Grow Up

By this time you should be teachers. But in fact, you need someone to teach you all over again. You need even the simple truths of God's word. You need milk, not solid food. Anyone who lives on milk is still a baby. That person does not want to learn about living a godly life. Solid food is for those who are grown up. They have trained themselves with a lot of practice. They can tell the difference between good and evil. So let us leave the simple teachings about Christ. Let us grow up as believers. Let us not start all over again with the basic teachings. They taught us that we need to turn away from doing things that lead to death. They taught us that we must have faith in God. They taught us about different kinds of baptism. They taught us about placing hands on people. They taught us that people will rise from the dead. They taught us that God will judge everyone. And they taught us that what he decides will last forever. If God permits, we will go beyond those teachings and grow up.[1]

Paul, or whoever wrote the letter to the Hebrews, challenged believers who were coasting along in spiritual infancy to grow up. The author advocated spiritual independence, a state of maturity in which the believer understood the difference between good and evil. Compare that to what Churches considered spiritual maturity today. The letter suggested the recipients should be teachers, not children needing to be taught the same things over and over again. Spiritually speaking, a first century infant was more advanced than mature Church members today. The primary task of leaders in a Church is to grow the congregation numerically. People are not encouraged to become spiritually independent, they are indoctrinated with the dogma of whatever Church they attend. Very few Churches, if any, see their role as that of encouraging spiritual maturity, so that believers can move away from that congregation as free emissaries of Christ. If we look at God’s plan for a family we see that at some point the guy will leave home and establish his own family related to, but independent of his parents. Churches don’t operate that way, they want keep everyone returning to the same building, same pew, and same old… whatever. Because, it’s a numbers game; look how many people come to our Church! Week after week the minister is expected to humour and entertain the congregation. It’s his job to mollycoddle and pamper the congregation so they will all keep turning up on Sunday morning.

When I was a kid, my buddy and I thought that if we were in the Church building when the end came, we’d be safe. –We were kids, about the spiritual age of those to whom the biblical author addressed his rebuke, but we were just kids. Come to think about it, we didn’t hatch that idea out of the air, it must have been communicated to us somehow. Not directly, but more likely assumed from the constant emphasis on attendance. Where do these bogus concepts come from? Few of the very important regulations found in Church teaching actually come from scripture. In the Hebrew system most of the regulations governed time not spent in meetings, or ceremonies back then. Men in Israel were expected to attend three ceremonies a year; there was no requirement for women to do so. That doesn’t sound very religious. Obedience to God when Israel was his nation, had more to do with daily life than with public ceremonies –the very opposite of what is taught today. A person’s spirituality is judged on Church attendance. Jesus said his disciples were lights in the world, presumably lights where light was needed, not a cluster of lights in a decorative chandelier.

Many of us have spent a long time in a Church. Much good has been accomplished through the system of Churches that may not have been possible without the institution. The first missionaries to southern Africa were from Britton, later there were missionaries from New Zealand, and about that time missionaries arrived from USA. In later years it must have been very confusing for the African people since there were many missionaries and about as many different doctrines. Modern times are no different, Churches send missionaries to foreign countries to teach people about Jesus –no, not Jesus, but each Church’s particular brand and doctrine. The Church is more important than Christ; truth is the possession of a Church –of course that is pure nonsense!

Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some also from good will; the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition rather than from pure motives, thinking to cause me distress in my imprisonment. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice,[2]

Where is the spirit of Christ, that each Church teaches its habits and traditions as truth, when it was Jesus who was crucified and raised to life by the Father? Why isn’t his name glorified? Why isn’t his love exemplified? Why instead are his goals modified? Paul rejoiced because Christ was being preached. He stated his desire and intent:

And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God. For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.[3]

It is really sad that Christianity is torn apart by Church traditions and trash. Jesus prayed for the unity of believers and instructed his disciples that by their love for one anther he would be seen as their leader. Who emerges as the leader of Christianity when seen through the discord and animosity among Churches? Maturity in Christ is being able to tell the difference between good and evil. Maturity come from years of spiritual practice and life exercise. Spiritual maturity is not the ability to argue points of doctrine. It is the ability, to know right from wrong –the difference between good and evil.

