Response as the Goal of All Bible Reading

I love purpose statements. I love them because I really don’t like guessing about someone’s motivation. It’s an uncomfortable place to be in. If I’m reading something someone wrote or listing to someone give a talk, I don’t want to be left wondering why they wrote what they wrote or said the things they said. I think this is partly why I like John’s gospel so much.

As the apostle John was drawing his gospel to a close, he thought it would be a good idea to make clear why he wrote it in the first place—to remove the mystery, if there was any. To do that he wrote that, “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:30-31, NIV). With that statement, you and I don’t have to wonder or guess about his purpose. John wrote what he wrote so that you and I might believe in Jesus (or continue to believe—there’s some debate about that, but we don’t need to get into it here) and, through believing in Jesus, experience real life.

In other words, what John did with his gospel is to give an opportunity for everyone who reads it to respond to what he wrote. I think that although John is probably the clearest of his fellow biblical authors about his purpose, his purpose is not unique to him. I would guess that if we were able to ask any of the biblical authors why they wrote what they wrote, their answer would be that those who read what they wrote would respond in one way or another to what they’ve read. It’s the same purpose I have in writing what I’m writing here. I want you to respond to it; I don’t want it to be wasted time.

Throughout the church world the language that is often used in relation to what I’m talking about here is application. Most books on Bible reading or Bible study guides will talk about applying the text to our lives in order for it to have any meaning. And I think they’re partly right. If all we ever read the Bible for is to gain knowledge then we’re missing the point, because knowledge alone puffs up (1 Corinthians 8:1, NIV). However, I think talking about application for all biblical texts sets us up for confusion and frustration, because not all biblical texts are equally applicable to us. To be sure, there are plenty that apply directly to us, but there are some—quite a few, actually—that are impossible for us to be able to directly apply to our lives.

Consider this passage from Leviticus 4 as an example of a text that is impossible for us to apply to our lives today: “If the whole Israelite community sins unintentionally and does what is forbidden in any of the Lord’s commands, even though the community is unaware of the matter, when they realize their guilt and the sin they committed becomes known, the assembly must bring a young bull as a sin offering and present it before the tent of meeting. The elders of the community are to lay their hands on the bull’s head before the Lord, and the bull shall be slaughtered before the Lord. Then the anointed priest is to take some of the bull’s blood into the tent of meeting. He shall dip his finger into the blood and sprinkle it before the Lord seven times in front of the curtain. He is to put some of the blood on the horns of the altar that is before the Lord in the tent of meeting. The rest of the blood he shall pour out at the base of the altar of burnt offering at the entrance to the tent of meeting. He shall remove all the fat from it and burn it on the altar, and do with this bull just as he did with the bull for the sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for the community, and they will be forgiven. Then he shall take the bull outside the camp and burn it as he burned the first bull. This is the sin offering for the community.” (Leviticus 4:13-21, NIV)

Right off the bat, it’s clear that this section of Scripture was written to a particular people during a particular time. That people and that time being the whole ancient Israelite community following their exodus from Egypt. You and I aren’t those people and we are not in that time. So if application was our goal in reading this passage, how would anyone today be able to apply it? The short answer is, no one today could appropriately apply it, so why would we ever make application the main goal of reading all the time? This is why I have found it helpful to talk about responding, instead. I think there are plenty of places throughout the Bible where direct application is right and necessary, but the direct application is a fruit of a proper response; application doesn’t arrive on its own.

Even though we are not able to directly apply Leviticus 4:13-21, we are fully capable of responding to it. Our response to that text might be something like, recognizing what God was doing with the ancient Israelite community in how he was being up front about unintentional sin, giving them clear instructions for how to deal with unintentional sin, and how what Jesus did on the world’s behalf in relation to sin somehow relates to what Moses was talking about way back then. I think that’s an appropriate response to Leviticus 4 even though application was never a possibility. And yet there was still a purpose for us with that portion of Scripture—we can still benefit from reading and responding to a section of the Bible that has no direct application to us.

This idea of not being able to apply a text, but still being able to respond to it is not unique to the Old Testament. In fact, we run into the same situation with one of the most famous sentences in all the Bible from the Gospel of John: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1, NIV). Here we have John reaching back as far as he can into the past and telling his readers what it was like back then. In particular, telling his readers about the Word and his relation to God. How would you apply this text to your life? Is there something you and I are being called to do from this text? I don’t think there’s any direct application for us. There’s nothing in the text for us to do, but that doesn’t mean the text has no purpose for us, because we are still able to respond to it. Our response, though is not by way of application but by way of stirring our imagination in wrestling with the reality of who God was and is. John 1:1 serves us today by giving us something solid to grab hold of, something true about who God was and is, and it’s okay that the text isn’t directly calling us to do anything.

