everyday. This no doubt limited him in life experiences, yet it released his passion and ability as a classical guitarist. Having seen him in concert, I’m thankful for the fruit of the boundaries and limits he accepted in order to become great.

Now, this seems like a generic life principle and it may be to a degree. But I think it shows up in the rest of life because it is first true spiritually. Living life to the full means accepting the boundaries of God’s sheep-pen, entered by a gate called Jesus.

And here’s another part to this. There are many gates beckoning. There are many manifestations of the thief who comes only to steal and kill and destroy. They promise to release us from boundaries, but ensnare and enslave us instead. Why not entrust ourselves to the one person who truly was unlimited, but who limited himself by love for our sake? He limited himself in order to become the Gate through which we enter into the fullest life possible. Limiting ourselves to life in God is the only way truly to “have life, and have it to the full.”

Filed under Bible, spirituality Tagged with ,

light of the world

15 June 2010 1 Comment

“I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” (Jesus, in John 8:12)

This is one of Jesus’famous “I AM” sayings, unique to John’s Gospel. It is a powerful statement and, no doubt, robust with meaning. But one part of this saying has troubled me. It’s Jesus’claim, “Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness.” How can that be? I’ve been working at following Jesus for most of my life, yet I have felt myself no stranger to a darkened and unsure path. Every Christian I know has at some point said the same.

Never walk in darkness? Really?

Consider this. There are two kinds of lights: search-light and lamp-light. And there are two places to be lit: inside us and outside us. So, which light goes where?

Our idea is this: Search-light on the outside and lamp-light on the inside. Why? Simple. On the one hand, most of us would give a great deal in order to see into the future with the search-light concerning our marriages, children, friendships, careers, financial decisions, etc. On the other hand, we are not so interested in God or anyone else seeing clearly into our inner life. The dimness of lamp-light will do fine there, thank you. We’d like our failures, hurts, sins, addictions, griefs, and embarrassments to remain in as much dark as possible.

But God has the exact opposite idea: Search-light on the inside and lamp-light on the outside. The truth is all people walk, at best, by lamp-light. If you’ve spent time sitting in a hospital, you’ve been someone, or been close to someone who’s been walking by lamp-light whether you or they wanted to or not. Finding a mate, being married, raising children, losing a job, starting a job, losing a friend or family member… all of these occasions and more remind us that we walk through life by lamp-light whether we want to or not. This is the way life works.

So, in Christ, God offers us a particular sort of lamp-light. Jesus is himself that lamp-light for life’s path. Much of our relationship with Jesus is spent learning lessons about trusting to walk by his lamp-light, that is, with only enough light to see the next one or two faithful steps. That’s it. He is reliable, but we must “trust and obey,” to quote the old hymn. But Jesus is also the search-light on the inside, bringing into the light the shame and pain, sin and hurt, that we tried desperately to keep in the dark. His light exposes, to be sure. But his light also heals, forgives, reconciles, and saves. His search-light deals with what’s on the inside of us that hinders our ability to “trust and obey” the lamp-light he offers to walk through life. Who else would we want to trust to be our lamp-light and to shine his search-light on us but Jesus? After all, he is the one who felt the brightness of the search-light in the Garden of Gethsemane (“Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me”) yet who walked by lamp-light (“yet not my will, but yours be done”) all the way to the Cross in order to save, heal, forgive, and make us whole in him.

Jesus said, “I am the light of the world.” May we receive his search-light within so that we trust him to lead us by lamp-light through life.

Filed under Bible, spirituality Tagged with , ,

preaching study: john 20:19-31

30 March 2009 1 Comment

All Scripture quotes are from TNIV unless otherwise noted. 

————————–

I’m preaching on the Sunday after Easter in the traditional services at my church and am trying to get ahead a little. The text, John 20:19-31, is one of my favorites and is here. 

Here are some thoughts about what’s going on here literarily: 