---

[1] Heb 5:12-6:3 (NIrV)

[2] Php 1:15-18

[3] Co 2:1, 2  

The Lifted Lord

…just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. [1]

…the LORD said to Moses, "Make a poisonous serpent, and set it on a pole; and everyone who is bitten shall look at it and live." So Moses made a serpent of bronze, and put it upon a pole; and whenever a serpent bit someone, that person would look at the serpent of bronze and live.[2]

Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness:

Interminable walking, waiting, and watching; decades of doubt and disappointment blunted Israel’s desire. Any spark of hope had long been extinguished, in the delay to accommodate the passing of an entire generation. Desert heat, dangers of the wilderness, contributed to the reckless desperation of speaking against God. Israel should have known better for by this time the people had witnessed the wrath of God against unfaithfulness in more ways than one. It was faithlessness that drove them into exile, and faithlessness that brought God’s punishment upon them in the form of serpents. When bitten, searing venom coursed through one’s veins bringing agonizing death. Penitently, leaders approached Moses seeking relief from the curse among them. Moses in turn spoke to God, and received a plan of action to be followed by anyone who was bitten. It did not include the removal of the serpents, but a remedy for people poisoned. Israel had demonstrated its faithlessness, and as the antidote, a display of faith was required for a victim to be cured. Moses at God’s bidding made a bronze snake, placed it on a pole for those bitten to see and be healed.

Most references to “serpent” in scripture are figurative; in the account mentioned by Jesus, the serpent would have been an actual poisonous snake. Israel had an antipathy to the snake because of its role in the fall of man, “that ancient serpent, who is the Devil and Satan.”[3] Israel like Eve was deceived by Satan, causing people to criticize God. “… I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by its cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ.”[4] Faithlessness could only be remediated by a positive act of faith. By looking at the bronze image of a serpent (symbolizing Satan), the wounded were healed by the mercy of God. Satan’s deceit of Israel lead to rebellion; which was met with death from the venom of poisonous snakes. Death from the bite of those snakes symbolized Satan’s pernicious nature. Being under Satan’s control results in death. In the same way the serpent instilled dissatisfaction into Eve’s mind, he manipulated the minds of Israel, which led them into action that brought death from lethal snake bites. When they believed God’s word they were healed by acting on their faith. God used the image of a serpent, which was a symbol of Satan, as an instrument of faith leading to healing.

The Son of Man must be lifted up:

…just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.[5]

The lifting of the bronze snake in the wilderness is considered a type with Jesus being the antitype. The cross represented death. The grave represented absence from God. And, the resurrection represented victory over death and Satan. Israel gained victory over Satan by putting their faith in God. All who looked at the bronze snake were healed. All who believe in Jesus are saved, from the snare of Satan, and banishment from God. Jesus battled Satan crushing his head in the victory of the resurrection and by offering life to all believers.

Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out.

The leaders, chief priest among them had, as it were, signed a death warrant for Jesus. Satan, manipulating the envy and insecurity of the Jewish council was in control, ready to bring about the death of God’s Son. The backdrop to events was Jesus’ triumphant entry into Jerusalem; adulation and praise announced his progress. The council’s plan to arrest and kill Jesus was Satan’s device by which he intended to destroy the Son of God. To everyone watching, the cross was the end of the man who claimed to be the Messiah. To the blood-lust intoxicated crowed the Nazarene would challenge their conscience no more. Satan supposed he would be unopposed in his deception. Contradicting evil assumptions, Jesus stated that Satan would “be driven out”.

And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.

The world focused on the demise of Jesus, the righteous mourned, while evil celebrated his death –the death of an imposter. Some would have thought Jesus’ words hollow, when he said, “now the ruler of this world will be driven out.” Or, “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” Being lifted up referenced the manner of his death, crucifixion. The world will be judged, Satan will be driven out of the world, but as for me –I will be victorious. Jesus said that all those who came to him would be given life. Not his exact words, but that is what the cross means for people who believe. We should never think that there is a different way, nor should we believe we can do it on our own. The only access to God is via the cross. Moses elevated the bronze snake. Israelites with venom in their veins could by lifting their eyes be healed by the love of God. We need to lift our eyes from the troubles and pressures of earth to look at the cross.

