Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • John Wesley – Sermon 44 – Original Sin

    John Wesley – Sermon 44 – Original Sin

    The following is a translation into modern English of John Wesley’s Sermon 44, “Original Sin.” The link is to the 1872 edition as posted on ResourceUMC.org. This translation was produced to my specifications by Gemini AI. I am including as footnotes the AI notes on the translation. My instructions were to modernize the language and on a scale of 1 to 10 for literal to free translation aim for about a 5 to 6.

    Whatever of these I happen to produce I intend to leave public domain and make fully available online. I may create an ebook or a PDF if I do enough of them this way. Comments on the accuracy of the translation are welcome. The AI provided a list of substantive changes after each section (varying from 4 to 7 numbered paragraphs) except for section 2, which I’m providing as footnotes. Again, per my instructions, the AI also updated the language of the scripture quotes except where the specific language was critical. I did not change these to a modern version, but rather allowed rephrasing of the KJV or of Wesley’s rendering.

    I have briefly checked this and did not find anything major. I’d appreciate any corrections.

    Modern Translation (Wesley, “Original Sin,” Sermon 44

    “God saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time.”

    Genesis 6:5

    1. How different this is from the flattering portrayals of human nature that people have drawn throughout history! Many ancient writings are full of cheerful descriptions of human dignity. Some ancient thinkers depicted humans as having all virtue and happiness built into them, or at least entirely within their grasp, without needing help from any other being. In fact, they presented humans as self-sufficient, capable of living independently, and only a little less than God Himself.
    2. And it’s not just non-Christian thinkers, those guided by little more than the dim light of reason, who have spoken so grandly about human nature as if it were pure innocence and perfection. Many who claim the name of Christ, and to whom God’s own revelations were entrusted, have also done this. Such accounts have been particularly common in the present century, and perhaps nowhere more than in our own country. Here, quite a few highly intelligent and learned individuals have used their best efforts to show what they called “the fair side of human nature.” And it must be admitted that, if their descriptions are accurate, humanity is indeed still “a little lower than the angels”; or, as the words can be more literally translated, “a little less than God.”
    3. Is it any wonder that these ideas are so easily accepted by most people? After all, who isn’t readily convinced to think favorably of themselves? Consequently, writers of this type are widely read, admired, and praised. They’ve made countless converts, not only among the general public but also in academic circles. So, it’s now completely out of fashion to speak differently, to say anything that disparages human nature. It’s generally agreed that, despite a few minor weaknesses, human nature is fundamentally innocent, wise, and virtuous!
    4. But, in the meantime, what are we to do with our Bibles? They will never agree with this view. These popular ideas, however appealing they may be, are utterly incompatible with what Scripture says. The Bible states that “through one man’s disobedience all men were made sinners”; that “in Adam all died”—meaning they died spiritually, losing the life and image of God. It says that fallen, sinful Adam then “fathered a son in his own likeness”—and it was impossible for him to do otherwise, for “who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?” As a result, we, like all other people, were by nature “dead in trespasses and sins,” “without hope, without God in the world,” and therefore “children of wrath.” Every person can say, “I was shaped in wickedness, and in sin did my mother conceive me.” There is “no difference,” in that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” that glorious image of God in which humanity was originally created. And so, when “the Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, he saw they had all gone astray; they had together become corrupt, there was no one righteous, no, not one”—none who truly sought after God. This aligns perfectly with what the Holy Spirit declares in the words quoted above: “God saw,” when He looked down from heaven before, “that the wickedness of man was great in the earth”; so great that “every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”

    This is God’s assessment of humanity. From this, I will first show what people were like before the flood; second, inquire whether they are not the same now; and third, add some conclusions.1

    Humanity Before the Flood

    I. 1. First, by examining the words of our text, I will describe what people were like before the flood. We can fully trust the description given here, because God saw it, and God cannot be mistaken. He “saw that the wickedness of man was great“—not just the wickedness of this or that person, nor just a few, nor even merely the majority, but of humanity in general; of people universally. The word “man” here includes the entire human race, everyone who shares human nature. It’s difficult for us to even estimate their numbers—how many thousands and millions there were. The Earth at that time still had much of its original beauty and incredible fertility. The globe’s surface wasn’t damaged and torn as it is now, and spring and summer seemed to blend together. So, it’s likely the Earth could support far more inhabitants than it can today. And these inhabitants must have multiplied immensely, as people had sons and daughters for seven or eight hundred years straight. Yet, among all this unimaginable number, only “Noah found favor with God.” He alone (perhaps including part of his household) was an exception to the universal wickedness, which, by God’s just judgment, soon after brought about universal destruction. Everyone else shared the same guilt, just as they shared the same punishment.

    1. “God saw all the imaginations of the thoughts of his heart”—meaning the inner person, the spirit within them, which is the source of all their internal and external actions. He “saw all the imaginations”: it’s impossible to find a word with a broader meaning. This includes everything that is formed, made, or created within; everything that exists or happens in the soul; every inclination, affection, passion, appetite; every disposition, plan, and thought. Consequently, it must also include every word and action, as these naturally flow from these internal sources and are either good or evil depending on their origin.
    2. Now, God saw that all of this, every single part of it, was evil—it went against moral rightness; it was contrary to God’s nature, which necessarily includes all good; it defied the divine will, the eternal standard of good and evil; it was the opposite of the pure, holy image of God in which humanity was originally created and stood when God surveyed His handiwork and saw that it was all very good; it contradicted justice, mercy, and truth, and the essential relationships each person had with their Creator and their fellow creatures.
    3. But wasn’t there some good mixed with the evil? Wasn’t there some light mixed with the darkness? No, none at all. “God saw that the whole imagination of the heart of man was only evil.” It’s true that many of them, perhaps all, had good impulses placed in their hearts, because the Spirit of God did “strive with man” even then, hoping they might repent—especially during that merciful grace period of 120 years while the ark was being prepared. But still, “in his flesh dwelt no good thing”; their entire nature was purely evil. It was completely consistent with itself and unmixed with anything of an opposing nature.
    4. However, one might still ask, “Was there no break in this evil? Were there no clear moments when something good might be found in the human heart?” We’re not considering here what God’s grace might occasionally work in their soul. Aside from that, we have no reason to believe there was any break in that evil. For God, who “saw the whole imagination of the thoughts of his heart to be only evil,” also saw that it was always the same, that it “was only evil continually”; every year, every day, every hour, every moment. Humanity never turned toward good.

    Are We the Same Now?

    II. This is the trustworthy description of the entire human race that God, who knows what is in humanity and examines hearts and minds, has left for our instruction. This is what all people were like before God brought the flood upon the earth. Second, we are to ask: Are they the same now?

    1. And it’s clear: Scripture gives us no reason to think otherwise. On the contrary, all the biblical passages quoted earlier refer to those who lived after the flood. It was over a thousand years later that God declared through David concerning the children of men, “They have all gone astray” from truth and holiness; “there is none righteous, no, not one.” All the prophets, in their various generations, confirm this. For example, Isaiah, speaking about God’s own chosen people (and certainly non-believers were in no better condition), said: “The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even to the head there is no soundness; but wounds, and bruises, and festering sores.” The same description is given by all the Apostles, indeed, by the entire message of God’s revealed word. From all these sources, we learn that concerning humanity in its natural state, without the help of God’s grace, “every inclination of the thoughts of his heart is” still “evil, only evil,” and that “continually.”
    2. This description of humanity’s current condition is confirmed by daily experience. It’s true that someone in a natural, unregenerate state doesn’t perceive this, and that’s not surprising. A person born blind hardly recognizes their lack of sight as long as they remain blind. Even less would they realize it if we imagined a place where everyone was born without sight. Similarly, as long as people remain spiritually blind in their understanding, they are not aware of their spiritual needs, particularly this one. But as soon as God opens the eyes of their understanding, they see the state they were in before; they are then deeply convinced that “every living person,” especially themselves, is by nature “altogether vanity”—that is, full of foolishness, ignorance, sin, and wickedness.
    3. We see, when God opens our eyes, that before, we were “atheoi en toi kosmoi”—without God, or more accurately, atheists in the world. By nature, we had no knowledge of God, no real acquaintance with Him. It’s true that as soon as we began to use reason, we learned about the invisible things of God, even His eternal power and divine nature, from the things that are made. From what we could see, we inferred the existence of an eternal, powerful Being who cannot be seen. But still, even though we acknowledged His existence, we had no true acquaintance with Him. Just as we know there is an emperor of China whom we don’t personally know, so we knew there was a King of all the earth, yet we didn’t truly know Him. Indeed, we couldn’t with any of our natural abilities. We couldn’t gain knowledge of God through any of these. We couldn’t perceive Him with our natural understanding any more than we could see Him with our physical eyes. For “no one knows the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him. And no one knows the Son except the Father, and anyone to whom the Father chooses to reveal Him.”
    4. We read about an ancient king who wanted to discover the natural language of humans. To settle the matter, he conducted an experiment: he ordered two infants, immediately after birth, to be taken to a prepared place where they were raised without any instruction or ever hearing a human voice. What was the outcome? When they were finally brought out of their confinement, they didn’t speak any language at all; they only made unarticulated sounds, like those of other animals. If two infants were similarly raised from birth without any religious instruction, there’s little doubt that (unless God’s grace intervened) the result would be exactly the same. They would have no religion at all; they would have no more knowledge of God than the beasts of the field, or a wild donkey’s colt. Such is natural religion, separated from tradition and from the influences of God’s Spirit!