  • Outline
    • 19-23 – Jesus sends disciples with gift of the Spirit 
    • 24-29 – Thomas’doubt countered by seeing Jesus 
    • 30-31 – John’s purpose in recording these signs by Jesus 
  • Structure: The overarching structure seems to be a parallelism in the two appearance stories seen in the repetition of the following. 
    • Of Jesus’appearance twice to the gathered disciples (vv19-23, 24-29)
    • Of Jesus’appearance among the disciples despite a locked door (vv 19, 26) 
    • Of the phrase, “peace be with you” (vv19, 21, 26)
    • Of the a reversal in the disciples’dispositions: 
      • In 19-23, the movement is within the group of disciples from fear (of the Jewish leaders) to joy (at seeing the Lord)
      • In 24-29, the movement is within the disciple Thomas from doubt (having missed seeing the Lord, an only having heard testimony) to belief (now seeing for himself) 
      • In both cases, the catalyst for change is first-hand witness of Jesus’wounded hands and side. The physicality of this experience is noteworthy. 
    • Of an exhortation with a purpose
      • In 19-23, Jesus breaths on the disciples and exhorts them to receive the Holy Spirit, with the purpose of the ministry of forgiveness (explicit) 
      • In 24-29, having shown Thomas his hands and side, Jesus commands Thomas to “stop doubting and believe,” with the purpose of bolstering belief in those who have not seen first-hand and who must rely on the ministry of testimony/witness (implicit) 
  • Interpretive key: John seems focused on not being misinterpreted. He makes explanatory comments throughout his gospel and this looks like an example of that. These verses have been taken by many interpreters as John’s purpose statement for writing his gospel. While I’m not ready to disagree with that, it does seem to fit the present passage rather tightly for the reasons following. 
    • In v30, John refers to “signs in the presence of his disciples.” This could certainly refer to the gospel as a whole. But in the immediate context, it seems to refer specifically to post-Resurrection signs, beginning with those recorded here in 20:19-29. 
    • In v31, John points to the motivation of producing belief in his readers. These would be folks who, unlike Thomas, have not seen Jesus physically, but are invited to believe just the same. This follows very closely on the heels of v29, which invites the readers to hear very clearly what Jesus says to Thomas: “blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” 
    • The themes of Jesus’performing signs and of belief run throughout the whole of John’s Gospel, but due to the tightness of these verses with the preceding verses, 19-29, it is probably best to read vv30-31 as applying to both the immediate context and the gospel as a whole. The point here is to avoid skipping from the meaning in the immediate context to its meaning in the larger context of the gospel as a whole. 

 

Interaction welcome…

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , ,

preaching study: john 2:13-25, pt 3

12 March 2009 Leave a Comment

 All Scripture quotes are from TNIV unless otherwise noted. 

————————–

My friend Jes has some comments (here and here) in each of the previous posts (one, two) that helped me continue my thinking on this text and message. I left a comment in the second post, but want to mention a little bit here. 

Two themes seem to converge here in John’s telling of this story: One is of Jesus replacing the Temple as the “unique location of God’s presence.” Two is of Jesus cleansing the Temple in order to it to be truly “holy to the Lord” (Zechariah 14:20-21). 

A follow-up to this thinking is that the Temple-presence of God is now no longer located in a building in Jerusalem that we go to, but in the person of Jesus who comes to/after us. The connection to what John has already said in his prologue seems to have gained a new dimension—to paraphrase: “the Temple became flesh and came locating himself with us, wherever we were.” Could it be said that in Jesus, the Incarnate One, God becomes the pilgrim on a journey to reclaim us? Hmm…. 

In any event, I think we can look at our inclination to see the Temple-cleansing as applying by analogy to us a little differently than we might at first. The canonical connection to Paul’s thought on the Body as a Temple of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 3, in which the issue is divisiveness based on loyalty to favorite preachers vs. loyalty to Jesus) or our bodies as Temples of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 6, in which the issue is immorality and the proper use of our bodies, which belong principally to God) are a natural places for us to intuit a connection (and I think there probably is something to that), but I wonder if a connection to Paul in Colossians 1:27, where he speaks of us becoming proclamation of his Gospel to others because of “Christ in us, the hope of glory”: 

To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. 

In John 2, the connection for us between Jesus’cleansing of the Temple and his replacement of the Temple in his person may be the work Jesus does in us to make us “holy to the Lord” because he is the Temple and he is entering us, to share his life with us and to share the Gospel through us. Again, a definite link to Paul in 1 Corinthians 6, but with a peculiar emphasis that is centered on Christ’s purifying us and missional purpose through us. 

A question Jessica raised in her commets was on “zeal” and how we don’t talk much like that these days. One of the initial thoughts I have is “zeal” in the mind of the first century may have been associated with persons called “zealots” who were prime examples. How does that image apply here? 

What other images or stories of persons being “consumed by zeal” in either good or bad ways can we think of? 

Thoughts? Stories?

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , ,

preaching study: john 2:13-25, pt 2

11 March 2009 3 Comments

 All Scripture quotes are from the TNIV unless otherwise noted.
++++++++++++++++++++++++

I began studying John 2:13-25 here. Here are some further thoughts about John’s version of Jesus’actions in the Temple courts. 

