Why didn't Jesus calm the waves first before walking on it?

I was reading Matthew 14 and something struck me when I read this popular passage about Jesus walking on water. 

Matthew 14:24-33 (NLT)

Meanwhile, the disciples were in trouble far away from land, for a strong wind had risen, and they were fighting heavy waves. About three o'clock in the morning Jesus came toward them, walking on the water. When the disciples saw him walking on the water, they were terrified. 

In their fear, they cried out, "It's a ghost!" 

But Jesus spoke to them at once. "Don't be afraid," he said. "Take courage. I am here!" 

Then Peter called to him, "Lord, if it's really you, tell me to come to you, walking on the water." 

"Yes, come," Jesus said. 

So Peter went over the side of the boat and walked on the water toward Jesus. But when he saw the strong wind and the waves, he was terrified and began to sink.

"Save me, Lord!" he shouted. 

Jesus immediately reached out and grabbed him. 

"You have so little faith," Jesus said. "Why did you doubt me?" 

When they climbed back into the boat, the wind stopped. Then the disciples worshiped him. 

"You really are the Son of God!" they exclaimed.

I never thought of it before but it suddenly dawned on me why didn't Jesus still the waves first before walking on water towards to disciples on the tossing boat? It may not be a full storm yet since Jesus and the disciples were having a conversion, albeit a frantic one on the disciples's side. 

An obvious answer will be to say that he wanted to teach the disciples a lesson and show them he is the Son of God. He has already calmed a storm before (Matt 8:23-27), and now on top of that walking on water would show more how the world is really in his hands.

But I thought maybe Jesus also has a fun streak in him. Hey, a storm? Wouldn't walking through it be fun too? 

Wouldn't it be like our version of a roller coaster, whizzing up and down, twirling and curling in loops in the safety of the carriage and laws of physics? 

Later in the evening, I led a short devotion at the beginning of our Grace Notes practice from Jack Coleman's Crescendos and Diminuendos, Meditations for Musicians and Music Lovers. I have chosen the chapter on legato for the devotion. 

Legato is to play music or sing a song in a smooth, sustained, and connected manner without any perceptible interruption between the notes. And if applied to life, we all want a smooth sailing life with minimum problems or issues, basically no storms in our lives. 

But wouldn't you think that would be a very boring life to live, as much as a full length of music in legato would be a boring piece to listen to, and actually quite difficult to play or sing and still make it interesting. 

We need to have some storms in our lives, some ups and downs. Sure, it will be difficult but don't forget, Jesus walks with us in it and we will in the safety of the carriage and the laws of physics. 

pearlie

A true elder brother in the parable of the prodigal son?

The Prodigal God: Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith

by Timothy Keller

We are using this book in our Covenant Group bible study, studying the Prodigal Son parable in Luke 15:11-32. This book by a Timothy Keller is quite good but there is one interpretation of this passage we have not encountered before. 

In my previous studies, I remember moving from a focus on the younger son to the elder son, a focus on the homecoming of the wayward to the selfish and unforgiving elder brother. 

But Keller brings it even further. He posits a view that in this parable, there is an implied lesson on Jesus being the true elder brother, someone who woulf go all out to search and bring back the younger brother back to the father, back to the family. 

While it is not unreasonable to have such a reading of the passage, can we go that way in proper exegesis of the passage?

I want to try to get to the bottom of this. 

pearlie 

We will be complete when he returns

I learnt about the concept of protogospel from this morning's sermon on Genesis 3. And on checking my commentary, Derek Kidner says on 3:15, "There is good New Testament authority for seeing here the protevangelium, the first glimmer of the gospel."

The first glimmer of the gospel... Wow.

With the gospel beginning right from the start, we are clear that God's redemption plan for us is The One Grand Plan of God, which I have posted three years ago in December 2012. (Wow, I did not even realized I had posted that so long ago. The thought I had still feel fresh to me, which means I should continue developing it.)

Although Gen 3:15 happened after the fall, it does not preclude that it is still God's one grand plan to create us in his likeness, who will disobey him and die, who will need the Incarnate Son of God to die and be raised for us to live. And as his kingdom is already upon us now, this Advent is where we are reminded of our waiting for his coming again, to bring completion to his prefect creation of the world, the universe and us, his chosen people, his royal priesthood, his holy nation.