The greatest lesson for me looking at the lifted Lord is, ‘that it is not always what it appears to be.’ There was finality in a crucifixion, it was horribly painful, dehumanizing, and shameful. I can only imagine the despair of believers watching as their hopes died with Jesus. They could not understand that it wasn’t what it seemed to be –that realization would come later. People today can’t experience that same faith-jolting scene, but we will all face situations that challenge our faith. Through electronic media we witness the horror of death and destruction. We all feel the anxiety of living in a world that disregards God. And, we all feel threatened by evil intent. Our assurance comes from looking to the lifted Lord. To those intent on evil, the cross was and is an illusion of victory, to believers the cross is absolute victory.

On the cross Jesus was suspended between the earth and heavens. To access God’s gift it is necessary to lift our eyes from the earth to focus on Jesus who is the path between earth and eternity. The cross was not what it seemed to be: not for believers who didn’t understand God’s plan, nor for the enemies of Jesus who thought they had succeeded in killing him.

Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of our faith, who for the sake of the joy that was set before him endured the cross, disregarding its shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God. Consider him who endured such hostility against himself from sinners, so that you may not grow weary or lose heart.[6]

---

[1] Joh 3:14, 15

[2] Num 21:8, 9

[3] Rev 20:2 

[4] 2Co 11:3 

[5] Joh 12:31, 32

[6] Heb 12:1-3  

Hope in Jesus

The myth of America as a Christian nation, with the church as its guardian, has been, and continues to be, damaging both to the church and to the advancement of God's kingdom. Among other things, this nationalistic myth blinds us to the way in which our most basic and most cherished cultural assumptions are diametrically opposed to the kingdom way of life taught by Jesus and his disciples. … The myth clouds our vision of God's distinctly beautiful kingdom and thereby undermines our motivation to live as set-apart (holy) disciples of this kingdom.[1]

Many western countries in their beginning established laws based on Judaic, Christian principles. Except for Islamic and eastern countries, few mix religion with politics as much as the US. It appears to makes no difference to staunch Bible believing Republicans that Jesus taught that, his kingdom was not of this world^[2], nor, that Jesus spoke against living by the sword.[3] There is no faction similar to the American “religious right” in the Canadian government.

Justin Trudeau’s intent to whip any vote on abortion (excepting current anti-choice MPs) has led to concern about a leader overriding an MP’s autonomy on a conscience issue… Actually, we’d be much better talking about the larger problem: whether the Westminster convention of conscience votes is itself outdated.

The labelling of certain topics as conscience issues, where free votes are allowed, stemmed in part from a narrow interpretation of morals—religious, cultural or societal. Party discipline was not appropriate because the values underlying one’s feelings were sacrosanct . . .

So is the concept of conscience votes at all relevant now? With a much broader understanding of values and morals, and in a multi- and, indeed, non-faith environment, is it appropriate to consider an MP’s feelings on these issues inviolable?[4]

This quote by Lauren Dobson is from an article in MacLean’s, by Aaron Wherry. Dobson reflects the growing attitudes of government, suggesting that the Westminster convention is outdated, because now there is “a much broader understanding of values and morals, and in a multi- and, indeed, non-faith environment…” The Canadian parliament is influenced greatly by the vocal minority, which makes good political sense. Because the “silent majority” is muted, its views are not considered. “Often, and especially in Canada, there is a consensus that religion is a private matter. … Canadians are extraordinarily cynical of professions of religious faith, especially Christian religious faith and political leaders…”[5] There is growing intolerance toward the Christian faith and the institutional Church bears much of the blame for that. From Dobson’s statement it is evident that standards which have been accepted for years as democratic, are under fire from those with divergent views and causes. But what if anything does this have to do with hope in Jesus?

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, states:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(d) freedom of association.