First, Jesus’words to the dove-sellers in v16 are noteworthy for figuring out what’s going on here: “Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!” 

To point out the obvious, Jesus draws a clear contrast between the Temple and the marketplace. I think this is saying more about the purpose of the Temple than about the persons selling livestock and exchanging money. They were, after all, performing a service that assisting the Temple in being the Temple for folks. Some persons needed an appropriate sacrifice to bring to the Temple in order to worship properly. Some (many?) of those folks were poor and needed the service that the sellers provided. Also, persons whose local currency did not match what was used in the Temple would have appreciated the money-changers’service, helping them exchange their currency for one that was useful in the Temple. 

Nonetheless, Jesus’“zeal for [God's] house” has consumed him (as the disciples remember later). Jesus’words in v16 allude to Zechariah 14:20-21, especially the last phrase of those verses (and the book): “And on that day there will no longer be a merchant in the house of the Lord Almighty” (though the TNIV says “Canaanite” instead of “merchant,” merchant seems to be the better reading, and one that is shared by the NRSV and The Message). Zechariah was a prophet in Israel who led the people in rebuilding the Temple. He emphasized purity and devotion to God, marking everything as “Holy to the Lord,” in other words, ‘”fully devoted to God.” 

In the context of Zechariah, we can see the continued significance of Jesus’response to the request for a sign. Jesus seems to continue his imaginative drawing upon Jewish history: Destroy this temple, and I will raise it up again in three days. Perhaps the point is related to what Zechariah was saying: when the Temple is rebuilt, it will be truly “Holy to God” or “fully devoted to God” because the person of Jesus is the new Temple. 

The Temple was the place where persons could encounter the presense of God, where heaven and earth touch or overlap, to use NT Wright’s way of talking about it. God is everywhere, but God is present in the Temple in a uniquely powerful way, unlike anywhere else (see Solomon’s prayer of dedication in 1 Kings 8 and 2 Chronicles 6, esp. vv40-42). So, here, as Jesus cleanses the Temple, his answer in v19 seems to suggest that he himself is the Temple’s replacement as well. 

Thoughts?

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , ,

preaching study: john 2:13-25

10 March 2009 1 Comment

In “preaching study” posts, I’m really interested in fostering a “community” approach to study and prep for the message, so please interact as much as you like. All Scripture quotes are from the TNIV unless otherwise noted. Thanks!
++++++++++++++++++++++++

This week I’m again preaching in our contemporary worship service. The text is John 2:13-25. Here is some initial work on it. 

Literary Context

  • The outline is fairly simple: Jesus creates a stir, People talk to Jesus about it, John shares a little more commentary about this point in Jesus’story. 
    • 2:13-17 – Jesus runs the marketplace out of the temple 
    • 2:18-22 – People question Jesus  about doing so 
    • 2:23-25 – Jesus has success, but is cautious about it 
  • One interesting recurrance is the reference in both v17 and v22 to the memory of the disciples, which seems to serve as an interpretive touch for the reader. 
    • v17 – “His disciples remember that it is written: ‘Zeal for your house will consume me.’” The OT reference is Psalm 69:9. My initial impression of the interpretive function of this verse is that it frames our reading of Jesus’outbreak in a positive direction–”zeal for your house will consume me,” rather than in a negative direction–anger at the moneychangers (this may be present, but the quotation emphasizes the former). Plus it explains the wildness of Jesus’actions: “zeal for your house will consume me.” It also establishes a purpose for Jesus’actions–defense of the Temple. Perhaps John is making a case that the true defender of the Temple faith is Jesus and not the other religious figures available–Pharisees, Saducees, scribes, teachers, etc. 
    • v22 – “After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.” John likes the flashforward approach, tipping his hand narratively as it were and offering “spoilers” in order to put the present actions in the context of the story-as-a-whole. In that light, this verse seems like a good example of John’s commitment to his purpose, articulated plainly in 20:30-31. 
  • Contrasts 
    • vv14-16 – Jesus’understanding of the Temple courts vs. those selling livestock and exchanging money. In Jesus’words, he understands the Temple courts to be his “Father’s house,” while his opponents think of it as a marketplace. 
    • vv20-21 – “The Jews” who question Jesus think his reference to “this temple” refers to the building, but he is actually referring to his own physical body (we know this thanks to John’s commentary within the narrative). 
    • vv23-25 – Jesus seems cautious about those who are coming to believe in him based on the signs “he was performing” at the Passover Festival, and therefore does not “entrust himself” to them. This reservation on his part is substantiated by John due to the fact that “he knew all people” (v24) and “knew what was in them” (v25). 
  • The exchange that follows Jesus’seemingly abrupt actions in vv13-17 unfolds like an interrogation as “the Jews” question Jesus (v18), he answers them (v19), and they respond in disbelief with another question (v20). Then John jumps into his narrative with explanatory comments (vv21-22). 
  • v18 – The theme of signs and the demand for and offering of signs in order to substantiate the claims of Jesus is one that runs throughout John, the first half in particular. 