Of course, though, there are plenty of places in Scripture where our response will be made evident by the way we apply the text to our lives. Think of Galatians 5 and Paul’s description of what life in the Spirit is like: “You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love. For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.” (Galatians 5:13-15, NIV) We would be fooling ourselves if we thought there was no direct application for us today from this passage. This is not like what we saw in John 1 or Leviticus 4. This text applies directly to us if we respond to it appropriately. Our response ought to be one of first reflection of our own lives, which includes a comparison to what Paul described, then adjustments in our lives where they’re appropriate. Paul is giving us instruction for life and if all we ever saw it for was simply something to consider as true without any direct application then we would missing out on his intention.

This way of reading the Bible takes effort on our part—serious effort. The Bible is not some cryptic force that can make you do what it wants you to do. In fact, it has no influence over you if you choose not to give it any. This is the surprising thing about God choosing to communicate his intention and will with his people through the writing of the Bible. He knew that words on a page are easy to ignore (the experience with the Mosaic law made that clear), and yet he chose to go this way with it—and for good reason.

Because God gave us a book that requires us to read, understand, and respond to it, it is up to us to decide if we are going to be shaped by God’s words to us. It is up to us if we’re going to take him seriously or not. And this is good. This reveals to us something true about ourselves. So it’s up to you and it’s up to me to decide—on a regular basis—if we are going to take the necessary steps to not only read, then work to understand what we’ve read, but also to respond to what we’ve read and understood. This is the life of a Bible-reader.

Who Wrote What Letters to Whom in the New Testament?

• Romans

  From: Paul

  To: All in Rome who are loved by God and called to be his holy people.

• 1 Corinthians

  From: Paul and Sosthenes

  To: The church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours.

• 2 Corinthians

  From: Paul and Timothy

  To: The church of God in Corinth, together with all his holy people throughout Achaia.

• Galatians

  From: Paul and all the brothers and sisters with him

  To: The churches in Galatia.

• Ephesians

  From: Paul

  To: God’s holy people in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus.

• Philippians

  From: Paul and Timothy

  To: All God’s holy people in Christ Jesus at Philippi, together with the overseers and deacons.

• Colossians

  From: Paul and Timothy

  To: God's holy people in Colossae, the faithful brothers and sisters in Christ.

• 1 Thessalonians

  From: Paul, Silas, and Timothy

  To: The church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

• 2 Thessalonians

  From: Paul, Silas, and Timothy

  To: The church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

• 1 Timothy

  From: Paul

  To: Timothy, my true son in the faith.

• 2 Timothy

  From: Paul

  To: Timothy, my dear son.

• Titus

  From: Paul

  To: Titus, my true son in our common faith.

• Philemon

  From: Paul and Timothy

  To: Philemon our dear friend and fellow worker—also to Apphia our sister and Archippus our fellow soldier—and to the church that meets in your homes.

• Hebrews

  From: Unknown (possibly Paul, Luke, or Apollos)

  To: Unknown (probably Christians who had recently came out of the Old Covenant system that was previously established).

• James

  From: James

  To: The twelve tribes scattered among the nations.

• 1 Peter

  From: Peter

  To: God's elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bythinia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood.

• 2 Peter

  From: Peter

  To: Those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have receieved faith as precious as ours.

• 1 John

  From: Unknown (probably John—the disciple whom Jesus loved)

  To: Unknown (probably Christian’s under John’s care).

• 2 John

  From: The elder (probably John, the disciple whom Jesus loved)

  To: The lady chosen by God and to her children whom I love in the truth (probably the local church and the members of that church).

• 3 John

  From: Unknown (probably John, the disciple whom Jesus loved)

  To: My dear friend Gaius, whom I love in the truth.

• Jude

  From: Jude

  To: Those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ.

Jesus and the Father Are One

Of all the things Jesus said to get himself in trouble with the religious leaders of his day (“Your sins are forgiven”, “Before Moses was, I am”, “The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath”, etc.) what he said in John 10:30 might have been the topper.

ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν.
I and the Father, we are one.

It’s a ridiculous thing to say… unless it’s true.