      And having no knowledge of God, we can have no love for God. We cannot love someone we don’t know. Most people certainly talk about loving God, and perhaps they imagine they do; at least, few will admit they don’t love Him. But the reality is too obvious to deny. By nature, no one loves God any more than they love a stone or the ground they walk on. What we love, we delight in, but no one naturally finds any delight in God. In our natural state, we can’t imagine how anyone could delight in Him. We take no pleasure in Him at all; He is utterly unappealing to us. To love God! It’s far beyond our reach, out of our sight. Naturally, we cannot achieve it.2
    1. By nature, we not only lack love for God, but we also have no fear of Him. It’s true that most people, sooner or later, develop a kind of irrational, senseless fear, properly called superstition (though some misguided Epicureans mistakenly called it religion). Yet, even this isn’t natural; it’s acquired, mostly through conversation or by example. By nature, God isn’t in our thoughts at all: We leave Him to manage His own affairs, to sit quietly, as we imagine, in heaven, and we handle ours on Earth. So, we have no more fear of God before our eyes than we have love of God in our hearts.
    2. Thus, all people are “atheists in the world.” But atheism itself doesn’t protect us from idolatry. In their natural state, every person born into the world is a blatant idolater. Perhaps we aren’t idolaters in the common sense of the word. We don’t, like pagan idolaters, worship statues made of metal or carved images. We don’t bow down to a wooden post or to something we made with our own hands. We don’t pray to angels or saints in heaven, any more than we pray to saints on Earth. But what does that mean? We have set up our idols in our hearts; and to these, we bow down and worship them: We worship ourselves when we give ourselves honor that belongs only to God. Therefore, all pride is idolatry; it’s attributing to ourselves what is due to God alone. And although pride was not meant for humanity, where is the person born without it? Yet, by this, we rob God of His unchallengeable right and, in an act of idolatry, steal His glory.
    3. But pride isn’t the only type of idolatry we are all naturally guilty of. Satan has also imprinted his own image on our hearts through self-will. “I will,” he declared before he was cast out of heaven, “I will sit upon the sides of the north;” meaning, “I will do my own will and pleasure, independent of my Creator.” Every person born into the world says the same, in countless situations; in fact, they openly declare it without ever blushing or feeling fear or shame. Ask someone, “Why did you do this?” They answer, “Because I felt like it.” What is this but, “Because it was my will;” that is, in effect, “because the devil and I agreed; because Satan and I govern our actions by the same principle.” Meanwhile, God’s will isn’t in their thoughts, isn’t considered in the least, even though it’s the supreme rule for every intelligent creature, whether in heaven or on Earth, stemming from the essential, unchangeable relationship all creatures have with their Creator.
    4. To this extent, we bear the image of the devil and follow in his footsteps. But at the next step, we leave Satan behind; we fall into an idolatry he isn’t guilty of: I mean love of the world. This is now as natural to every person as loving their own will. What is more natural for us than to seek happiness in creation instead of the Creator? To seek satisfaction in the works of His hands that can only be found in God? What is more natural than “the desire of the flesh?” meaning, the desire for sensory pleasure of every kind? People do talk grandly about despising these low pleasures, particularly educated and learned individuals. They pretend to be indifferent to gratifying these appetites, which put them on the same level as perishing beasts. But it’s mere pretense; for everyone is self-aware that, in this regard, they are by nature very much like a beast. Sensual appetites, even the lowest kind, have, more or less, dominion over them. They lead them captive; they drag them back and forth, despite their boasted reason. A person, with all their good manners and other accomplishments, has no superiority over a goat. In fact, it’s highly debatable whether the beast doesn’t have superiority over them. Certainly, it does, if we listen to one of their modern wise figures, who very properly tells us:


      Once in a season beasts too taste of love;
      Only the beast of reason is its slave,
      And in that folly drudges all the year.

      It must be admitted that there is a significant difference between individuals, arising (besides what is achieved by God’s grace that prepares the way) from differences in physical makeup and upbringing. But despite this, who, if not utterly ignorant of themselves, can cast the first stone at another here? Who can withstand the test of our blessed Lord’s commentary on the Seventh Commandment: “Anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart”? So one doesn’t know what to wonder at more: the ignorance or the arrogance of those who speak with such disdain of people overcome by desires that every human has felt in their own breast—the desire for every pleasure of the senses, innocent or not, being natural to every child of humanity.

    5. And so is “the desire of the eye“—the desire for the pleasures of the imagination. These arise either from grand, or beautiful, or uncommon objects. It might even be that the first two coincide with the last; for perhaps, upon careful investigation, it would appear that neither grand nor beautiful objects please us any longer than they are new. Once their novelty wears off, most of the pleasure they provide is gone; and the more familiar they become, the more dull and tasteless they seem. But no matter how many times we experience this, the same desire remains. The inborn thirst stays fixed in the soul; in fact, the more it’s indulged, the more it grows, prompting us to chase one object after another, even though each pursuit leaves us with unfulfilled hope and deluded expectations. Indeed:

      The old fool, who for many days
      Has struggled with continuous sorrow,
      Renews his hope, and foolishly places
      A desperate bet upon tomorrow!
      Tomorrow comes! It’s noon! It’s night!
      This day, like all the former, flies:
      Yet on he goes, to seek delight
      Tomorrow, until he dies tonight!
    6. A third symptom of this deadly disease, the love of the world, which is so deeply rooted in our nature, is “the pride of life“—the desire for praise, for honor that comes from people. Even the greatest admirers of human nature acknowledge this to be strictly natural; as natural as sight, hearing, or any other external sense. And are they ashamed of it, even learned individuals, people with refined and improved understanding? Far from it—they glory in it! They applaud themselves for their love of applause! Yes, even so-called eminent Christians have no difficulty adopting the saying of that old, vain pagan: Animi dissoluti est et nequam negligere quid de se homines sentiant: “Not to regard what people think of us is the mark of a wicked and abandoned mind.” So, for them, to remain calm and unmoved through honor and dishonor, through bad report and good report, is a sign of someone who is, truly, not fit to live: “Away with such a person from the earth!” But could one imagine that these people had ever heard of Jesus Christ or His Apostles, or that they knew who it was that said, “How can you believe if you accept honor from one another but do not seek the honor that comes from God alone?” But if this is truly the case—if it’s impossible to believe, and consequently to please God, as long as we accept or seek honor from one another and do not seek the honor that comes from God alone—then what a state all humanity is in! Christians as well as pagans! Since they all seek honor from one another! Since it’s as natural for them to do so (by their own judgment) as it is to see the light that strikes their eye or to hear the sound that enters their ear; yes, since they consider it a sign of a virtuous mind to seek the praise of people, and a sign of a vicious one to be content with the honor that comes from God alone!3