Religious people, specifically Christians, cannot expect that their rights of freedom, guaranteed by the Charter, will be honoured by the government. The current prime minister has said that, the right of women supersede the Charter. The government is not now, nor ever was a security blanket for people of faith. Pierre Trudeau, when acting as Justice Minister, said, “There’s no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation,”[6] and added “what's done in private between adults doesn't concern the Criminal Code.”[7] The comments were made in support of his proposal to decriminalize homo-sexuality. During his time divorce was legalized. At that time religious institutions were horrified by the proposed changes. Governments cannot be directed exclusively by Christian principles, and nor should they; their task is to govern the country. This is the reality that Christians must get used to it. No nation or country represents God, and no earthly empire is the kingdom of God. In the same way, no Church or religious institution represents the kingdom of God. The Catholic Church is not the kingdom of God; some Catholics may be citizens of the kingdom. No Protestant Church is the kingdom of God; though some from within that community may be citizens. No evangelical or fundamental Church is the kingdom of God, but some adherents may be in it. Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world.”

The Church has brought on itself criticism from society and some of it is justified. There are as many crazy people in Church as in general society, maybe more, who knows? There are some Church activities of which “outsiders” are suspicious. I am a believer, but I am embarrassed by the antics of some “Christians”. People sometimes say that Churches are filled with hypocrites, and sometimes what they is true. Disciples of Jesus obviously benefit under a government sympathetic to their beliefs, but if faith can flourish only in that environment, it is not what it should be. Christianity blossomed under persecution, not that believers today should seek adversity. The absolute worst thing for Christianity was its acceptance as the state religion of Rome. That was the birth of the Church and institutional Christianity. Long before that, believers were instructed to pray “for kings and all who are in high positions, so that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and dignity.”[8] That did not suggest believers were to look to earthly governments for security of faith. The believer’s hope and assurance are in Jesus. If the government doesn’t hassle believers, that’s a plus, but not a necessity. People committed to a Church are going to see their world changed. People espousing causes as a means of acceptance by God, will be disillusioned. Although scoffed at by doubters and atheists, “blind faith” is the only path to God. People who believe and are committed to Jesus are to grow in faith to become like the faithful of old, “…strangers and exiles on the earth … seeking a country of their own.”[9]

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you know me, you will know my Father also…"[10]

---

[1] The Myth of a Christian Nation, by Gregory Boyd,  pp. 13, 14

[2] Joh 18:36

[3] Joh 18:11

[4] macleans.ca A few more thoughts on Trudeau, abortion and the party whip, by Aaron Wherry

[5] The Private Faith and Public Lives of Evangelical MPs, Jonathan Malloy

[6] CBC Digital Archives

[7] ibid

[8] 1Ti 2:2 

[9] Heb 11:13, 14 

[10] Joh 14:6, 7 

Make the familiar strange

To romanticize the world is to make us aware of the magic, mystery and wonder of the world; it is to educate the senses to see the ordinary as extraordinary, the familiar as strange, the mundane as sacred, the finite as infinite.[1]

This philosophy has been used to inspire creativity in business by a number of speakers and authors.

One of the well-known aphorisms in the field of creativity consulting is to "make the familiar strange." When we’re overly familiar with something, we have all kinds of assumptions, biases, and preconceived notions that inhibit us from discovering new and potentially exciting ways of looking at it. By making the familiar strange, we can often once again look at that something with a fresh, new, almost naive perspective and open ourselves to the possibility of making some truly unique discovery.[2]

Government corporations and their unions are woefully inefficient and steeped in tradition. Many large corporations are sluggish and unwieldly; these companies seldom take remedial action until shareholder value plummets. In most cases the bottom line has indicated the ineffectiveness of the company for considerable time before any action is taken. Corporations have to do something to stop the bleeding, or they will go out of business. One major institution that has failed miserably in virtually every department, other than the Post Office, is the Church. I can’t think of any institution that needs to review it output and purpose more than the Church. Traditions are like barnacles on a ship; those tiny creatures can make a ship use up to 40 percent more fuel. The area they cover may be small compared to the size of the ship, but their collective mass causes considerable drag on the hull. Likewise, the accumulation of traditions over time has bogged the Church down to where it is ineffective and irrelevant.