It was blasphemy for anyone to say that they were equal with the Father. The Father is God for goodness sake. How could Jesus possibly think that he ought to be thought of, seen, talked to, and experienced on the same level as the Father?

Did Jesus really expect those of his day to see him as the embodiment of the One they worshipped—the incarnation of Yahweh?

“You believe in God; believe also in me” (Jn 14:1, NIV)

It seems so.

Passion Week: Thursday - Our Last Time Together... Like This

Scripture Reading: Mark 14:22-24; John 13:12-17, 34-35

For several years Jesus had been with his disciples almost all the time. There was little he did without them.

They walked from town to town together. Met new people together. Jesus taught amongst his disciples. And he healed people in the presence of those twelve he had chosen to follow him. Now, things were getting to change in a big way.

Their time together was drawing to an end. In fact, this would be the last time Jesus and the disciples closest to him would be together like this (that is, until the resurrection and the eventual outpouring of the Holy Spirit). And so, what does Jesus do with his disciples during their last evening together? He shares a meal with them, of course.

Actually three events take place during their last time together. Jesus easts with his disciples. He washes their feet. And, lastly, he gives them a new commandment to live by.

First, the meal. In celebration of the Passover, they share a Passover meal. And, at the end, Jesus gives them what for the next 2,000+ years will be celebrated by the Church as The Lord’s Supper, or Communion. In that act Jesus took bread, which he said represented his body (that would be given for the many), and a cup of wine, which represented the blood of the new covenant (that was poured out for many). He offered it to his disciples and they ate and drank together. In much the same way we continue to do today.

Secondly, after the meal, Jesus took off the outer garments he was wearing, got down on his knees, and washed his disciples feet until they were clean. This, Jesus said, was done on purpose in order to show his disciples how they ought to live amongst one another and in the world. “I have set an example that you should do as I have done for you.” This was both the way the kingdom of God would be brought into the world and the way the children of God would live in the kingdom of God. Above all, they would serve one another. And, lest there be any objections to this kingdom way of life, Jesus tells them, “Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you should also wash one another’s feet.”

Lastly, a new commandment. Jesus already showed the disciples what it looks like to serve one another. He showed them what type of people the kingdom of God contains. Now, he sums it all up in one command: love one another. He tells his disciples, “As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” This is weighty. Love will be the identifying mark of those who follow Jesus. And not just love in a generic sense. This type of love is like the love that Jesus showed for his earliest disciples, and us. This kind of love drove Jesus to the cross both as a king and a sacrifice.

Next is the arrest, the trial, and the crucifixion. Under the cover of darkness, through the cooperation of one close to Jesus, the authorities will come for him in order to make him pay with his life for the life he led.

Passion Week: Sunday - The King Is Here

Scripture Reading: John 12:12-19

Passover was a week away. Jerusalem was beginning to grow to over 5-times its size. And a “new” king was coming to town.

As John tells it, even those who were following Jesus from the time he raised Lazarus from the dead were the ones following him to the edge of town joining up with others from the area bringing both palm branches and shouts of joy for their king riding on a donkey.

Hosanna! Blessed is the king of Israel!

Do not be afraid, Daughter Zion; see, your king is coming, seated on a donkey’s colt.

John tells us something the other gospel writers don’t that ends up being one of the more interesting things about this “triumphal entry” story. John writes, “At first his disciples did not understand all this. Only after Jesus was glorified did they realize that these things had been written about him and that these things had been done to him.”

For some, this didn’t make sense in the moment. Why was Jesus coming to Jerusalem like this and why are there people with palm branches shouting hosanna? This isn’t how a real kings come into their cities. They don’t come in on a donkey’s colt; they come in on a proper horse, with a procession of the most important people leading and following. For Jesus, though, it was the poor, the destitute, the outcasts who were accompanying him, and he not only approved of this, but invited this sort of company. You can see then why someone might be wondering how a king like this could have any influence in the realm of those in charge.

For others, however, this did make sense and they were not happy about it. According to John, the Pharisees were speaking to one another saying, “See, this is getting us nowhere. Look how the whole world has gone after him!” Notice that. For those who had been in charge for a long time and could read the tea leaves, this was no insignificant king riding in. Instead, this was a king with a people who were not focused on controlling, but following. They were not a people bent on force, but on peace. Not a people looking for servants, but a bunch who were learning to serve as their king served them. In other words, this was a king with a people with whom the controlling world was not ready.

This was the original Palm Sunday. And it is what we continue to celebrate today.

The king—hopefully, your king—is here!