    Inferences and Conclusions

    III. 1. I will now draw a few conclusions from what we’ve discussed. First, from this, we can understand a major, fundamental difference between Christianity, viewed as a system of doctrines, and the most refined paganism. Many ancient pagans extensively described the vices of particular individuals. They spoke strongly against greed, cruelty, luxury, or extravagance. Some even dared to say that “no person is born without vices of one kind or another.” But still, none of them were aware of humanity’s fall, so none of them knew of its total corruption. They didn’t know that all people were empty of all good and filled with all sorts of evil. They were completely ignorant of the complete depravity of human nature—of every person born into the world, in every faculty of their soul—not so much by the specific vices that dominate particular individuals, but by the general flood of atheism and idolatry, of pride, self-will, and love of the world. This, then, is the first great distinguishing point between paganism and Christianity. Paganism acknowledges that many people are infected with many vices, and even born with a tendency toward them; but it also assumes that in some, the natural good far outweighs the evil. Christianity, on the other hand, declares that “all people are conceived in sin” and “shaped in wickedness”—that from this, there is in every person a “carnal mind, which is hostile toward God, which is not, and cannot be, subject to” His “law”; and which so infects the entire soul that “in” them, “in their flesh,” in their natural state, “no good thing dwells”; instead, “every inclination of the thoughts of their heart is evil,” only evil, and that “continually.”

    1. From this, we can, second, learn that all who deny this truth, whether they call it original sin or by any other name, are still pagans in the fundamental point that distinguishes paganism from Christianity. They may indeed concede that people have many vices; that some are innate; and that, consequently, we aren’t born as wise or virtuous as we should be. Few would boldly assert, “We are born with as much inclination toward good as toward evil, and that every person is, by nature, as virtuous and wise as Adam was at his creation.” But here is the shibboleth: Is humanity by nature filled with all sorts of evil? Is it devoid of all good? Is it completely fallen? Is its soul totally corrupted? Or, to return to the text, is “every inclination of the thoughts of his heart only evil continually?” Accept this, and you are, to that extent, a Christian. Deny it, and you are still just a pagan.
    2. We can learn from this, in the third place, what the true nature of religion is—specifically, the religion of Jesus Christ. It is therapeia psyches, God’s method of healing a soul that is so diseased. Here, the great Physician of souls applies medicines to heal this sickness; to restore human nature, which is totally corrupted in all its faculties. God heals all our atheism through the knowledge of Himself, and of Jesus Christ whom He has sent; by giving us faith, a divine awareness and conviction of God and of the things of God—in particular, of this important truth, “Christ loved me”—and gave Himself for me.” Through repentance and humility of heart, the deadly disease of pride is healed; the disease of self-will is healed by resignation, a humble and thankful submission to the will of God; and for the love of the world in all its forms, the love of God is the ultimate remedy. Now, this is truly religion: “faith” thus “working through love”; producing genuine, humble meekness, complete detachment from the world, along with a loving, thankful acceptance of and conformity to the whole will and word of God.
    3. Indeed, if humanity had not fallen in this way, none of this would be necessary. There would be no need for this inner transformation, this renewal of our minds. The “superfluity of godliness” would then be a more fitting phrase than the “superfluity of naughtiness.” For an outward religion, without any true godliness at all, would suffice for all rational purposes. And it does, accordingly, suffice in the judgment of those who deny this corruption of our nature. They make very little more of religion than the famous Mr. Hobbes did of reason. According to him, reason is only “a well-ordered train of words.” According to them, religion is only a well-ordered train of words and actions. And they speak consistently with themselves; for if the inside isn’t full of wickedness, if it’s already clean, what’s left but to “cleanse the outside of the cup?” Outward reformation, if their assumption is correct, is indeed the only necessary thing.
    4. But you have not learned the oracles of God in this way. You know that He who sees what is in humanity gives a vastly different account of both nature and grace, of our fall and our recovery. You know that the great purpose of religion is to renew our hearts in the image of God, to repair that total loss of righteousness and true holiness that we suffered through the sin of our first parent. You know that any religion that doesn’t achieve this purpose, any religion that falls short of this—the renewal of our soul in the image of God, after the likeness of Him who created it—is nothing more than a poor farce, a mere mockery of God, leading to the destruction of our own soul. Oh, beware of all those false teachers who would try to pass this off as Christianity! Pay no attention to them, even if they come to you with all the deceitfulness of unrighteousness; with smooth words, with decency, even beauty and elegance of expression, and with all professions of sincere goodwill toward you and reverence for the Holy Scriptures. Hold fast to the plain, old faith, “once delivered to the saints,” and delivered by the Spirit of God to our hearts. Know your disease! Know your cure! You were born in sin: Therefore, “you must be born again,” born of God. By nature, you are wholly corrupted. By grace, you shall be wholly renewed. In Adam, you all died: In the second Adam, in Christ, you all are made alive. “You who were dead in sins, He has made alive”: He has already given you a principle of life, which is faith in Him who loved you and gave Himself for you! Now, “go on from faith to faith” until your entire sickness is healed; and let “that mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus!”4

    Notes on the Translation Choices

    Section 1

    • Introductory Verse: Modernized the Genesis 6:5 quote to a common modern rendering.
    • “Fair pictures” / “gay descriptions”: Translated to “flattering portrayals” and “cheerful descriptions” to convey the sense of overly positive and perhaps unrealistic depictions.
    • “Beholden to any other being”: Changed to “needing help from any other being.”
    • “Self-sufficient, able to live on his own stock”: Simplified to “self-sufficient, capable of living independently.”
    • “Heathens alone”: Changed to “non-Christian thinkers” for broader understanding.
    • “Oracles of God”: Translated to “God’s own revelations.”
    • “The present century”: Refers to Wesley’s century (the 18th). The modern translation keeps this as “the present century” to maintain Wesley’s original perspective within his historical context.
    • “Strong understanding, as well as extensive learning”: Modernized to “highly intelligent and learned individuals.”
    • “The fair side of human nature”: Kept as a direct quote as it seems to be a phrase Wesley is critiquing.
    • “Little lower than the angels” / “little less than God”: Retained the scripture-like phrasing.
    • “Readily received by the generality of men”: Simplified to “so easily accepted by most people.”
    • “Innumerable are the converts they have made, not only in the gay, but the learned world”: “Gay world” refers to the fashionable or worldly society of Wesley’s time; translated as “general public but also in academic circles” for a modern equivalent. “Academic circles” captures the “learned world” aspect better than just “learned.”
    • “Quite unfashionable to talk otherwise”: Changed to “completely out of fashion to speak differently.”
    • “Disparagement of human nature”: Kept as is, as it’s still a clear phrase.
    • “Infirmities”: Changed to “minor weaknesses.”
    • “Utterly irreconcilable with the scriptural”: Changed to “utterly incompatible with what Scripture says.”
    • Scripture References in Paragraph 4: Modernized the embedded scripture quotes (e.g., “made sinners,” “died spiritually,” “fathered a son,” “dead in trespasses and sins,” “without hope, without God,” “children of wrath,” “shaped in wickedness,” “all have sinned,” “gone astray,” “become corrupt,” “no one righteous,” “inclination of the thoughts”). I’ve added a parenthetical clarification for “died” to “meaning they died spiritually” as Wesley himself clarifies it.
    • “Just agreeable this, to what is declared by the Holy Ghost”: Changed to “This aligns perfectly with what the Holy Spirit declares.”
    • “Recited”: Changed to “quoted.”
    • “Take occasion, First, to show…”: Changed to “From this, I will first show…” for a more natural transition.

    Section 2

    Somehow I seem to have lost these notes.