Against all odds, Christianity in its early years grew exponentially. Established religions were opposed to and persecuted the disciples of Jesus; Rome viewed the upstart religion as atheistic, and a social pariah. Yet in a climate of adversity belief and commitment to Christ was established world-wide within a relatively short time. For somewhere around three hundred years independent congregations of Christians existed in countries, cities, towns and villages. Until the time of Constantine congregations were autonomous and self-sufficient. Disparities existed in structure and doctrine among congregations to the point that Constantine deemed it necessary to convene the council of Nicaea. The purpose of the council was to impose unity upon the disparate communities of Christians. Under Constantine’s direction the various congregations were brought under the control of bishops residing in Rome. The structure adopted by the newly organized body was that of the Roman Empire; thus the Roman Church came into being. Over the centuries reformers have tweaked doctrines with very little substantial changes resulting to the structure or doctrines of the Church. Every denomination and Christian organization has roots firmly embedded in the Church of Rome. Reformers, ancient and modern, have all taken the traditional base – the Roman Church, as the model, and from there moved in some direction more appealing to themselves. Some of the restorers worked on the assumption that the New Testament Church had to be reinstated. Even the restorers used the base of the Roman Church, stripping from it doctrines not found in the New Testament and inserting what they called biblical processes. Nobody that I know of followed the philosophy of Novalis, or was brave enough to consider that the Church may not be a New Testament entity, but an unwieldly, cumbersome design of man.

Establishing Churches and planting Churches, are not remotely related to the growth of discipleship in the first century, “…those who had been scattered went about preaching the word.”[3] Christianity is said to have reached Briton before the death of Claudius in 54 CE. It was not an organized Church sending out missionaries, but individuals, possibly a Roman soldier, merchants, or travelers. If it were possible to forget the traditions we’ve accepted as truths, if we could step away from any bias we have, or if we could free our minds from presuppositions; then with an open mind seek the kingdom of God, what would being a disciple look like? It took the emperor of Rome to force scattered independent congregations into an ungodly organization. Stripped of tradition, no one would use the word Church since it is not in the original language of the New Testament. If one studied with an open mind, there would be no pope, there is only Jesus. If without bias we read the gospels, we would want to be just believers, disciples of Jesus not members of a Church.

Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.[4]

Are we able to accept the raw simplicity of John’s writing? Is it actually possible that if the only scripture available to us was the gospel of John, that we could believe in Jesus and have life in his name? How many conditions would yet apply? What caveats need to be considered? What Church doctrines or practices supersede the written word?

Therefore they said to Him, "What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?" Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent."[5]

---

[1] Baron Georg Philipp Friedrich von Hardenberg, pseudonym – Novalis

[2] 99% Inspiration, by Bryan Mattimore p. 72

[3] Act 8:4 

[4] Joh 20:30, 31 

[5] Joh 6:28, 29

Love your enemies

You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you…^[1]

…if your enemies are hungry, feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink…[2]

The instruction concerning enemies must have sounded as strange to the ears of people in the first century as it does to us today. More than a few have endeavoured to demonstrate the impracticality this command. Some with time on their hands might seek solace in the eternally long poem of Alexander Pope, from which I have extracted a very short quotation:

To what base Ends, and by what abject Ways,

 Are Mortals urg’d thro’ Sacred Lust of praise!

 Ah ne’er so dire a Thirst of Glory boast,

 Nor in the Critick let the Man be lost!

 Good-Nature and Good-Sense must ever join;

 To err is Humane; to Forgive, Divine.[3]

It would be against God’s nature to burden believers with impossible demands. “No testing has overtaken you that is not common to everyone. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tested beyond your strength, but with the testing he will also provide the way out so that you may be able to endure it.”[4] Some of the difficulty connected to loving and treating enemies well, maybe that we do not look at the whole situation. To love your enemies is not natural; in what way could human nature be changed to make it natural to love enemies? To a somewhat similar question Jesus responded, “The things that are impossible with people are possible with God.”[5] If I with God’s help were able to elevate my spiritual nature and follow its course would that circumvent my human nature? The short quotation from Romans above has been taken out of context so that it aligns with Jesus’ statement. The full context follows:

Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly; do not claim to be wiser than you are. Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all. If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." No, "if your enemies are hungry, feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink; for by doing this you will heap burning coals on their heads." Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.[6]