A Church Called Love (Part 2): What is love?

definitions are tricky

If I say I hate asparagus, pretty much everyone knows what I mean. It means I really don't like it (which is absolutely true). Now watch what happens when I switch out asparagus for something else. If I say I hate Eric, pretty much everyone knows what I mean then, too. And pretty much everyone would agree that I don’t mean the same thing as when I said I hated asparagus. Why’s that? The same word was used. Even my tone (which can’t be captured here) could have remained the same and you would still understand the second usage of hate as something quite a bit stronger than the first. This works with love, as well.

I love my wife. And by that I mean that I have chosen to happily and without hesitation lay down my life for her. To which you, after reading that sentence, would probably be totally fine with that usage of love. What do I mean, though, when I say that I love roller coasters? Hopefully not the same thing as when I said I love my wife. Further, what do I mean when I say I love God?

What do we find if we turn to the dictionary (which, just to make sure there isn’t any confusion, I think is a good idea) for a definition of love? Several options.

an intense feeling of deep affection
a great interest or pleasure in something
a warm attachment, enthusiasm, or devotion
a score of zero

Feelings, pleasure, attachment, enthusiasm, devotion. All these definitions give us a sense of what love can mean, but none of them paint the entire picture. Love can mean you’re totally devoted to a person or it could mean you’re about to lose a game of tennis. I can say I love my wife and I love roller coasters and mean different things, because definitions are tricky.

context is king

What do we do when we can’t figure out what a word means in the Bible? A word study, of course!

Whether or not someone knows Greek (the language in which the New Testament was originally written), they probably know that ἀγάπη (agape) is a Greek word for love. And they probably know it’s used a lot in the New Testament. For instance, Paul uses it (and the verb cognate, ἀγαπάω (agapao)) 9-times in 13-verses in 1 Corinthians 13. (There’s another word for love in the New Testament, φίλος (philos)/φιλέω (phileo), but it is not used as often as agape. The tricky thing with philos/phileo is that it can sometimes mean friend, or even kiss.)

Defining words is not easy and defining an often used word like love is no different. In some places, like John 3:35, the definition seems pretty much self-evident. There the apostle writes, “The Father loves (agapao) the Son and has given all things into his hand.” One of the things I love about John is how he likes to use different words to mean the same thing. Later, in chapter 5, he writes almost exactly the same thing, but this time uses the Greek word phileo for love instead of agapao: “For the Father loves (phileo) the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing.” (If you’d like to look into this feature of John’s writing further, check out John 21:15-17.)

Moving out from the New Testament, but using the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint, LXX), we could look at a verse like 2 Samuel 13:1, which reads: “Now Absalom, David’s son, had a beautiful sister, whose name was Tamar. And after a time, Amnon, David’s son, loved (egapesen) her.” If you know this story, you might be a little concerned with the usage of the word love here, because what happens next is nothing short of horrific. Amnon takes Tamar and humiliates her because, as the text says, the love he had for her overcame him. And, less we think that there is something odd going on here with the English translation, the Greek translators of the Old Testament chose to use the word (egapesen), which is a form of the word (agapao). The same word used by the Apostle John for the love the Father has for the Son. Depending on the context—even in Greek—one word can mean something positive and true, and in another sense something twisted and dark.

We’ve arrived at the familiar conclusion that, even with an original language study, it’s context that drives the definition of love, because context is king.

LOVE IS OTHERS-FOCUSED

So, here we are once more at the question driving this article: What is love? We can continue to give thanks to God for the Apostle Paul, because he lays out some very helpful characteristics of love for us in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 as he writes:

Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude.

It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.

Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

A couple things to note here right off the bat. First, this is almost certainly not an exhaustive list of characteristics for love. Second, this list can be divided up into two main categories: what love is/does, and what love is not/does not do.

Love is/does: patient, kind, rejoices with the truth, bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things.

Love is not/does not: envy, boast, arrogant, rude, insist on its own way, irritable or resentful, rejoice at wrongdoing.

When we further stare at these characteristics of love, it becomes clear that one group focuses on others and the second focuses on the self. Those without love have little to no care for anyone other than themselves. They make much of themselves, and they’re rude when they do it. Instead of backing up and allowing someone else to lead, they insist that their way is best. God forbid they don’t get their own way, because they’re irritable and resentful. This, then, manifests itself into the tragedy of rejoicing when evil befalls others. Someone without love has become a person who has turned in on themselves, and to turn love around so that it is focused back on ourselves, is little more than the age-old idolatry of Genesis 3. I should make something clear here before going forward. Saying this is not the same thing as saying we ought not to care for ourselves or think we’re worthwhile as human beings. It’s exactly the opposite. Far from a call to think we’re worthless, it’s a call for us to love the God who loves us more than anyone else in the universe has or ever could. And, thus, gladly receive the love he has for us. This is the essence of true self-worth.