Our story began back when he created us, and we will be completed in Christ when he returns.

pearlie
Source: Derek Kidner, Genesis, An Introduction and Commentary, TOTC, IVP 1967

I am forgiven!

We had our third session of Christianity Explored this morning and what impressed me the most was this video with the analogy of a room where what if all the walls in the room were to be filled with all your life, everything, good and bad.

What if you were to stick on the walls all records of your thoughts, good ones or lewd ones, all your words how gentle or rude, all your deeds how decent or indecent they are. You obviously would keep the room tightly locked and if you could put a spell on it to be locked forever to anyone but you, you certainly would.

The video's message was that we are not inherently good, not at all. We can readily admit we are bad, and that we need help.

When we returned to our discussion group to discuss it, it was through the discussion that I had some sort of an epiphany. I imagined I had all of my life pasted on the walls in the room. They are real. I have thought, said and done those things - some good but mostly terrible.

But the amazing thing is that God then comes into the room and tells me he forgives me through the blood of Jesus! All of them. He has removed them. Sure, I still face the consequences, but they are no longer in my account.

I am forgiven! And I thought that was awesome.

pearlie

Christianity Explored

My church is having its second run of Christianity Explored and I have invited someone to attend it. With his acceptance of the invitation, I'm committed to also attend its 7 sessions, starting today.

I have not attended CE before and I can't say much yet from its first session. I am looking forward to the following weeks ahead.

pearlie

A dangerous fallacy

Our preacher spoke about Watchman Nee in his sermon yesterday and he gave Nee's books high commendation, which I feel is worrying.

I have heard many times from reputable theological speakers and scholars say that Nee's theology is not very sound. And though I have not read anything by Nee, I would take these scholars' word for it.

When I brought this up amongst my friends, one of them commented that even though Nee is not theologically trained, it is good to read something different, something more spiritual and experience based.

I find that a dangerous fallacy.

When we read and learn about God and his truth, his gospel, we must only take God's word for it. Yes, we interpret what he says to understand it better and yes, we interpret it hermeneutically to apply his truth in our lives to live as his children. But we still interpret Scripture with Scripture, not based on our spirituality or experience (what "spirituality" really means warrants another long discussion altogether).

I'm not saying that our spirit and experience are not important. They are but they must rest on the Holy Spirit and the Word of God.

I was reading James M Hamilton's commentary on Revelation for devotion today and what he says here is relevant:

We must know the gospel, know our Bible, and know Christian theology so that we can tell the difference between someone who increases our faith in Jesus by telling us the truth about his greatness and someone who makes us feel good about ourselves by giving us pep talks and “encouragement” to rely on our own resources."

Do what the Bereans did when we listen to sermons and when we read Christian literature: "And the people of Berea were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, and they listened eagerly to Paul’s message. They searched the Scriptures day after day to see if Paul and Silas were teaching the truth." (Acts 17:11, NLT)

That is one thing we do not do enough. We do not spend enough time meditating and studying God's Word. We do not need something different. We need the very Word of God. We need to dwell in it, to mull in it, to wade in it, to swim in it.

It's time we pull up a chair, sit, read and study Scripture.

pearlie
Source: 'Revelation' by James M. Hamilton Jr.; R. Kent Hughes, gen. ed.

Jesus never used the title "friend" for himself

I am in the process of choosing worship songs for this Saturday's church worship service when I was looking at this one by Matt Redman, "Once Again."

Whilst I could use the song, I am not all too comfortable with it, because of these two areas, especially the second one.

For one, I felt the phrase "once again", which is also the title of the song, hence its focus, is superfluous. Why once again? Why is it necessary that once again I am thankful or once again I lay down my life or once again I am full of praise for him? Why once again? I just am...alright, I suppose he meant it to be a never ending rendition of thankfulness and praise to God.

And secondly, I'm not sure if I would use the word "friend" for Jesus. Don't misunderstand me, I do regard the Lord as my friend but I felt that the meaning of the word friend now is more sentimental than it was then in the New Testament times. Therefore, by singing "thank you for the cross, my friend," I feel like I'm not honoring him and his sacrifice for me on the cross.

I remember I was at a bible conference several years ago when D.A. Carson commented that Jesus never referred to himself as our friend. And that is true. Jesus called us his friends but did not refer to himself as our friend. But of course, we can say it is implicit because friendship works both ways. But isn't it interesting he never called himself our friend?