“…you will heap burning coals on their heads.” This is a much debated phrase; some commentators suggest “divine punishment” is meant. Some look to an Egyptian ritual in which a person showed his repentance by carrying a pan of burning charcoal on his head. Some point out the source of Paul’s quotation as, “If your enemies are hungry, give them bread to eat; and if they are thirsty, give them water to drink; for you will heap coals of fire on their heads, and the LORD will reward you.”[7] An explanation put forward by a very few commentators suggests, “A deed of benevolence (giving live coals to those in need)”

This might well be an occasion to invoke, “Occam’s Razor” - “Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily.” Or, in its modern concise form “keep it simple”. The general theme of the paragraph is kindness and love, and the victory of doing good. It would be inconsistent to require believers to love their enemies, and as an incentive to do so, point out that their love will bring pain upon those enemies. Paul earlier quoted God saying, “Vengeance is mine, and retribution…”[8] I can’t reconcile the notions of loving your enemies and doing good to them, so that they will be worse off because you did. I don’t know if heaping coals on your enemies’ heads can be satisfied by the explanation of providing live coals for them to use, but, at least it fits the context a whole lot better than being gleeful over their increased suffering.

There is perhaps another idea which may fit into the context of Paul’s writing. We need to focus on ourselves and the command for us to love our enemies. Two things we must notice; one is that the injunction of Jesus does not include anything about the impact on our enemies. Secondly, the passage quoted by Paul from Proverbs includes, “and the LORD will reward you.” From the context which is more likely to be rewarded, kindness, or causing pain? The concluding sentence of Paul’s instruction is, “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” Taking it as the summary of the paragraph, it is the principle that must govern our behaviour. It is a principle, a guideline for living. Overcoming evil with good, doesn’t suggest satisfaction at another’s suffering. What I get from Paul’s writing is that I am to focus on positives, I am to love, and I am not to be distracted by vengeance. God has claimed vengeance, and the right to judge and punish. In exercising love and kindness I glorify God, and show grace and love in my life. I honour God by not taking upon myself that which he has claimed as his right. The burning coals to me expresses that God is doing his job and allowing me to do mine. The assurance that God will do whatever is necessary, if accepted, permits me to get on with what I have to do –and that is to love.

Corrupt governments, child murderers and molesters, terrorist organizations, civil wars, and the like. People who commit such despicable heinous acts give up the right to be called human, they are worse than ravenous animals. It would seem that no individual could love such evil people, but for some it is easier to be magnanimous to cruel and bloodthirsty terrorists than to their next-door neighbour. As the adage says, “hate the sin, but love the sinner”; that may just be a copout. My first observation would be that I’m not sure the creeps I’ve listed would have been the kind of enemies that believers in the first century were told to love. I would think their enemies would likely have been a cranky neighbour or a domineering boss. An enemy might also have been someone to whom they owed money, or, someone guilty of slandering them, or a neighbour whose livestock trampled their gardens. I’m inclined to believe that the murderous people and groups listed fall within God’s bailiwick. That God is the avenger is comforting to any who witness injustice.

My second observation is that the love we are to show our enemies, is God’s love. God’s love goes beyond friendship or affection and may not even include familiarity or friendship. We are to love our enemies because God has loved us. We did not, and do not, deserve God’s love. We are to love our enemies even when they don’t want, deserve, or appreciate our love. As children of God we must have his nature, and his nature is love. Believers are people through whom the love of God is extended to any and all. It may be reasonable to withhold affection or friendship from someone who is mean or miserable, but you cannot withhold love. Believers recognize the awfulness of being separated from God in eternity. When God’s love is channeled through believers, hope is offered to the hopeless. “Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.”[9] Love demands that we put aside animosity and hostility. God’s love is channeled through us to those who have insulted, persecuted, or just annoyed us. Love cannot be institutionalized or programed. It is hosted in individual hearts –from which it flows to others.  