Cultural Cues 

  • Good to review cultural practices and elements of the Passover Feast 
  • Investigate the practice of selling livestock (in particular the significance of the different types of animals mentioned) and exchanging money in the Temple courts 
  • Explore the role of the Temple culturally and religiously, and differences in the various areas of the Temple structure
  • What was the role of signs in substantiating the ministry of a prophet or would-be Messiah?

Canonical Connections 

  • v17 – Psalm 69 (noted above)

 

That’s all for now… thoughts so far?

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with ,

preaching study: john 14:5-7 (jesus the truth)

29 January 2009 Leave a Comment

In “preaching study” posts, I’m really interested in fostering a “community” approach to study and prep for the message, so please interact as much as you like. All Scripture quotes are from the TNIV unless otherwise noted. Thanks!
++++++++++++++++++++++++

What does it mean to say that Jesus is the Truth? 

Last Sunday, I preached the second message in a sermon series considering Jesus as the Way, Truth, and Life. I was out of town all week prior in DC and didn’t have access to post anything, but I want to get this whole conversation on the blog, so here are some thoughts that I wrestled with en route to a sermon on Jesus as the Truth. This is not my sermon in written form, but it does capture the meat of the message I think. The previous study posts on this text/series are here and here. This Scripture is John 14:5-7. 

In endeavoring to hear this Scripture well, as usual when endeavoring to hear the Scriptures, it becomes more and more clear that I spend an inordinate about of energy seeking to make Jesus more palpable to my and my hearers’ears. I spend much of my time as a preacher and as a disciple trying to make the Triune God easier to take. Why I do this I’m not sure, because whenever God runs wild in my life, I’m most full of life and whenever I’m able to make God more managable I succeed in making him and my life more boring. 

Saying that Jesus is the Way seems to mean, if we’re listening to this conversation between Jesus and Thomas well, that our obsession with the “where” (If you died tonight…) isn’t nearly as important to Jesus as the Way. This might be true because the “where” is the “way.” In other words, the “where” seeks to know our destination, which is citizenry in the kingdom of God and adoption into the family of God, which therefore is to be living in a different, transformed relationship to God. And this different, transformed relationship to God just happens to look an awful lot like the Way of Jesus! The “where” is the “way.”

This is a daunting Way that we would not have chosen on our own, either. We would have much preferred a divine escape from life here on earth to a far away place called heaven, an escape that does not place the demands and intrusiveness of transformation on us the way that becoming citizens of God’s kingdom, members of God’s family, and apprentices to Jesus in the Way does. Let other folks get left behind to have to change their lives! I’m interested in getting out of here without conforming myself to the character of Christ, thank you very much. 

So it is further upsetting that Jesus is the Truth as well.

Notice what Jesus doesn’t say. He doesn’t say, “I know the truth,” or “I have the truth,” but “I am the Truth.” 

Where is Jesus going in John 13-14 anyway? Where is this place of which Jesus says to Peter, “Where I am going, you cannot follow now, but you will follow later” (13:36)? It is to Jerusalem and execution. There’s something about Jesus being the Truth that is not as comfortable as 7 habits or 10 steps or 3 rules or 5 purposes or my best life now. When truth is not a principle for life application or a propositional statement with which to agree or disagree, but a person, we find ourselves (to paraphrase Will Willimon) saying not, “yeah, I get it,” but instead, “woah! He’s got me.”

When the most true thing in all of creation is a homeless wandering Jewish rabbi who is executed by an occupying military force because he was a threat to disrupt the peace, and that in this death God has accomplished the salvation of the cosmos, I am in trouble. I’m just a little bit Roman myself; I like my peace non-disrupted, thank you. I used to have a quiet house until my kids came along. Now my peace is disrupted 24/7. Can’t Jesus give me a little peace? 

But Jesus–who is the Truth–claims me, gets a hold of me. Steps or purposes or principles of application would be nice right about now. I’d still be in control of my life, just better equipped to do it well. If he’s got a hold of me, all of a sudden, he’s wanting me to walk in his truthful Way. This is because truth, as usual, is always more true shown than told. Truth is more true enfleshed, embodied, lived, narrated, than abstracted, disembodied, and outlined.