With that I went searching for a journal article on the topic and found one titled, "Jesus as Friend in the Gospel of John," written by Gail R. O'Day. And this is what I learnt, and I quote:

Even though there is a consistency of vocabulary across the centuries used to discuss friendship in antiquity, there is no consistency of emphasis or definition...Each ancient writer, including the New Testament writers, developed the friendship traditions in different ways depending on his or her own community setting. (And what more in comparison to its usage in our time now?)

The Gospel of John is a pivotal text for the discussion of friendship in the New Testament. The vocabulary of friendship, especially the noun philos and the related verb phileöy is found at key moments in the narrative.

The word "friend" in John carried many associations for John's first readers. Modern readers cannot completely recapture those associations, but they can at least recognize that John did not create the theme of friendship out of whole cloth. Awareness of cultural embeddedness helps modern readers see that friendship is not a universal term for all times and cultures. Most contemporary friendship greeting cards, for example, adorned with roses, kittens, and butterflies, do not exhort the card's recipient to "lay down one's life for a friend." Jesus' words in John 15:13 seem unprecedented for a modern friend.

Two friendship motifs from the Greco-Roman world provide a promising framework for regarding Jesus as friend in John: Jesus' love for others that is embodied in his death and Jesus' boldness in speech and action...frank speech was encouraged as a mark of honest instruction, dialogue, and training...not engaging in flattery to further their own ends.

Jesus' friendship is the model of friendship for the disciples, and it makes any sub-sequent acts of friendship by them possible because the disciples themselves are already the recipients of Jesus' acts of friendship.

(Comments in parentheses mine.)

So you see, our modern understanding of friendship may not do justice to the friendship that Jesus was referring to.

As such, I am not too comfortable in singing it simply, "thank you for the cross, my friend"...but then it does describe the first motif above, him laying down his life for us.

pearlie
Source: Gail R. O'Day, "Jesus as friend in the gospel of John", Interpretation (April 1, 2004, p144)

The Noble Shepherd

The sermon this morning was based on John 10:11-18 on Jesus as the Good Shepherd.

11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
12 He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them.
13 He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.
14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me,
15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep.
16 And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd.
17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.
18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father."
John 10:11-18 (ESV)

Now that I read the passage again, I realise I'm asking a very basic question: why did Jesus use the adjective "good" with his role as a shepherd?

The Greek word used here is kalos as opposed to agathos, in that it is a good in relation to being good and not shameful rather than being good and not evil.

A more accurate translation of the kalos would be "noble". Jesus the Noble Shepherd has died a honorable death for the sake of his people.

To understand it, I found this diagram quite useful:


Source: Jerome H. Neyrey, "The 'noble shepherd' in John 10: cultural and rhetorical background", Journal of Biblical Literature (June 1, 2001, p267)

pearlie

Counterfeit Gospels

Counterfeit Gospels: Rediscovering the Good News in a World of False Hope
by Trevin Wax

Pastor Joshua preached on Col 1:1-8 today and made a reference to this book by Trevin Wax.

Wax categorised the counterfeits to these six:
1. Therapeutic
2. Judgmentless
3. Moralist
4. Quietest
5. Activist
6. Churchless

This will be a good read when I finish reading N.T. Wright's How God Became King, Getting to the Heart of the Gospel. I'm especially interested in the Quietist counterfeit.

pearlie

Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed

We were late for church service today, not realizing that being Easter Sunday, it was an hour earlier. We were half an hour "early" and so we just missed half an hour of the service. I'm sad to miss the praise and worship part, but glad we were there nonetheless.

The sermon today was on John 20:19-31 on "Doubt: Good or Bad?"

I remember blogging about Doubting Thomas before, here.

Back then I was crazily into chiasms. I still am but I don't do it much anymore.

John 20:19-31
19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you."
20 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.
21 Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you."
22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld."
24 Now Thomas, one of the Twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came.
25 So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe."