On the flip side, someone with love is patient and kind. They believe that another person’s time is just as important, or even more important than theirs. Those with love are kind to other people. They rejoice with the truth they find in the world. They bear, believe, hope, and endure in all circumstances. Someone with love lives their life in such a way as to see others (God and their neighbors) as the worthy recipients of their love. They are others-focused, because love is others-focused.

the embodiment of love

After the Israelites were freed from their 400-years of unjust captivity and forced labor in Egypt they found themselves on the edge of the Promised Land. An entire generation had died, but here they were, about to step into what God had been calling them to for 40-years. But…there was a problem; a big problem. They had become a forgetful bunch, who didn’t always trust the one who rescued them. So Moses exhorts them to remember their calling into a life intimately connected to God; to remember what it’s like to be the people of God in a world who doesn’t know him. And he does this by reminding them of who they are, and whose they are.

It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the Lord set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but it is because the Lord loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the Lord has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. (Dt. 7:7-8, ESV)

Lest any of the ancient Israelites of Moses’s day think that they were God’s people because they were great in number, he reminds them that they were actually the fewest of all peoples. In other words, they were not God’s people because of who they intrinsically were—a large collection of wanderers—they were God’s people because, as Moses says, “the Lord set his love on you and chose you.” There goes all their boasting in anyone but God. There goes all their reliance upon anyone but God. And there goes all their reception of self-worth from anyone that would say anything different than what God has already said. The Lord set his love on the ancient Israelites because he “loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers.” The ancient Israelites were loved by God because that’s who God was, and that’s who he continues to be today.

Fast-forwarding a few thousand-years, we find a similar thing being said about God and Christ from the Apostle Paul.

…but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Ro. 5:8, ESV)

Can you imagine doing this for someone who was dead set against you? How about someone who had made it their life’s mission to discredit everything about you? How about someone who tried to destroy all you made? I can’t. But this was the exact situation God was in. He had reached out to a world he made with his hands—to a people he crafted individually—and he was met with a resounding, NO! So, what did he do? He decided it was best to step down into the world, live among his creation, teach them what it meant to be truly human, and then allow them to put him to death in the most horrific way possible at the time. While we were still going after anything but God, Jesus—the second person of the triune God—-gave up his life for us. Why did he do this? To show his love.

Understanding love is not merely to ascend to an appropriate definitional standard. Love is much more real and solid than that; it’s much more complex than that. In the end, love is a person. And that person, who is the embodiment of God, is by definition the embodiment of love.

a story about jesus

So, what would you say to friend who asked you to define love? Are you going to Google “What is love?” and then read off the first few definitions, putting together a definition of your own? At least you’d be doing some research. Maybe you do a word-study throughout the Bible? That’s not bad, either. You’ll get a lot of useful material. You might, though, just flip open your Bible to 1 Corinthians 13 and read aloud.

You could do any of those or none of them. One other thing you could do, though (which I think Paul would gladly approve of), is to read through the gospels until you know them like the back of your hand and then tell your friend a story about Jesus. The Jesus who preached to his followers about what it meant to be a part of the kingdom of God. The Jesus who didn’t turn away children, but warned those who did and would. The Jesus who confronted some of the religious leaders of his day who sought to control people instead of showing them God. The Jesus who healed people who trusted him. The Jesus who wept over Jerusalem before heading in to be crucified. The Jesus who resurrected, ascended, and sent the Spirit of God to minister to us as we live our lives.

To define love, just tell a story about Jesus.

A Church Called Love (Part 1): “…but have not love.”

without love, nothing

Burgers or pizza tonight?

What about burgers or pizza for the next 40-nights? What about for the next 10-years? Or, what about for the rest of your life?

At first the question is simple, because not much rides on it. It doesn’t really matter if I have burgers or pizza tonight, because I could have the other one tomorrow, or something else entirely. Now, if I had to choose one of those foods for the next 40-nights, things get more interesting. Further, if I had to choose one for the next 10-years, or the rest of my life. Now, we’re talking about a big, life-changing decision.

Let’s try another one.

If you could pick only one characteristic for your local church to be known by, what would it be?