    Section 3

    Notes on Translation Choices:

    • “Senseless, irrational fear, properly called superstition”: Modernized to clarify the distinction Wesley is making.
    • “Blundering epicureans”: “Misguided Epicureans” conveys the critical tone without being overly archaic.
    • “God is not in all our thoughts: We leave him to manage his own affairs, to sit quietly, as we imagine, in heaven, and leave us on earth to manage ours”: Simplified sentence structure and phrasing for natural flow.
    • “Rank idolater”: Retained “blatant idolater” for impact.
    • “Vulgar sense of the word”: Changed to “common sense of the word.”
    • “Stock of a tree”: Clarified to “wooden post.”
    • “Stamping his own image on our heart in self-will also”: Modernized to “imprinted his own image on our hearts through self-will.”
    • “I will sit upon the sides of the north”: This is a direct quote from Isaiah 14:13, where Satan/Lucifer says “I will sit upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north.” Wesley uses it as a concise illustration of self-will. I’ve retained it as a quote.
    • “Nay, and avow it too, without ever blushing upon the account”: Modernized to “in fact, they openly declare it without ever blushing.”
    • “I had a mind to it”: Changed to “I felt like it,” which is a common modern idiom for doing something out of personal desire.
    • “Intelligent creature”: Kept as is.
    • Poetry in Paragraph 9: I’ve reformatted the poetry for easier reading and modernized a few words for flow while retaining the original meaning and rhythm.
    • “Preventing grace”: This is a specific theological term in Wesleyan theology, referring to the grace that goes before and enables one to respond to God. I’ve translated it to “God’s grace that prepares the way” for clarity, while still conveying the technical meaning.
    • “Abide the test of our blessed Lords comment on the Seventh Commandment”: Modernized to “withstand the test of our blessed Lord’s commentary on the Seventh Commandment.”
    • “Desire of the eye”: Kept as a specific biblical phrase (1 John 2:16), making the connection clear.
    • Poetry in Paragraph 10: Similarly reformatted and slightly modernized while preserving the essence.
    • “Hoary fool”: Changed to “old fool” for accessibility.
    • “Pride of life”: Kept as a specific biblical phrase (1 John 2:16).
    • Latin quote and translation: Provided the Latin as Wesley did, and then translated it for clarity.
    • “Eminent Christians, so called”: Retained the slightly critical “so-called” to reflect Wesley’s tone.
    • “Away with such a flow from the earth!”: This is a very strong, almost violent dismissal. I’ve retained it with “Away with such a person from the earth!” to convey that severity.

    Section 4

    • “Grand fundamental difference”: Translated to “major, fundamental difference.”
    • “Apprized of the fall of man”: Changed to “aware of humanity’s fall.”
    • “Total corruption” / “entire depravation”: These are key Wesleyan theological terms, so I’ve kept them while simplifying the surrounding phrasing for clarity.
    • “Carnal mind, which is enmity against God”: A direct biblical quote, maintained but within modern sentence structure.
    • “Shibboleth”: This specific term is kept as it implies a definitive test or distinguishing feature, which is Wesley’s exact intent here.
    • “Therapeia psyches”: Maintained the Greek and provided Wesley’s translation (“God’s method of healing a soul”).
    • “Physician of souls”: Retained this common theological metaphor.
    • “Divine evidence and conviction”: Kept this specific phrasing for “faith” as it reflects Wesleyan understanding.
    • “Superfluity of godliness” / “superfluity of naughtiness”: These are interesting and slightly ironic phrases from Wesley, so I’ve kept them directly as they convey his point well within context.
    • Mr. Hobbes quote: Retained and slightly modernized the surrounding explanation.
    • “Ye have not so learned the oracles of God”: Changed to “You have not learned the oracles of God in this way” to maintain the “you” address.
    • “Poor farce, and a mere mockery of God”: Maintained the strong, condemning language.
    • “Palm this upon you for Christianity”: Changed to “try to pass this off as Christianity” for clarity.
    • “Deceivableness of unrighteousness; with all smoothness of language, all decency, yea, beauty and elegance of expression”: Kept the vivid description of false teachers.
    • “Plain, old faith, ‘once delivered to the saints’”: Maintained this important scriptural reference and concept.
    • Concluding exhortations: Retained the direct, imperative tone (“Know your disease! Know your cure! You must be born again!”).
    • “Principle of life”: A key concept in Wesleyan theology, so retained.
    • “Go on from faith to faith” / “that mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus”: Maintained these biblical phrases.
  • Matthew 6:9b – Father

    Matthew 6:9b – Father

    Our Father in heaven.

    Matthew 6:9b

    Jody provided me with texts about fatherhood this week and quoted just this line specifically. It amused me when I read The Five Gospels, a product of the Jesus Seminar (Robert Funk, specifically), that the word “Father” was the one thing the seminar agreed was definitely something Jesus said.

    But what exactly does this mean? Why does Jesus invoke the image of fatherhood in telling us how to speak to the Father in heaven?

    I’m going to quote four authors that I publish and then make my own comments.

    First is Bruce Epperly, in his book One World:

    At the heart of the Lord’s Prayer is Jesus’ invocation of God as Abba, a term used to describe the intimacy between father and child. The God Jesus prayed to is not distant and demanding,
    preoccupied with rules and regulations, and ready to pounce on our slightest mistake. The God Jesus prayed to is like the best of parents – loving, patient, listening, and guiding, willing even to die for the well-being of the child.
    In calling God “Abba,” Jesus raised the bar for our images of God and our images of parenting. A good parent aspires to be godlike in her or his loving and protective care for vulnerable and impressionable children because this is the way the God of the Universe behaves. The Infinite is the intimate, and loves us more than we love ourselves.

    Bruce Epperly, One World: The Lord’s Prayer from a Process Perspective, p. 8

    There has been some controversy on just what the connotation of “Abba” is, but I think that Jesus’ own relationship to the Father gives us plenty of ground to hold that there is intimacy involved.

    The second book is Ultimate Allegiance: The Subversive Nature of the Lord’s Prayer. I like the title of this book, because we so often take passages like Romans 13 in such a way as to put temporal authority above divine authority. The Lord’s prayer subverts human authorities in any way in which they push us away from God. Our duty as Christians is to follow Christ’s example, not to glorify the temporal authorities, no matter how much they demand it.

    We see this sense of adoption present in Paul’s letter to the Romans, where he suggests that having been freed from the spirit of slavery we can now cry out ”Abba Father,” because the Spirit is speaking through us giving witness to our adoption as children of God. Yes, it would appear that Paul emphasizes this relationship by combining the Aramaic abba with the Greek pater, to emphasize this change in status. Therefore, when we address God as our Father – recognizing the gender related problems inherent in that confession – we give thanks that God has adopted us into the family, making us “heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ” (Rom. 8:15-18). Whatever promises are made to Jesus, our elder brother, are made to us, and we can receive them in trust, knowing that God’s love for us is infinite in character and breadth. Therefore, we need not be anxious about anything (Phil. 4:6).

    Robert D. Cornwall, Ultimate Allegiance, p. 12

    The third source is the forthcoming book Bold to Say, from New Fire Press, an independent imprint produced by Energion Publications the author is Rev. Geoffrey Lentz, a long-time friend.

    Praying to “our” father means that we are a part of a family.  This concept is a helpful corrective to a modern world that focuses so heavily on the individual and his or her rights.  The rabid individualism of the enlightenment often finds its way into church, but there is no place for it in God’s family. When we cannot pray, our sisters and brothers pray for us. When we do not have the words, those gifted with words use them on our behalf. When we lack faith, our friends lend us theirs, much like the paralyzed man’s friends did when they lowered him through the ceiling to Jesus. It was because of their faith that Jesus healed him (Luke 5:20). Our community—not only the church here on earth but all the company of heaven, the community of saints—carries us when we cannot manage on our own. When we pray, the saints are praying with us; the great cloud of witnesses cheer us on as we run our race (Hebrews 12).  To pray as a Christian means to never pray alone. And the most exciting thing about this blessed community called church is that the primary member is Jesus, our older brother. To say, “Our Father,” is to be a part of Jesus’ family, to call his father ours, and know that when we pray, he prays with us and for us (Hebrews 7:25, Romans 8:34, 1 John 2:1).