To love in God’s way believers have to relinquish the desire to control situations beyond their scope. A clear line of distinction must be maintained between what I am expected to do, and that which is within the purview of God. This I believe is the first step in being able to love enemies. I can fret and stew about the heinous acts of Mugabe, or the malevolent creep that murdered the five year old girl, but in the end I am the one that becomes embittered and frustrated. On the other hand, accepting those situations will be handled by God, leaves me free of the burden of setting things right. And yes, God is able and will see that justice is done; of that I am sure. One final thought; we must love our enemies, and not make enemies of the ones we love. With the institutionalizing and programming of personal responsibilities, it becomes possible to “love” people, as part of a Church program. We feel pious about what we do for the Church, while at the same time failing to meet family and personal obligations. The parable of the young ladies and oil for their lamps[10] suggests that you can’t give away what you don’t have, or that which is crucial to your spiritual survival. The same applies to family; it is wrong to provide spiritual nurturing to others, at the expense of your family. The home is more important than the Church, and godly parenting more critical than Sunday school programs.

…the LORD is in His holy temple. Let all the earth be silent before Him.[11]

---

[1] Mat 5:43, 34

[2] Rom 12:20

[3] An Essay on Criticism, by Alexander Pope

[4] 1Co 10:13 

[5] Luke 18:27 

[6] Rom 12:14-21

[7] Pro 25:21, 22

[8] Deut 32:35 

[9] Rom 13:8 

[10] Mat 25:1-12

[11] Hab 2:20 

What you are, where you are.

…let each person lead the life that the Lord has assigned to him, and to which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches. Was anyone at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was anyone at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision. For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God. Each one should remain in the condition in which he was called. Were you a bondservant when called? Do not be concerned about it. (But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.) For he who was called in the Lord as a bondservant is a freedman of the Lord. Likewise he who was free when called is a bondservant of Christ. You were bought with a price; do not become bondservants of men. So, brothers, in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God.[1]

In this section the apostle wrote to Corinthian believers concerning marriage, circumcision, and slavery. His teaching was driven by a sense of urgency; the term qualifying the urgency was “the present distress”[2]. That distress would have included the persecution of believers by Jews and Romans, as well as events associated with the Jewish rebellion and subsequent destruction of Jerusalem. The destruction of the temple in 70 CE was hugely significant since it marked the end of the Jewish age. The temple represented God’s presence among the people of Israel, and its destruction indicated God’s absence. The focus of Paul’s recommendations centered on the instability and cruelty of the time they were about to enter. None of the recommendations of Paul’s warning flow through history as regulations for believers today. However, there is at least one principle that rings true and clear, one that people today need to consider carefully. That principle is, “in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God.” A caveat Paul included for slaves was, if they were offered freedom they should take it. His warnings were not meant to prevent people from improving their lives. Paul was burdened by the trials he saw coming upon believers. It is saddening to read of the suffering and torture some early believers endured.

The idea of being called by God, is not common to all Churches, even though it is referred to in apostolic writings. “…you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's own people, in order that you may proclaim the mighty acts of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.”[3] There is a relationship between what Peter wrote regarding believers and what Moses was told to tell the people of Israel; “but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation.”[4] The proviso for Israel was “if you obey my voice and keep my covenant.”[5] For believers, being in the kingdom is a gift from God, yes, we have to believe, but it is by grace that we are called into God’s kingdom. Appreciating that we have been called helps us to be confident of our place in that kingdom. “Let us therefore approach the throne of grace with boldness, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.”[6] We have been called out of darkness into God’s marvelous light to proclaim all that he has done in love. God is not capricious seeking to take back what he has given. God’s love is as strong as ever, it is his nature. Peter addressed a concern that some had in early times writing, the Lord, “is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.”[7] We live in a different times to those first believers, yet may have similar concerns; when it comes to God’s love we have the same assurance. God loves us and wants us to be secure in his kingdom; he’s paid way too much to let his investments slip away. We have a responsibility to believe so that we can proclaim God’s grace in and through our lives. We need to give up being religious in order to earn a place in God’s kingdom. We are in it, we don’t deserve it, but we’ve got it, because God loves us. Now, we have to show it! Every day, who we are, where we are.