26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you."
27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe."
28 Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"
29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book;
31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

I noted then that the passage can be divided into 2 parts: firstly, when Jesus appeared to the disciples but Thomas was not around (v.19-25) and secondly, Jesus appeared to the disciples again and this time Thomas was with them (v.26-29). I came out with this chiastic structure:

Disciples, in fear inside with doors were locked
    Jesus came and stood with them
          Jesus proclaimed peace, showed his physical being
                Disciples overjoyed!
          Jesus proclaimed peace and breathed on them
    Jesus commanded them to receive the Spirit for mission
Thomas was not there, was told, did not believe

Disciples were inside, with Thomas, doors locked
    Jesus came and stood with them
          Jesus proclaimed peace, showed his physical being to Thomas
                Thomas believed – my Lord, my God!
          Jesus proclaimed Thomas’ belief because he has seen him
    (No command given)
Those who have not seen but believe will be blessed

Right now, I don't think this I structure would carry much water. The second chiasm is broken with Part B' missing. But the first one holds. So what's the difference between the two sections?

I think that's where the focus of the passage is--where it diverted from the structure is where the emphasis of the message is. If you compare the two parts of the passage:

Part 1 v.19-25	Part 2 v.26-29
19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you."	26 Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you."
20 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side.	27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe."
Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.	28 Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"
21 Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you." 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld."
24 Now Thomas, one of the Twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe."
	29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
	30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

I find 20:23 very interesting. Apparently it has to do with the receiving of the Good News of Jesus Christ, of the Holy Spirit in the preceding verse. Colin G. Kruse says, "The non-forgiveness of sins is always related to refusal to believe in Jesus, suggesting that forgiveness of sins comes through belief in him. It is noteworthy that Jesus’ statement ‘If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven’ is intimately connected with the (symbolic) bestowal of the Spirit (22–23), which is in turn related to the disciples’ being sent into the world as his witnesses (21–22; cf. 15:26–27). This supports the view that the way in which the disciples forgive sins and retain sins is by preaching the good news and declaring the effects of believing it (forgiveness) and rejecting it (no forgiveness)."¹

I would the interpret the emphasis of the passage as this:
1. Jesus is risen and he is sending us to preach the Good News
2. So receive the Holy Spirit, and preach the forgiveness of God
3. To those who have yet to believe, believe even though you have not seen
4. Because though you have not seen, the word is given to you that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God and by believing you will have life in him

pearlie
1 Colin G. Kruse, John, Tyndale New Testament Commentary, IVP, 2003

It's Friday...but Sunday's a Coming

pearlie

Jesus walks on water

The sermon this morning was preached based on the popular passage of Jesus walking on water - Matthew 14:22-33.

As pastor preached, I soon had three questions:
1. Why did Jesus walk on water? Why didn't he just wait for the disciples to come back?
2. Why did Peter walk on water? There seem to be no purpose for him to do so.
3. Before he came walking on water, Jesus went up alone to the mountain to pray. I ask a most fundamental question, why did Jesus pray?

Why did Jesus walk on water?
The disciples were caught in a storm. Interestingly, Jesus had insisted that they get into the boat knowing that there will be a storm. He may have done it to teach them faith. Jesus then came walking on water in the midst of the storm - he was in the storm, in full control of it. The lesson is this - in our lives as Christians, we will find ourselves in life-storms, big and small. Be rest assured that Jesus is in them, and he is in control. Trust in him. You may not see him in the tumultuous times of your life, (the disciples thought they saw a ghost!) but he is there.

Why did Peter walk on water?
Really, why? There is no reason to. I checked the commentary I have and the author said, "If we take the narrative as historical, it is difficult to know what lay behind Peter’s request. It may be that Peter wanted to participate with Jesus in this miracle as he had in the preceding one [feeding of the five thousand]. Perhaps it was no more than impulsiveness or the desire to do something excitingly dangerous—to have a once-in-a-lifetime experience—which appealed to him. The impossible would be possible through the power of Jesus. Thus Peter’s request is based upon faith in Jesus and not upon an uncertainty about whether the apparition really was Jesus (this reality is assumed in the protasis of the condition)."¹ In application, I see that we should actually walk the storms of life in faith with Jesus because he is right there with us!

Why did Jesus pray?
This is a very fundamental question but it came to me and I decided to put aside my pat answers and really think about why Jesus made it a point to pray. He is fully God himself and he knows what will happen. That leaves us with only one reason why he prayed - his communion with the Father. The Father, the Son and the Spirit are so close in the Trinitarian relationship that when Jesus became human and was apart, he often recluse himself to spend time in the relationship. And this is exactly what we his children are called to do - to abide in Jesus and to remain in him. This is why we pray, not for the asking, but the communion with God.

pearlie
1 Donald A. Hagner, Matthew, Word Biblical Commentary

Explaining Sin in a Chinese Context

We discussed about our conversion experience in CG today, but I didn't say much because (1) I wasn't feeling well and quite soon into the study, I felt feverish and (2) being a "third generation" Christian, my conversion story is rather boring, but I must admit I'm indeed very, very blessed.