    Geoffrey Lentz, Bold to Say, forthcoming

    And finally, again emphasizing intimacy and community, we have Dr. David Moffett-Moore, in The Jesus Manifesto:

    “Our Father.” “Father.” All religions understand a transcendent God, a God who is the Holy Other, above and beyond. The mystics of all religions experience a God who is immanent, a God with whom we may be intimate, though most would hesitate to be too familiar with the holy. The Hebrew Scriptures do speak of God as the Father of Israel. But this is not what Jesus describes; he would not call God “father” as I call my dad “father” or as my children might refer to me. Jesus spoke of “Abba,” like an infant’s babbling sound for this big, strong, awesome, gentle, loving presence. “Dada” or “Papa.”
    It is one month old Declan or four month old Evan or 2 ½ year old Ryker. Even Alex at 6 has outgrown the magical mystical intimate wonder of the unconditional trust and abiding confidence of this relationship. Our God is our Abba, our Amma, our strong, gentle, abiding Presence.

    David Moffett-Moore, The Jesus Manifesto, p. 36

    One of the problems people have with this prayer is that our concepts of “Father” may significantly impact the way we read the verse. How did our fathers treat us? Did we have a relationship that could be called “intimate”? Were our fathers trustworthy?

    As with many short, succinct statements in scripture, this one draws a great deal of other material in. We cannot really understand God properly as father, without some idea of how God has acted. How does God function as father?

    I believe this is one of the most important reasons that the Bible is largely presented as story or in the context of story. We don’t have a generic theological treatise telling us in bullet points what God’s character is like. Rather, we have a story of God interacting with humans with all the ambiguities that introduces. This is a tremendous blessing because our lives are filled with various kinds of experiences and we learn to understand others by means of experience–by living a story with them, if you please.

    I recall a friend who had several children telling me how it was truly impossible to treat all children equally. Different levels of consequences and different boundaries are necessary simply because children are different. I think that’s an important point about fatherhood and childraising. Fathers recognize the different experiences of their children. God, in presenting scripture, recognized those different experiences and thus presented the rules and theology in the form of stories or embedded in the context of stories.

    This is a crucial element of recognizing God as Father. God sees you as a unique child. God values you as a unique person. This connection, as multiple authors I quoted point out, is emphasized by the word “our” in the prayer. We pray together with Jesus. We, like him, are God’s children. We are siblings, and he’s not ashamed to admit it (Hebrews 2:11).

    At the same time, we recognize in addressing our heavenly parent that we are also siblings of all humanity. We do not stand on higher ground, addressing the poor masses who don’t have our wonderful father in their inferiority. Rather, in praying this prayer, we are taking our example from the one who was indeed not ashamed to call us brethren. And face it, if Jesus can call us brethren/siblings, we can surely do so to others.

    One of the greatest misunderstandings of being Christians is the idea that it makes us better than or more important than other people. In the light of eternity, in the light of eternal wisdom and eternal righteousness, all of our good character isn’t even a dot on the paper. In recognizing our heavenly parent, we give up the right to look down on others.

    We’ll look at some characteristics in further posts this week, but we’re going to end up looking at a range of verses about fatherhood that go from creation to new creation.

    In the meantime, how can you better imitate your heavenly parent?

  • Psalm 78:5-7 – Generations

    Psalm 78:5-7 – Generations

    5 He established a decree in Jacob,
    and appointed a law in Israel,
    which he commanded our ancestors
    to teach their children;
    6 that the next generation might know them,
    the children yet unborn,
    and rise up and tell them to their children,
    7 so that they should set their hope in God,
    and not forget the works of God,
    but keep his commandments.

    Psalm 78:5-7 (NRSV)

    Jody has given me verses this week that relate to fatherhood. I’m not sure I’m up to the task of presenting a picture of good fatherhood, but I’m going to try.

    I’m not starting with one of the verses she provided, however. I won’t tell you what the final “verse,” better described as a task is, but I’m going to schedule that one to publish on Sunday morning. Today I want to introduce this series with a thought from my Sunday School class yesterday.

    We’re looking at what I call landmarks for Bible study, and the landmark today is the call of Abraham. The call of Abraham provides some interesting thoughts. In working with these landmarks, I point back to the one before, in this case the flood, and forward to the next, the exodus from Egypt. This provides us with parallels, similarities and differences, that help us understand the overall story.

    We sometimes take Bible stories in isolation. This come naturally, because we have an hour for Sunday School (or less), and each story can take up that much time and more. But there are patterns in the broader layout of scripture. In fact, it’s good to look at Bible books in the context in the canon, because the Bible as a collection is what we hold as the standard.

    Now here’s the pattern we observed. We have a perfect creation, and then the fall. Genesis 5 presents 10 generations, and then Genesis 6 tells us that everyone’s thoughts were only evil continually. Noah was found righteous, and chosen for salvation on the ark.

    Following this story we have 10 generations again in Genesis 11, and then in Genesis 12 we have Abram called. God doesn’t make any claims about how righteous Abram is. He just calls him, and Abram goes. But Joshua, in his farewell speech (Joshua 24:2) tells the Israelites that their ancestors, including Abram (or Abraham–Joshua uses the new name God gave him) “worshiped other gods.”

    What does this show us?

    First, please don’t spend time on debating the chronology. Let the story speak. Ten generations lead to a point where knowledge of the true God has almost disappeared.

    It’s worthwhile to consider the difference in God’s response in these two cases, Genesis 6 and Genesis 12. But what interests me here is the way the two genealogies emphasize the loss of the knowledge. This should have been transferred through the patriarchal line, father to son. This was the plan to maintain knowledge of God.

    It didn’t work.

    We observe this throughout the Bible story. The High Priest Eli’s sons were not like him, but were evil, and their father failed to change this (1 Samuel 2). Following this, even though Samuel himself had received a word from God (1 Samuel 3) regarding the situation, Samuel’s own sons did not follow in their father’s steps, but “took bribes and perverted justice” (1 Samuel 8:3).

    The pattern continues in the Kings of Judah. Israel has a fairly steady decline morally. Judah, on the other hand has good kings followed by bad kings. Manasseh, possibly the worst king of Judah, was the son of Hezekiah, possibly the best (2 Kings 21).

    Why doesn’t this work?

    We’re often told that all this was the result of a failure to discipline these children, to make them behave properly. If they had just trained them to strict enough standards, surely they wouldn’t have turned away later. If the patriarchs had just spent enough time making their heirs memorize the full history of their family line, they would surely not have failed.

    History is filled with “disciplined” children turning away from the ways their parents intended to teach them. Passing along ethics and good behavior can be a very difficult task. Indoctrination can fail very quickly when the child is presented with other ways of thinking. Many parents think that secular colleges rip away the faith they have so carefully inculcated in their children.

    In most cases, indoctrination will fall to the opportunity to think freely. More importantly, indoctrination won’t provide a framework for that thinking.

    My parents, when they were in their seventies, came to me and apologized. What for? They said that they had failed to present God’s grace to me in word and action. They regretted this aspect. They did not regret missed opportunities to indoctrinate me more. They regretted to presenting God’s grace to me.

    At the same time, I can testify that they got a number of things right. Most importantly, they lived and publicly testified to their faith.

    Now when I say “lived and publicly testified” I don’t mean that they read me Bible stories and expressed their belief in these stories, though the did that. What I mean is that they not only said they believed in prayer, but they prayed regularly. When I couldn’t find them after lunch, I knew they would be in their room, praying together, as they did three times per day.

    They told their own stories, often interesting stories of their lives, but they testified in these stories to God’s action. I knew that faith was important in their lives because that was how they lived.

    Now please don’t create a checklist of things you need to do to show by your life that your faith is important. That’s where God’s grace comes in. (Well, also before that and after that!) Look to your own experience with God, not to a set of checklist items that will convince others. If God is guiding you, it will be obvious, even in your imperfections.

    And if God is guiding you, if God is important to you, if you’re looking to God’s grace for yourself, it will be obvious to those who observe. Let others observe in you the continued story of God’s grace in action. Most importantly let the next generation observe it.

    And let this not just be about physical generations. Think spiritual generations. We need to be passing on our life’s experience to those younger in the faith or needing spiritual guidance. Too often experienced believers gather with others of similar history and inclination and don’t spend time with the less experienced.

    “Tell your children,” is the call.

    Who will you tell?

    (Featured image generated by Jetpack AI.)