Acts of service?
Generous hospitality?
Miraculous healings?
Sound teaching?
Unwavering faith?

I know what I’d choose from those five options. I know what I’d choose because of how incredibly important I believe it to be. Churches live or die based on what is taught and, ultimately, lived-out by those who make up a church. It’s not a far walk from believing that Jesus isn’t really God, to believing that salvation isn’t really possible, and so believing that these “stories” of Jesus in the Bible aren’t worth your time.

That being said, if I had to choose just one characteristic for my local church, it wouldn’t be on the list above. I know, I know, it wasn’t fair how I framed the question, because you didn’t know picking your own characteristic was actually allowed. A thousand pardons, please.

If I had to pick, it would be what Paul considered to be the most important. It would be what he, in 1 Corinthians, exhorts his fellow brothers and sisters in Christ to make the foundation of all they do. It would be what Paul believed gave meaning to everything else.

The apostle writes this in 1 Corinthians 12:31b-13:3:

And I will show you a still more excellent way.

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.

The message seems to be pretty straight forward. If Paul (and by application, you and I) doesn’t have love, it negatively affects all he does. It doesn’t matter if he can speak in different languages (humanly or angelic). It doesn’t matter if he has prophetic powers, or if he is able to understand all mysteries and all knowledge, or if he has total trust in God. It doesn’t even matter if he gives up his own body. If he does not have love, whatever he has said or done has come to nothing.

The message is clear: without love we are nothing, and there is nothing.

Why is this so? Why is it that without love, it doesn’t matter what we do? To answer this, we must first take a step back.

you are not far from the kingdom of god

In one sense, what Paul just said there in 1 Corinthians 12:31b-13:3 doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter to us, nor does it matter to the world, if we have not considered ourselves to be living in the same world as Paul. For Paul, the world as we see it now, was not all there is. There were other things going on that weren’t readily visible to everyone. To put it another way, Paul really believed that God was doing something in this world that really changed the way those who followed him could and ought to live. This thing that God was doing is commonly called the kingdom of God (or heaven).

The kingdom of God was (and is) the reign of God in and through this world that Paul, you, and I live. It is the place within the world where God’s rule, influence, and way of life is being practiced and experienced. The kingdom of God is not some far off dream of an escape one day; it is the actual present-day reality of those who bow the knee to Jesus. And both of Paul’s knees hit the floor in front of Jesus.

Jesus talked about the practical reality of the kingdom of God like this:

You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.”

But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. (Mt. 4:43-45a, ESV)

He was confronting this convoluted half-truth that God had called his people to love their neighbors and to hate their enemies. This was never what God had called them to do; instead, it was a manipulation of the real request God had made for his people: “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord.” (Lev. 19:18, ESV)

And so, Jesus being Jesus, he announces to those who had been following him that if they are going to be a part of his kingdom then they are going to live in the truth of who God was and continues to be: love. Those who live in the kingdom of God (Jesus-people) are going to live like their king, and their king does not hate his enemies. In fact, he died for them (Rom. 5:10). So, his people are not going to hate them; instead, they are going to love them as their neighbor, because the kingdom of God is a place where love reigns supreme.

One day, as was pretty typical, someone came up to Jesus with a question about what type of life God had actually called his people into:

And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?”

Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

And the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher. You have truly said that he is one, and there is no other besides him. And to love him with all the heart and with all the understanding and with all the strength, and to love one’s neighbor as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.”

And when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And after that no one dared to ask him any more questions. (Mk. 12:28-34, ESV)

The scribe knew what he was talking about, but I’m not sure he knew the implications of what he was talking about, or he at least didn’t want to fully accept them. There is nothing more that God asks of his people than to love those who were made in his image. This is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. In other words, there is nothing more special to God that you could offer him than to love other people. The implication, however, of agreeing with this is striking. If you trust Jesus and you trust what he has said then you are not far from the kingdom of God. You’re right there. You’re at the doorstep of living in the reality of God being king; the reality of Jesus being king. The next step is to move forward from mere agreement to living it out.

called to love

When he had gone out, Jesus said, “Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him. If God is glorified in him, God will also glorify him in himself, and glorify him at once. Little children, yet a little while I am with you. You will seek me, and just as I said to the Jews, so now I also say to you, ‘Where I am going you cannot come.’