Being born in a Christian family, I was brought up in the faith and I became very active in church, which contributed to my growth in Christ. I was uncomfortable in one phase of my life for not having a specific date of conversion like most of my friends. But I remember the very moment when I finally became convinced and settled in my heart and mind that my conversation is a journey, and that I am saved by the grace of God.

My faith journey started right when I was exposed to the faith by my parents to Sunday School to Youth Fellowship to the undertaking of my Masters Degree in Christian Studies right up to that moment of realisation where I finally felt confirmed I belong to Christ.

Interestingly, as much as Wesley's moment of warmth in the heart was in 1738 when he "experienced confirmation of his salvation by the grace of God" in a meeting room in Aldersgate Street, London, mine was when I was thinking and walking to Pustaka Sufes Book, a Christian bookshop! However, isn't it sad that I don't remember when that happened.

Anyway, during CG, some were sharing moments before their conversion where they were in conflict and most have said it was difficult for them to take it when they were told they were sinners.

In my understanding, it all has to do with the difference in the Western and Eastern culture. The mindset and worldview is so different that methods of evangelism that work well in the Western world do not work as well in the Eastern.

I have this article entitled "Explaining Sin in a Chinese Context" written by Mark Strand in the journal Missiology: An International Review (Oct 2000). He wrote it because he read "an intriguing paper by a Chinese Singaporean who argued that the key to Chinese converts remaining faithful to Christianity over the long haul was that at conversion they understood clearly the doctrine of sin". And inspired by the author, he "arrived at a method of how to teach the doctrine of sin to Chinese people."

He began by stating the fact that our understanding is very much dependant on our language. He gave a summary of the history of the Chinese translation of the Bible followed by why zui is not a very good translation of sin for the Chinese based on these three points:

1. With the group mentality of the Chinese people, wrong is determined primarily by consequent negative social implications rather than by failure to live up to some fixed standard.

2. Culturally, Chinese people believe in the original goodness of humankind.

3. To Chinese readers, zui is equivalent to breaking the laws of society or committing a crime and being a criminal.

On point #2 and #3, it's common to hear us say, "I did not kill anyone, nor have I burned [your house], I have not sinned."

His method involves teaching the biblical concept of sin accurately in two ways:

1. Talk to the Chinese about sin as missing the mark (Rom 3:23), as in the Greek word hamartia used in the New Testament, translated as sin.

2. Use the traditional Chinese concept of filial piety, where they are obligated to honour their fathers and how much more they are obligated to honour their heavenly Father, who has given them life and breath, and all things (Acts 17:25).

If you are interested to read the article, leave me a comment and I will send it to you. I am not able to post it here publicly but within the rights given, I'm allowed to send it to you for individual use.

pearlie

The Love Test

Pastor Marvin's sermon today is a continuation from last week, a second and closing part to the topic of "Test Every Spirit", based on 1 John 4:1-8. (The mp3 sermon for Part 1 is here. I will append this section with today's sermon when the link is up.)

He refers to Jonathan Edwards's four ways to test the spirits taken from these verses in the 1 John epistle. They are:
1. The identity test
2. The association test
3. The biblical test
4. The love test

Check to link provided above for Test #1. For the other three tests, as promised, I will post the link when it's up.

What I like to bring up right now is my thoughts today on Test #4, the love test.

"Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love."
1 John 4:7-8 (ESV)

What Pastor Marvin said this morning reverberates with me because I have been evaluating my relationship with some people.

There are many kinds of love in the world. But the most popular one of them all is the love of self. If you look around, you are bound to see Narcissus everywhere. Think about it, no matter where you go and whomever you speak to, most people will be for themselves, and only themselves. Seldom will they ever be for you.

Don't get me wrong, I am not against being for yourself and taking care of yourself. I am referring to the downright selfishness and conceit of humankind, those who seldom spare one thought for another. Those whose actions and words are only self-serving. They may sound like they care for you, but sadly, they don't sound at all genuine. It's only a façade. They only think and do for themselves.