  • Link: On John Wesley and Penal Substitution

    Link: On John Wesley and Penal Substitution

    I found the article Penal Substitution in John Wesley’s Atonement Theology quite helpful. It’s one valuable note that is often not accounted for enough in scattered Wesley quotations is the development of his own experience.

    I value penal substitution, though not nearly enough for many of my Reformed friends, in that I believe it is one of many metaphors used for the atonement. The atonement is a huge topic and we should expect to encounter mystery. Unlike more progressive theologians, who tend to discount penal substitution, I think it has a story to tell. So, however, to other theories.

    Here are a couple of earlier blog posts I’ve written on the subject, not of Wesley’s view, but of penal substitution:

    We are not saved by our theological beliefs any more than we are saved by any other type of works. But good beliefs do make it easier to make that surrender to God.

  • 1 Peter 2:1-2 – Pure Milk

    1 Peter 2:1-2 – Pure Milk

    1 So putting aside all evil and every kind of deceit and hypocrisy and jealousy and all slander, 2 like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, so that you might grow into salvation.

    1 Peter 2:1-2 (my translation)

    This verse is sometimes contrasted with Hebrews 5:13 where the recipients of the letter are chided for not being mature, for needing milk rather than solid food. The two verses are talking about rather different things, however, and thus one should take each metaphor on its own terms, even though “milk” is involved in both.

    After seeing each separately, however, I think there are some lessons to be learned from bringing the two points together. So I’m going to look at that.

    First, the term translated “spiritual” is not usually translated that way, though in this particular verse a wide variety of translations render it as such. I wanted to find a different word, but after looking at it for a while, I couldn’t find a good alternative, and thus bowed to the majority. Perhaps translation committees have made similar searches.

    The word translated here as “spiritual” is also used in Romans 12:1, where it is rendered in a variety of other ways, generally centered around the idea of “acceptable” or “appropriate.” I would like to combine the ideas of “thoughtful,” “logically appropriate,” and “spiritual” into one word in order to translate it well for this context, but I don’t know any word that does that.

    The point of the verse, however, is clear if you look carefully at the context. The meaning of words is determined by the context. This should be a warning against the process of looking in a Greek lexicon or in Strong’s or another concordance keyed to Greek words, and then trying to force one of the definitions into the verse you’re reading.

    In this case, this “spiritual” milk is longed for and taken as nourishment when we put aside all the evil and deceit.

    This reminds me of a military aphorism: In war, most things are simple, but never easy.

    In our spiritual life, the answer can be rather simple, but it never easy.

    Let’s read that into this verse. If we could put away evil, deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander, we’d be able to get to that appropriate, acceptable, logical, and spiritual milk. And not only all those things, but pure!

    Now go ahead. Get rid of all of those things from your life.

    Unless you keep deceit–self-deceit–you’ll realize that may be simple, but definitely not easy. Or even possible.

    Yes, if we could just stop deceiving ourselves, we’d be able to get to that pure, nourishing milk. It’s a simple, and hard, as that.

    But Peter isn’t leaving us there. How are we going to get there? Peter, pretty good at messing things up himself, isn’t leaving you there. “If you have tasted that Christ is good” (v3), and if you’ve done that, Christ is going to the the cornerstone.

    There it is. The one and only way to get to this is through Christ. And this is why we have to go back to the basic and simple. One of my authors wrote that there was one way, and only one way to tell if a doctrine is a Christian doctrine, and that was whether it was centered in Christ.

    And that’s where we are right now. People often, with some validity, relate this to the study of scripture. When I identify errors in biblical interpretation, particularly my own, they usually come down to my desire for the text to say something other than what it does. Scripture is not that easy to understand, and the more we look at the big picture, the more difficult it gets. How do all these things fit together?

    It’s so easy to take my agenda, my desires, and put the pieces of the puzzle together in such a way that it pleases me. The deceit involves is most often self-deceit. Self-deceit will corrupt everything you try to understand.

    And that’s where we have to go back to the foundation, in Peter’s words, the cornerstone. Living cornerstone. The question is whether the interpretation you’re creating fits with that living cornerstone.

    Now a short note: I’m speaking hear ultimately about application. A historical understanding of a passage as it would have been heard by those who heard it first is important, and is generally achieved by good historical methodology. But how that applies to my life and the life of the church today requires greater discernment, and this passage provides the basis for this.

    Now let’s relate this to Hebrews 5:13, and the need for solid food. I think it’s a good idea to put the two things together. Getting the pure milk of the word, which results from keeping our eyes on The Living Cornerstone, is a critical foundation. It is also a foundation you can’t cover up as you go on to higher things. If you forget the basics, you’re not going anywhere good.

    At the same time, we are challenged to grow, to get to the solid food, to build up. One of my concerns with Christian education is that we tend to cycle and recycle the same material over and over again. We don’t behave as though we expect anyone to grow and to go on to more advanced material. We’re stuck on the basics.

    Often, we’re stuck on the basics because we aren’t getting the basics. Putting our eyes on Christ is basic, and if we aren’t getting that, more advanced things will tend to get scattered across the landscape. We get into vain arguments when we forget the basics.

    So rather than being contradictory to Hebrews 5:13, the concepts of 1 Peter 2:1-2 are foundational to it. They provide the only path there is to more solid food that doesn’t involve falling back into self-deceit.

    As you read, or meditate, or talk with your Lord today, keep this question in mind: Am I building on the Cornerstone? Is this a fit living stone to put into my structure?

    Let Christ be the center of every thought and act.

  • Romans 12:12 & 15:13 – Hope

    Romans 12:12 & 15:13 – Hope

    Rejoice in hope, stand your ground in the face of trouble, be devoted to prayer (Romans 12:12).
    May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you might have abundant hope through the power of the Holy Spirit (Romans 15:13).

    Jody listed these two verses as a starting point for discussing hope. I’m tempted to wander for some time in the immediate context of these verses, but these posts are not supposed to be complete homilies.

    But my mind does wander a bit through various passages, and these reminded me of the end of 1 Corinthians 13, where we have the trio “faith, hope, and love” with the greatest being love. This greatest is not directly mentioned in either of the verses cited above, but you won’t have to look far in the context to find it.

    Now let me tell you that hope isn’t my greatest subject. I’m a realist. I like to know how things really are. I move forward by putting one foot ahead of another, and generally looking most closely at that next step. I’m good with what Jesus had to say, “Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof!” (Matthew 6:34b). (Note that if you look at the context there, Jesus isn’t talking about hope or lack of hope, but rather about worrying, which he declares useless.)

    I, on the other hand, am very much convinced that every day has its full quota of annoyance. I’m much more likely to preach about duty than about hope. Why get up in the morning? Is it because things are going to be great and I’m going to enjoy them? No, it’s because that’s what I do. That’s what I should do.

    There’s a call here to realists, well, at least my version of realist. And that is to live in the light of hope. This hope comes in two different parts, at least.

    The first is simply the hope of eternity. This life, no matter what it brings, is temporary, and my life is eternal in Christ. That is great news. It is a hope that draws me forward from within the fog of my natural pessimism.

    But that hope seems very far away most of the time. There are mountaintop experiences when I can feel the grass of heaven’s feels under my feet and hands, and I can sense that glory, limited by my feeble vision. Those moments are good. But they are moments only.

    The other kind of hope is that God is with you now. You sense that in Romans 15:13, which speaks of a hope that brings joy as we believe. That this hope is present and not just future is emphasized in Romans 12:12, with three commands together. “Rejoice in hope, stand your ground in trouble, and be devoted to prayer.” Those are all present activities, not things we await in the kingdom.

    And the fact that we are to stand firm in trouble or tribulation suggests that rejoicing in hope is not limited to those times when we are on the mountaintop or otherwise feeling good. Rejoicing in hope is a daily activity that goes right along with the annoyances of daily life. We rejoice, we struggle, we pray, we stand firm. Hope is part of all of these things.

    Paul, we should remember, was no stranger to trouble. He was afflicted on a pretty regular basis. And yet he said to rejoice in hope. Now and in the future.

    Put some prayer and hope into the troubles of your day today!

    (Featured image generated by Jetpack AI.)