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” (Jn. 13:31-35, ESV)

One of the last things Jesus tells his disciples, before his eventual crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension, is to love one another. Now, on one level this is not a new command. This had been given ages ago. God’s people were always instructed to love one another. However, on another level, this command from Jesus was as fresh as could be. Here he is, the king of the kingdom of God letting his disciples know that he is going away and there is but one thing they are to do: love one another. The reason, as Jesus says, is that by their loving one another the world will know that they are his disciples. And, as a result of the world knowing that they are Jesus’s disciples, the world will have a chance to know Jesus. That’s how love works in the kingdom of God. It is given to others, so that others would know God.

The Apostle John drills down on this point in his epistle to an early church body when he writes that, “Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love” (1 Jn. 4:8, ESV). It’s not hard to see how Jesus’s words in John 13 still hung in the ears of John years later. He took to heart what Jesus meant by calling his disciples to love one another and that was worked out for a group of early Jesus-followers through John explaining that those who don’t love, don’t know God, because God is love. It’s pretty cut-and-dry. They (and we) could not call themselves disciples of Jesus (i.e., God) and have no love for others. The two are (and continue to be) mutually exclusive realities. They either do not love others and thus prove that they don’t love God. Or, they love others and thus prove that they actually love God.

John naturally continues this line of reasoning in writing that, “…we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him” (1 Jn. 4:16, ESV). Those who remain/live in love, remain/live in God. The two realities go hand-in-hand. It’s not like there are a bunch of hoops to jump through in order to be connected to God and helpful to the world. The calling is simple: love.

okay, but, what is love?

Now, although the calling is simple, the practicalities and real-world application of that calling bring with it all the complexities we could imagine, which is why we ought to be so thankful for Paul because of what he wrote down for the Corinthian church (and us, two-thousand-years later).

Paul began with the truth that our speech and our actions are meaningless if we do not have love. Next, he will continue down this road by describing to us some of the characteristics of this slippery word love. Because, if you’re anything like me, the question that’s been buzzing around your head throughout this article is: what is love?

With Just a Sentence

John Piper is fond of saying, “Books don’t change people, paragraphs do — sometimes sentences.” To his credit, he does quickly iron out this statement by explaining that he doesn’t think books are a waste of time—he’s written over 50 of them!—it’s just that it’s difficult told hold an entire thesis of a book in your head at once.

He’s not wrong.

I’m working through a massive 1,300 page systematic theology book right now and, when I’m finished with it, I will have forgotten most of what the author wrote. What I won’t forget, however, are those handful of places where what he wrote made me stop reading and reflect on what I just read.

This same thing happens to me when I read the first page of John’s gospel.

Believe it or not, but I don’t really get hung up anymore with the language of the Word being with God and God, himself. Probably because I’ve fooled myself into believing I know what John is talking about. But, nearly every time I get to verse 14, I can’t continue until after I’ve had time to take a few breaths.

“And the Word became a human being and made his home with us.”

With just a sentence (not even a full sentence in Greek) John gives us one of the greatest mysteries to ever be known…ever. The Word of God, who had existed forever prior to what happened in John 1, stepped down into humanity, not to have a look around to see how things were going and then quickly remove himself, but to become (egeneto) what human beings are.

Literally, John says that the word (ho logos) became flesh (sarx). In other words, he became precisely what makes us who we are. He, who was forever truly God, continued to be truly God but took upon himself the nature of humanity. As Paul puts it (better than I ever could) in Philippians 2, Jesus (the Word of God), “…emptied himself, by taking the the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men” (Phil. 2:7).

But, he didn’t leave it at that. Jesus was not content with merely becoming what we are, he wanted to live with us—as has been the goal of God ever since the beginning and will be the realized reality in the age to come (see Genesis 1-3 and Revelation 21-22). As John puts it, this Word became flesh made his home (eskenosen) with us!

This is, for me, why Christmas is so meaningful—and, grows more meaningful with each passing year. It’s the reason why I have to pause almost every time I read John 1:14a.

Jesus not only became what he was not (and remains that to this day), he stepped down into this broken world full of broken people to make his home with us, so that some day we will be able to have our home with him—forever.

A home in a made new world full of made new people…all because of the reality contained in one sentence in John.

A Reason to Learn Biblical Greek (2): Preserving the Ambiguities

In general, ambiguity is uncomfortable.

If you asked me how to get to Grand Rapids from Hastings and I told you to get on M-37 and travel anywhere from 15 to 40 miles, you’d be annoyed—you might get there—but, you’d be annoyed. You’d be annoyed because 1) I didn’t tell you which direction to travel and, 2) 15 to 40 miles is nowhere near exact enough. Those directions are far too ambiguous.