But God loves us so much that he gave us his only son to die for us that we may live. God's love is supreme and whatever message we hear must be tested against this love of God that commands us to love one another because God is love.

But love is not easy. In its purest form, it's hard to understand, to live out and to practice. But love we must.

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself."
Luke 10:27 (ESV)

And who is your neighbor? Jesus's subsequent parable makes it very clear that your neighbor is whomever you come in contact with. And we are to love them with the love of God.

How we understand the love of God is then a very, very important thing.

Check out D.A. Carson's two excellent volumes on:
1. The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God
2. Love in the Hard Places

I have read these books some years ago and it is now a good time for me to dig them out from the shelves and read them again.

We need to really know and experience the love of God and we need to test every spirit with the love of God, to ensure we listen to the right things and live our lives right in Christ.

pearlie

What of the problems you can't solve?

What do you do if you have problems that deeply affect you that you can't solve?

I have been thinking and thinking and thinking about this problem of mine to no end, and there is still not a solution in sight. The only solution is to just surrender it to God. There is nothing else I can do.

None of the roads I see are worth going on, and yet it feels frustrated being where I am. It does seem like a narrow road that I am on -- hard, tight and tough -- not the wide and broad roads of shortcuts, compromise and escape.

Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.
Matthew 7:13-14 (ESV)

It is interesting that Jesus used the word "gate" and not "road". I feel the difference in nuance here is quite significant. The gates represent the "crossroads" in life, the places where we make a decision to pass through or not, and it is the choosing of which gates to pass through, the wide that leads to destruction or the narrow that leads to life.

The wide gate will be enticing and it will look like the easy way out. It will allow all your baggages and encumbrances and burdens. You can bring it all in. The gate will be wide enough for you to get through, with much, much more space to spare. However, you will so be burdened by the heaviness and sheer weight of it all that you may not go far, if at all. You may even just give up and camp at the wide gate!

The narrow gate however will only fit you, just you. You will need to drop, discard and peel away all the things that you hold on to that has no place in the narrow way. You will have to go with nothing. It is a hard way, the verse is very clear about that. You will feel vulnerable and exposed. And your only dependent and source of security are not the things that you left behind at the gate, not even yourself, but the Overseer of the narrow way, Jesus himself. He will provide the way. He will be your strength. He is your only hope.

He is my only hope.

pearlie

Always read in context

I missed cell group last week because I fell sick and so I missed the first portion of the studying of Matthew 17:13-20.

When we got to verse 17-19, it got a few of us a bit worried.

"So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire."

None of us if any, would ever meet these criteria, we thought, and what about it not being a gospel of works but grace? The verses are clear in that good trees will only bear good fruits, not bad fruits and we know that we sometimes do bear imperfect fruits. We are then destined to the fire?

In the midst of the discussion, I opened up my TNT commentary on Matthew by RT France in my iPad (this is the very reason going ebook make sense!) and France addressed v.16-18 together, which made me realize a very important point and with that I shared it with the group.

We must read these verses in context. Matt 7:15-20 is about false prophets and Jesus gave the criteria to recognise false prophets, in that they are the ones who bear bad fruits, never good ones.

"Thus you will recognise them by their fruits." (v.20)

This brought understanding to all of us as we can now reconcile these verses to the gospel as we know it.

The lesson here is to always read Scripture in context.

pearlie

The good eye, the evil eye

We had bible study on Matthew 6:19-34 this evening during CG and the verses that caught my attention were these two:

22 The eye is the lamp of the body. So, if your eye is healthy, your whole body will be full of light,
23 but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness! (ESV)

It may seem unusual in our modern understanding for these two verses to appear in a passage about not laying treasure on earth but in heaven, and not serving two masters but one.

However, seen from an exegetical context, it actually make perfect sense. The meaning of a bad eye or in some translations evil eye is being stingy and set on wealth and material things. Having a healthy eye means being generous. And it is notable and interesting that the eye is in the singular and not plural, pointing to the person who sees.

In that context, when a person whose eye is bad is a person who wants everything that he sees, whereas a person with a good eye wants to give to others what he has.

It strikes me because I notice myself having an evil eye lately, and this is a good and timely reminder and commandment for me to guard my eye and focus it on Jesus and Jesus alone.

pearlie

One of the best apologetics sermon on the resurrection of Christ

We had one of the best apologetics sermon I've ever heard on the resurrection of Christ by Pastor Marvin Wong. Here is the mp3 link.