I don’t know all the ways in which God calls people, but judging from ancient times I expect it may be similar to what Elijah experienced:

…behold, the LORD was passing by! And a great and strong wind was rending the mountains and breaking in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind. And after the wind an earthquake, but the LORD was not in the earthquake. After the earthquake a fire, but the LORD was not in the fire; and after the fire a sound of a gentle blowing.[8]

A thin small voice, or a gentle whisper; it was not the tumultuous violent demonstration of power, but a gentle comfort that alerted Elijah to God’s presence. God the Creator is all-powerful, yet his approach to people is gentle and loving. Jeremiah foretold a time in which God would replace the old covenant with a new covenant;

…this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other, "Know the LORD," for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the LORD; for I will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more.[9]

We don’t know how God writes on our hearts, but we know he does. His calling us into his kingdom will be such that we attribute it to some particular event or circumstance, or maybe go unnoticed in the passage of time. However God accomplishes that which he promised is really not the issue; we need to know that we are wanted and called by God into his family. I have difficulty recognizing any call in my life; my introduction to believers was the result of wanting to go out in the evening as my older sister did. I wanted to go out and have fun with my friends, but my parents said I could stay out late only if I went with my sister. I guess at the time that was preferable to staying home.

The most important feature of being called is not the ability to identify a voice, an event, or even a time, but to acknowledging that God through Jesus reached out to us, offering hope and love. I have no idea when or how I was called by God, maybe it was in the crucifixion of Jesus, maybe through my dad’s advice, or maybe some sermon I actually listened to. It really doesn’t matter to me if I know the how; what impresses me is knowing why. Recognizing that God loves me, and wants me in his family is comforting beyond words. My only wish is that I had realized this decades ago. In the light of God’s message in Jesus the Church may be an obstruction to people seeking to simply belong to God’s family. I don’t believe that the Church began with the intention of hindering people’s relationship with God, but in many cases that has happened. No matter how good or well-planned Church programs are they are no substitute for the teaching of Jesus. Too often Church teachings feature the doctrines of a Church and are biased toward its plans and programs. The effort and devotion to Church is misplaced and must be focused on Jesus. The Church depends on its members to support its infrastructure and programs. We need to understand that God doesn’t need human planning, or financing, to accomplish his plan. Jesus gave advice on what to do with wealth; give to the poor. There is nowhere in Jesus’ teaching that I’m aware of, suggesting believers to put their money into structures or programs. As a Church member or a believer at large, one’s relationship with God is personal.

May grace and peace be yours in abundance in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. His divine power has given us everything needed for life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Thus he has given us, through these things, his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of lust, and may become participants of the divine nature. For this very reason, you must make every effort to support your faith with goodness, and goodness with knowledge, and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with endurance, and endurance with godliness, and godliness with mutual affection, and mutual affection with love. For if these things are yours and are increasing among you, they keep you from being ineffective and unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.[10]

My initial response to being called by God is denial, supported by a number of thoughts that come to mind; why me? It’s not logical! What would God want with me? I’m not sure it’s theologically sound. How can I measure up? Haven’t I made too many mistakes? I really don’t want to change! I don’t need to include more, but you likely have a few you could add –not that I want to know what they are. We either feel self-sufficient or too bad to accept that God would call us into his kingdom. Maybe the supposed responsibilities of being a citizen in God’s kingdom are too daunting. As I write I see a pattern played out in a number of situations where, fear, self-loathing, blaming, or pride are at the base of our decision-making. Somewhere between the extremes we find acceptance; the point at which we are willing to submit to God’s love and grace. That God calls us into his kingdom is really no big deal; he sent his son into the world to be sacrificed. Our relationship with God the Father will be enhanced when instead of looking at the Bible as a textbook for religion we acknowledge it as a love story. The Bible is a library of different records, by different people, unified by a common purpose –the revelation of God’s love.

---

[1] 1Co 7:17-24 (ESV)

[2] 1Co 7:26

[3] 1Pe 2:9 

[4] Exo 19:6 

[5] Exo 19:5

[6] Heb 4:16 

[7] 2Pe 3:9 

[8] 1Ki 19:11 

[9] Jer 31:33, 34

[10] 2Pe 1:2-8 (NRSV)