We like things to be black or white; grey isn’t helpful. That is, unless we’re talking about some particular places within the Greek New Testament.

One of the things that make good English translations of the New Testament (and the Old Testament) so helpful is that they often clear up ambiguity within the text. Teams of translators have given hours in looking at particular phrases, and even individual words, in order to come up with a good English equivalent that helps us understand the meaning of the text we’re reading.

I’m extremely thankful for that type of work, as I think we all (who read the Bible) are.

That being said, there are situations in the New Testament where ambiguity exists in the Greek, and that ambiguity has sometimes been removed through the translation process. This, then, leaves a question for us: If there’s ambiguity in the original text, is it helpful to remove it when we translate it into another language.

What I’d like to briefly do here, is to look at one example where removing that ambiguity might not actually be the most helpful thing.

John 3:16 is probably still one of the most well-known verses in all the Bible. Even those who have little to no relationship with church or the Bible know what John 3:16 says. Or, it might be better to say: they know what their translation of John 3:16 says. The reason for that is because there’s some ambiguity with the first word (in Greek) of that verse.

Here’s how the Greek looks: οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον (John 3:16a). That first word in question is: οὕτως.

There are a number of ways to translate that word—not all of which are correct in every situation—but, briefly several of them are: in this manner, thus, and so. It’s ambiguous with this statement on what John meant to communication with the word οὕτως. What’s really interesting is that by surveying a number of different English translations, we can see how faithful translators have made decisions based on their research.

For God so loved the world (NIV, ESV, NASB, KJV)
For this is how God loved the world (NLT)
For God loved the world in this way (CSB)
God loved the people of this world so much (CEV)
For this is the way God loved the world (NET)

As you can see different translations have made different decisions. And, with these translations above, all of the options for the Greek word οὕτως have been put into play. In making their particular decisions, the translators have removed the ambiguity of the Greek under the English. No longer, if we’re just reading the English text, do we feel any greyness when we come to John 3:16. God either so loved the world, loved the world in this way, or loved the world so much. The English is pretty black and white.

The question for us though, if we are going to deal with the Greek of the New Testament, is might it be better to allow the ambiguity to stand? Could it possibly be that John, himself, wanted the ambiguity there? Wouldn’t it be amazing if John really wanted to hold different—albeit complementary ideas—with the one word: οὕτως?

I think that might be exactly what was going on with the text.

If you’re interested in learning Biblical Greek and you’d like some help along the way, please email me at kevindavis1986@gmail.com. I’d be happy to discuss with you some different teaching options that will help you get into the Greek of the New Testament!

A Moment on the Scriptures: The Theology of Christmas (7)

At this point in working through the Athanasian Creed, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to start thinking of Jesus as two different people or beings.

We have been witnessing how the creed can speak of his divinity and humanity as two separate and distinct aspects of his person. So, this ultimately leads to two people, right?

Again, thankfully the creed is on top of this and works to clear up any misunderstandings.

Although he is God and man, yet Christ is not two, but one.

According to the creed, it would be incorrect to assume that because Jesus is God and man that he is somehow two beings or two persons. This is not the testimony of the creed and neither is it the testimony of the Scriptures. We’ve seen what the creed says on the matter, now let’s look at what the Scriptures say in the Gospel of John. 

In John 1, we read: “In the beginning was the λόγος (Word, singular)…and the λόγος (Word, singular) became flesh and dwelt among us, and we saw αὐτοῦ (his, singular) glory” (John 1:1, 14). I want to point out just a few things that I think are crucial for our understanding of who Jesus is based on this particular text.

1.  John’s usage of λόγος (Word) in verse 1 and 14 are singular. Grammatically, there is no hint of a plurality of persons or beings in the one Jesus. In the beginning was the Word; not the Words.

2. John says, “we saw his glory” in verse 14. Again, the grammar of the word choice makes a big difference. The word, in Greek, for “his” is αὐτοῦ, and αὐτοῦ is—you guessed it—singular. John is not speaking of multiple beings or persons here. Instead, he is speaking of the one Word of God who became flesh.

The question is: Does this make sense? How in the world can we believe in one person being God and man? The truth is you and I can’t look anywhere else in the world to see this sort of thing happening. But, this does not mean we’re left without a testimony. We have the Scriptures and we are bound by grace to them. And, in the good providence of God, we have testimonials written by fervent Christians of old like what we’ve seen in the Athanasian Creed.