But if I were to name one thing...no, two things...from the sermon today, they are:

(1) Pastor Marvin said that every sermon in the book of Acts is about the resurrection of Jesus. I shall take his word for it, and will take notice from now on as I read the book of Acts.

(2) The resurrection is the linchpin to the gospel of salvation. In the same way a prisoner who has not been released is one who has not fully paid his price of his crime, a Jesus who has not risen, a Jesus who is still dead, will not have fully paid for the price of sin of humankind, for the wages of sin is death. But the good news of Easter is that He is risen! He is risen indeed! The price of sin is fully paid in Christ Jesus and through Him and in Him, we can have life, and life to the fullest.

My friend Heng Yew made this floral arrangement in his church, "to the letter" of the gospel - we have the good news of the empty tomb. We proclaim a risen Saviour.

Happy Easter everyone! May you also believe in the empty tomb and the risen Lord and have life to the everlasting. Amen.



pearlie
Photo: Liew Heng Yew, 2014

It is finished!

Jesus' "τετέλεσται" (tetelestai), "it is finished!" (John 19:30) was the meditation of our Good Friday service yesterday.

I had song practice this morning for Easter tomorrow. During the opening prayer of the practice session, I thought I heard the person praying "it was finished" referring to the finished work of Christ. I may have misheard it but it has again reminded me of the Greek word I learnt some years ago, were the tense is of utmost importance, in that we say "It is finished" and not otherwise.

I shall quote from William D. Mounce's Basics of Biblical Greek, Zondervan, 1993, p.218:

It is often the very first and the very last thing we say that is the most important, or the statement that is the most memorable. First impressions and last impressions are the lasting impressions. The same is true for Jesus. The first statement we hear him say is that he should be in his Father's house (Luke 2:49). Even at the age of twelve, he was aware of his divine lineage.

And as he hung on the cross, having lived a sinless life, having paid the penalty for your sins and mine, Jesus uttered his last words before dying. Tετέλεσται. "It is finished" (John 19:30). This one word summary of Jesus' life and death is perhaps the single most important statement in all of Scripture. The word means "to complete," "to bring to perfection." Jesus has fully done the work God the Father sent him to do. Paul spends Romans 5 discussing this very fact, that our salvation is sure because Christ's death totally defeated the effects of Adam's sin, completely.

But the tense of the verb, the "perfect" tense, bring out even more of what Jesus was saying. The [Greek] perfect describes an action that was fully completed and has present-day consequences. Jesus could have used the aorist, ἐτέλησεν [etelesen], and simply said, "The work is done." But there is more, there is hope for you and for me. Because Jesus fully completed his task, the ongoing effects are that you and I are offered the free gift of salvation so that we can be with him forever. Praise the Lord. Tετέλεσται. (Emphasis mine.)

pearlie

More on Christ in the Passover

Noel sent an email to his friends with regards to his thoughts on the sermon I blogged about yesterday. He touched on important points I missed. I have gotten his permission to post it here:

I found myself unexpectedly in Pantai Baptist Church this Sunday.

The Palm Sunday sermon was given by a Dr Richard Harvey, Jewish by birth and a former believer in Judaism who became a Christian and lives in England.

He spoke of his conversion and his missionary activities among the Jews, but the highlight of his presentation was his clear exposition of how the various elements in the Passover celebration point to Christ. He even brought several of this elements with him to the service. I learnt a number of things.

One of these elements, the roasted egg, symbolises the destruction of the temple in AD 70.

Another element, the horse radish root, symbolises the emotional trauma/bitterness of Jewish sufferring. The expression "root of bitterness" in Heb 12:15 is probably influenced by this Passover connection.

Parsley (hyssop) symbolises Jewish tears shed.

The roasted shank bone, another important element, symbolises the Jews who were saved from 10th plague as described in Exodus.

The importance of unleavened bread and the removal of any leaven from Jewish homes during Passover lies behind 1 Cor 5:7 (clean out the old leaven...because Christ our Passover has also been sacrificed).

As we focus on the cross where Jesus died in our place, may our love for him who is the first born of all creation and the perfect image of the invisible God who is our heavenly Father, grow more and more as our insight and wonder deepens.

pearlie