Which is more true? Abstracted, point-by-point teachings about forgiveness, or Amish families caring for the family of the man who killed their children? 

Sounds to me like the sort of folks who are more likely to say, “He’s got us,” than, “We get it.”

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , ,

preaching study: john 14:5-7 (jesus the way, pt 2)

15 January 2009 1 Comment

In “preaching study” posts, I’m really interested in fostering a “community” approach to study and prep for the message, so please interact as much as you like. All Scripture quotes are from the TNIV unless otherwise noted. Thanks!
++++++++++++++++++++++++

As I mentioned before (here and here), I’m preaching our contemporary service for the next few weeks on Jesus as the Way, Truth, and Life. This week is about Jesus as the Way. I’m working from John 14:1-7. 

In the earlier study post, I thought about the following regarding Thomas’exchange with Jesus in vv5-7: 

Thomas seems to make the assumption, usually a correct one, that knowing the destination, the aim, the end result, the where, is the first thing to cover. If we know the where, we can figure out a way to get there. All that stands between our cleverness and resourcefulness in nailing down the way is clear, direct communication from Jesus about the where, the destination. 

Right now I’m pursuing the question, “When is the way is the where?” One way we might say it is to emphasize the journey over the destination. That’s close, but I’m not sure that’s exactly what I’m trying to get at here. 

In much of evangelical Christianity we’ve emphasized that heaven is the point of salvation. It’s what we’re saved for. But the Gospels, while they seem to have an existence with God after death in mind, emphasize the Kingdom of God as the point of salvation. Jesus preaches a Kingdom of God that is near, and even within. Revelation speaks of a new heavens and new earth. These hardly suggest that salvation is exclusively, or even first of all, about the afterlife. In fact, the whole of the NT witness seems to bundle anything about life with/in God in an afterlife with life with/in God in the present, earthly existence. In other words, heaven seems to be included in, but not the point of, the Kingdom of God. Further, we pray as Jesus taught, “Your kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” The kingdom seems to be spanning earth and heaven and connecting them under the rule of God. 

I think we see, upon rereading our bibles, that while Thomas (like us?) is more interested in the where, the destination, Jesus is teaching, perhaps subtly, that the Way is the Where and that he is the Way. 

“If you really know me, you will know my Father as well.” (v7)

Is not much of heaven knowing and being known, and in the midst of that loving and being loved, by the Father? 

John Calvin said, “True knowledge of God is born out of obedience.” I think John Wesley would have agreed with this. Discipleship, apprenticeship, following and learning life from Jesus, imitating Jesus, gives us deeper knowledge of God than we had when we where only thinking about God or having feelings toward God. When my wife and I had our first child (we’re on number three now), we were told over and over that having children would change our life. We genuinely knew that was a deeply true statement. But our experiential knowledge of it is much different–richer and more robust–than our theoretical knowledge of it, correct though it was. 

Plus, I think touches on a Wesleyan emphasis on sanctification or holiness—our growing into the likeness of Christ. Our becoming persons who love God and neighbor, whether that neighbor is friend or enemy, near or far, like us or very much unlike us. Love in action will not be cookie cutter–it will not look the same in every circumstance. But it will still be love, and not something else. 

This is the difficulty of the Jesus Way. Jesus went to places and among people that we aren’t interested in going to or among. We don’t like “those people” but Jesus seems to love them and be quite interested in saving “them” too. Jesus isn’t terribly impressed with our tribal, national, familial, cultural, denominational, political, ideological borders and boundaries and shibboleths. He wasn’t in his own day. He didn’t mind upsetting polite society in order to push the kingdom agenda and as a member of polite society, why do I act as though I think he would behave any better today? 

We’ve tended to emphasize the “the’s” in John 14:6: “the way and the truth and the life.” (emphasis mine) 

Perhaps we’ve done so in order to emphasize that other people are “other” to us. I’m not denying the exclusive claims of Jesus, but aren’t we avoiding what the “the’s” are there for by emphasizing them? Jesus isn’t the way before he is the Way. 

We’re saved from a life that is characterized by alienation from God and others (and therefore even our own selves) and animated by sin into a life that is characterized by imitating Jesus, living the Way of Christ. And since we’re living in the Jesus Way, we find ourselves in the where of relationship with the Father. Is this not heaven? Is this not the destination, the goal? 

What happeens with our lives when the where we were interested in nailing down (“Lord, we don’t know where you are going…”) is the way that we’re interested in only secondarily (“…so how can we know the way”)? 

Thoughts?

Stories of people living, embodying, the Jesus Way?

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.