  • Matthew 18:1-5 – As Children

    Matthew 18:1-5 – As Children

    1 At that time the disciples approached Jesus and asked, “So who will be greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” 2 He called a child to him and put him in the middle of the group, 3 and said, “I tell you truly that if you don’t turn and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 So whoever humbles himself as this child, that is the one who is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever receives such a child in my name receives me.

    Matthew 18:1-5 (my translation)

    My wife set an interesting task for me in suggesting this text. The reason? It challenges just about everything about the way we tend to think, the way we do church, and the way we do community. In general, we’d prefer not to be challenged in this way.

    A standard question, a good question, is just what aspects of being a child Jesus is pointing to here. Are we to be ignorant, inexperienced, demanding, perhaps a bit spoiled? Are we not to take responsibility for ourselves? I’ve heard every negative, or supposedly negative characteristic of children brought into the conversation.

    But there is a point of context that sets the boundaries. The disciples were looking at who was greatest. They wanted a hierarchy. They assumed there would be a hierarchy. They wanted the best spots in that hierarchy. They would be able to protect themselves by having the places of leadership. They could keep other people in line by use of their positions in the hierarchy.

    At this time the disciples expected Jesus to take over as king, so these positions would be those of political power. They would rule other people, always in Jesus’ name, of course, but taking care of themselves in the process. Everything would be on their side. And each of them wanted to be the one of them that was making the calls. That’s the place of control, the place you can protect yourself.

    And Jesus says to them to become like little children. It’s not what that little child’s behavior that Jesus wants them to imitate, though there are certainly good characteristics of a child-like approach to life. What Jesus is saying is to them is this: “You’re going to have to give up the power and the control to become part of the kingdom of heaven.”

    It’s not even that Jesus is standing at the gate of the kingdom blocking people from entering because they lack a list of characteristics of a child. The problem is that as long as you want the power, as long as you want the control, you really can’t fit into the kingdom of heaven.

    The kingdom of heaven is ruled by One who has absolute control and uses that on behalf of everyone. The glory of God is not that God is powerful. That is really glorious. We worship the power and the glory and we want that for ourselves. We admire it.

    But the One with all the power and the glory went to the cross, enduring all the agony and shame because for the One who is really glorious, the glory is all there for the good of everyone and everything. And if you want to be part of the kingdom you’re going to be losing all that control as well, giving it up for everyone around you.

    You will have to be powerless for all those who are powerless.

    Why? Because the only one who ever had it put that power to work for the benefit of the powerless.

    If you or I enter the kingdom we’ll realize that we actually were “as little children,” as those children would have been in the world of the first century, without their own choice or power. We’re going to receive others who are powerless as Jesus would have.

    And what’s more, we’re going to realize that we are powerless even to do all this, because all power comes from God in the first place. We can only become those little children, and we can only receive those little children through God’s grace working in us.

    God’s strength is manifested in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9).

    So be weak today. Be dependent. Be helpless.

    Let God.

  • 1 Peter 1:24-25 – Endures

    1 Peter 1:24-25 – Endures

    So

    All flesh is like grass
    and all its glory like a flower in the field.
    The grass has withered and the flower has fallen,
    But the Word of our God lasts forever.

    Isaiah 40:6, 8


    This is the word which was proclaimed to you.

    1 Peter 1:24-25

    I’ve decided to change my way of selected texts for these meditations, but to continue writing meditations. First, I’m going to do these only Monday through Friday, with the option of skipping holidays. Second, Jody is going to send me passages she’d like me to comment on, and I’m going to meditate on those. Today’s passage is the second she’s sent me, after John 16:30-33 yesterday.

    I formatted the text today to show just how much of this passage is actually a quotation taken from Isaiah 40:6 & 8. There it serves as part of the powerful introduction to what is sometimes called 2nd Isaiah. Up to this time we’ve been largely thinking about Judah around the time of Hezekiah, with some passages earlier and some later. In Isaiah 40 we are suddenly transported to the time of the exile and given the proclamation that Judah will return and be restored. This is God’s plan.

    But one of the clearest messages of 2nd Isaiah is that this restoration is a work of God, and not an accomplishment of the people. People fail; God’s word endures and prevails. At a time when many of the people felt that God’s word had already failed, the message is proclaimed that God’s word is still powerful and will prevail.

    We often quote this passage about the Bible. Everything else is temporary, but the Bible will last. This is one of those things that makes us feel very holy, because we can point to a book and call it the word of God. Then we hold something eternal in our hands. You may be getting tense as I speak disparagingly of such a view.

    My intent here is not to minimize the value of the Bible, but rather to maximize the word of God. God’s word is not just the Bible. God’s word is what created everything. God’s word is what saves. God’s word is what acts from creation to new creation and even further, from eternity to eternity.

    At the time these words were written, the New Testament had not taken form. Many of the books, probably most, had been written, but they had not been collected, and were not regarded as part of scripture as we would see it today.

    This passage points to something else that is God’s word–the gospel message proclaimed to the recipients of this letter by which they had been converted. That message was that of a crucified and risen savior, and God’s Spirit empowering and giving life to the church.

    You see, I don’t believe that we elevate the word of God when we try to limit it to written scripture. What we generally intend is to provide a standard against which people can judge ideas, something solid, something widely accepted, something we can know is God speaking. Its good to have the written word in the role of a core standard.

    But all too often what we’re really doing is making sure that we have control of what the Word of God is doing. We want God’s word to be in our hands and under our control. People like me, who have studied the biblical languages can lord it over others by claiming to have a more accurate knowledge of God’s will due to our intellectual knowledge.

    But God’s word is superior to church laws, doctrinal statements, administrative manuals, sermons, and claims to superior knowledge. God’s word is actually eternal, and when people abuse God’s word, when they turn the form into an idol, and make their interpretations into idols, God’s word will still stand.

    It’s important that the events in view in the quoted passage come from the time of exile. You see, religious people had created a doctrine that gave them control over what God could do. They thought that Jerusalem and the temple could not be destroyed. If they were living near the temple, they would be safe.

    The idol of a human interpretation of the text took over from the word of God, in this case presented by Jeremiah. Jeremiah challenged this view in Jeremiah 7, particularly verse 4, but the entire chapter makes the point.

    Here in 1 Peter, we are being told that the gospel proclaimed was also God’s word, and that the gospel proclaimed was and is eternal.

    We like organizations, structures, and documents that settle what the Bible means. Many churches have a history of starting out with a simple statement that they believe the Bible, and then they add doctrinal statements. Why? Because people see different things in the Bible, so they have to specify just how you’re supposed to understand your Bible.

    Soon, verses are being judged against doctrinal statements and interpretations channeled into precise channels previously approved by the theologians.

    But just like the grass and flowers in the field perish, so will everything that is not, in fact, eternal.

    I want to encourage you to study the Bible, because there you will find God’s word. But spend your time primarily in going directly to scripture and not in letting others define you into a corner. There were good “scriptural” reasons not to accept Jesus as God’s son. Yet God’s word proclaimed him so. Read Hebrews 7 to see just how this works. In that chapter we see that Jesus, our High Priest, couldn’t be a priest according to the scripture of the time. Yet, Jesus became our High Priest, by which the author lets us know that God’s word stands forever, even if we have to change our understanding, our cherished understanding , in order to see what’s really going on.

    What in God’s word has become withered and fallen because you’re clinging to the idolatry of your own opinions?

    Let God move you past that dead ground and onto new, eternal ground.

  • John 16:29-33 – We Got This!

    John 16:29-33 – We Got This!

    29 His disciples said, “Now you’re speaking openly, and no longer using difficult sayings. 30 Now we know that you know everything, and there’s no need for anyone to question you. For this reason we believe that you came from God.” 31 Jesus answered, “So you believe now? 32 Take note that a time is coming, indeed has come, when you will be scattered each to his own place and I will be left alone. But I won’t be alone, because my Father is with me. 33 I have told you these things so you will have peace in me. In this world you will have hardships, but take heart! I have overcome the world.

    John 16:29-33 (my translation)

    In the warm up to this passage Jesus tells his disciples that a time is coming when he will no longer speak in “dark/obscure sayings,” but will speak clearly. Jesus states this as a future state, but the disciples quickly assume that they’ve made it, that everything is now clear. One of the characteristics that Jesus points forward to is this: They will be able to approach the Father on their own. Jesus doesn’t have to pray for them. They can pray, and the Father will listen.

    We often read the Bible as those looking down at the characters and judging them. We often speak negatively about the disciples. They are not ideal followers. We discuss why Jesus would have chosen such inauspicious looking people to take his message to the world.

    But if we look honestly around the room when we discuss such things, or look in the mirror, we should ask why Jesus would choose such inauspicious looking and sounding people as we are to take his message now. Because in every room where followers of Jesus are having fellowship, studying, or learning, there is a group of people whom God has chosen to carry the Divine message to the world. All the weaknesses of those original disciples and more are manifest.

    Yet we sometimes think, and even say, “We’ve got it.” We make the claim to such complete understanding that we don’t need to learn from anyone else. God is lucky to have such astute and able ambassadors to take the message out to the world.

    All of which collapses, all too commonly, on the first contact. We discover, suddenly, that we very definitely have not got it!

    Jesus knows this. Jesus is totally unsurprised. I imagine him looking at those disciples much as he looks at us. They think they’re ready, but I know they’re not. They’re in the world and they’re going to have tribulations, trials, troubles, hardships. They’re going to want to quit. They’re going to quit.

    But Jesus knows the answer to this as well. He’s not surprised that they think they understand, but he knows that there is something coming that will show that they don’t understand at all.

    Here’s a key: When you think you’ve totally got it, you don’t.

    The very fact that you think you have everything under control is a danger sign. I don’t care how good you are at what you do, and I am certain many of my readers are much better at navigating life in this world than I am, you will have a moment, or many moments, when you know you didn’t quite have it all.

    The disciples are prepared to go with Jesus the divine, Jesus the all-knowing, Jesus the conqueror, Jesus the one who will take care of everything. They are not prepared to go with Jesus the arrested, Jesus the accused, Jesus the tortured, Jesus the crucified. They really haven’t gotten the idea that any such things can happen.

    They’re seeing things “in the world,” from a worldly perspective. The solution to their problems come in worldly form. Jesus knows that with that vision, that limited, world-bound vision, they will not be able to face what’s coming. There will be tribulation and they will be scattered.

    “You will be scattered,” Jesus tells them, “and I will be alone.”

    Terror! Unimaginable things coming and Jesus will be alone!

    But no, that’s not how it is. Jesus has an answer. He will not be alone. Why? Because the Father will be with him. The Father he has just said loves these very disciples and will hear their prayers. The Father who is the ruler of the universe and knows everything.

    Jesus turns the “aloneness” back on the disciples. They will scatter and leave him alone. But where do they go? “Each to his own place.” The disciples will scatter and abandon Jesus, leaving him alone. But Jesus will not be alone, because the Father is with him. But the scattered disciples will each be alone.

    Isn’t it odd that Jesus tells the disciples that they will fail, and then tells them he said that so that they can have peace? How does prediction of failure point the way to peace?

    And here’s the core of the passage. “I have told you these things so that you will have peace in me.” Jesus is pointing the way to peace. It comes from two concepts: 1) In the world you have trouble, 2) In me you have peace.

    Our problem as Christians is that we live and think and solve (or not) problems in the world. Now there’s a sense, a very important sense in which we are in the world. A bit later (John 17:14-16), Jesus prays not that God would take his disciples out of the world, but that God would keep them from the evil one. This is where we get the saying that we are to be “in the world but not of the world.”

    That “in Christ” (“in me” in our passage, spoken by Jesus), is the key to the peace. Christ has overcome the world, and our task is to be “in Christ.” More accurately, our task is to put our faith in Christ and Christ will see to keeping us in him.

    This applies to all aspects of life. Whether I’m worrying about arranging an intractable schedule, paying bills, trying to work through issues of health, my peace is in Christ. That means knowing that I serve and am held by the one who has conquered the world.

    But it also applies to news of the world. I am here living that life in Christ. What is it that is controlling my thinking and my actions? Is it fear? Is it a resort to the weapons and methods of the world? I am reminded that while I am still in the world, my most important location and orientation is in Christ. That is where peace comes from. That is the only peace.

    I think one of the most important things we can learn from this passage is that it was spoken by Jesus with the knowledge that the disciples were going to think they got it, and that they were very definitely wrong. They were going to fail. Things were going to get very dark for them.

    The message of peace is not for the powerful, the perfect, those who are going to get everything right. It’s for the people who will realize that failure has come to them, but that God’s got it. They are in Christ. They can have peace with that realization.

    It may take some time as it did with the disciples. They did scatter. They did not have peace. Jesus died and was buried. Things were dark. They were alone.

    But then came that moment. He is risen! We are not alone. He is alive. We have peace in the only way we can.

    In Christ!

  • Psalm 23:6 – Pursued

    Psalm 23:6 – Pursued

    Surely goodness and lovingkindness will pursue me all the days of my life,
    and I will love in the LORD’s house forever.

    Well, this is the last verse of Psalm 23. It’s a bit shorter than Psalm 119!

    So which is better? A lot more people quote Psalm 23, and with good reason, but there is value both in something comprehensive and something compact and evocative. That’s why we have different kinds of literature in the Bible. It’s also why we all love different kinds of literature ourselves.

    So what is the impact of the ending of this Psalm? For me, it comes in the second half of the verse. I’ll live in God’s house forever. But I chose the first half to provide my title. I am pursued by God’s goodness and lovingkindness. It reminds me of Psalm 119:176. I may have gone astray like a lost sheep, but I cry out for God to seek me. When I do, I discover that God has been pursuing me all the time.

    Many times, the result of prayer is not a change in circumstances, but rather a change in perspective.

    After crying out to God in my trouble, I hear a voice that says, “Look the other way.” When I do, there God is. God has been there all the time. I can’t get away from God’s mercy and love.

    But the second half of the verse gives me another perspective. I’m going to live in God’s house forever. There are a number of view of this, each of which can help us understand God’s love for us.

    I’m going to look at three.

    First, we can think of this as the privilege of being in God’s presence in a place and time of worship. There is pleasure and comfort in being in God’s presence in such a place at such a time. Often this involves the enjoyment of our relationship to other people as well as our relationship to God. Conceive of a time of peace and joy and then think of that never ending.

    There’s a saying that we can’t live our lives in a spiritual retreat, and that we can’t stay forever on a spiritual high. Psalm 23:6 suggests that this is going to change down the road.

    Second, we can think of this eschatologically, meaning at the end. Yesterday, in writing about the heavenly banquet, I looked at some passages from Revelation. But if you look carefully you’ll see that Revelation is built with sanctuary imagery. In the Israelite temple you had a courtyard, then the holy place, and finally the most holy place, in which the ark of the covenant was kept. It represented God’s presence.

    That presence was separated from the people by that courtyard and earlier room, the holy place. Access was more limited the closer one got to the throne. But in Revelation, starting with chapter 4 and the command to John to “come up here,” we start to see sanctuary imagery all around, and the center of the action is around the throne of God, right in the Most Holy Place.

    Access was limited. Access will be unlimited. We will dwell in God’s house forever.

    But there is a third. If we jump just one verse to the next Psalm, we can learn what it is:

    To the LORD belongs the world and everything in it;
    The inhabited land and everyone living in it.
    For He established it upon the seas,
    Upon the streams he made it firm.

    Psalm 24:1-2, my translation

    You may think you have to wait, but God’s house is here now. You’re living in it. Your house is in God’s house. All your stuff? That’s God’s stuff. You? You’re God’s person.

    Now.

    What we all need is a change of perspective, a new understanding of what belongs to God. I frequently note what I believe is Jesus’ humor when he says, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.” Just what is it that actually belongs to Caesar? There’s some practical advice for life in the saying, but there’s also a pointer to something greater.

    Just as you can turn, look, and find that God is already there seeking you, and was doing so before you called, so you can turn any direction, look, and see God’s house all around you. The change is in you. God was there all the time and will be there forever.

    You live in God’s house, because God owns all the houses and all the stuff.

    Live in God’s house today!