Jesus The: Sage

A short series of short reflections on the person of Christ in the Scriptures

For me, Jesus is The Sage. He is enlightened, inspiring, and His teachings reach into the very depths of one’s soul. Out of all that Jesus said and did, the sermon on the mount (Matt 5-7) is probably among some of His greatest teachings. From “blessed are the poor in spirit” (Matt 5:3), “salt and light” (Matt 5:13-16), the lord’s prayer (Matt 6:5-14), to the golden rule (Matt 7:12-14), Jesus’ teachings drip with wisdom for all to come and drink from. If the Bible is anything, it’s wisdom literature that reaches its crux in the teachings of Jesus (Ps 19:7). As I walk through the pages of God’s Word, I can almost feel Jesus leading me by the hand from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22 into a life long journey to wisdom. The Bible says in Proverbs 4:6-7, “Do not forsake wisdom, and she will protect you; love her, and she will watch over you. Wisdom is supreme; therefore, get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding.”

The cost of following The Sage is your life. Yet, The Sage will protect you and watch over you if you love Him. However, a life walking after The Sage feels like anything but. I believe wisdom’s most effective tools in the classroom of life is time plus suffering. Jesus Himself spent a life full of suffering up to the cross itself, and no servant is greater than The Master (Jhn 15:20). The Sage has taught me much about suffering, much about self, much about God. The greatest lesson? “to fear God, keep His commandments, and to love others as yourself” (Ecc 12:13; Lev 19:18; Mk 12:31).

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.”

― Confucious

Thoughts on the Sacraments

Hey guys. I’ve written elsewhere on church here and here and this is sorta in that same vein with a focus on the sacraments. Enjoy 🙂

Church. It is vitally essential for the life of a Christian. A church is a place where people from all tribes, tongues, and nations can come together to worship their King Jesus as one body; one family unified to one another in Christ. Churches look different all over the world from place to place, from context to context. However, there should be fundamental biblical principles that guide every church in how it looks. Why? Because Jesus is the head of the Church, and it’s up to him, not us, in how it is ultimately governed, in how it runs. Where do we turn to then to discover what a biblically healthy church is? Well, of course, the Bible. 

As good Christians, we believe that “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness so that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Notice the implications of this passage. Scripture (the Bible) is:

  1. “God-breathed.” This means the Bible comes from God Himself and therefore carries a certain weight of authority that no other text does. 
  2. “Useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness so that the person of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work.” This means that the authoritative scriptures have everything we need in them to live the Christian life. Or in other words, if you want to know how to build a healthy church, read the Bible (especially the New Testament). 

Of course, that doesn’t mean it’s always as simple as picking up the Bible and knowing exactly what God wants for the church. The Bible is by no means an exhaustive treatise on building a church, but the New Testament does give the standard for one. Here are some of those principles now: 

  1. The Word. God speaks in different ways (through nature, people, and other sources). However, the most straightforward and most authoritative way God has spoken is through the Scriptures. Therefore, coupled with the idea of 2 Timothy 3, it makes complete sense then to have faithful teaching as the centrepiece of church.
  2. The Sacraments.
  •  The Lord’s Supper: the sacraments have had various use throughout church history and have all been interpreted differently. Yet, one thing in common remains; among nearly every major Christian tradition, these two sacraments have been observed regularly in one way or another. Why? Because it’s thoroughly biblical. Every Gospel mentions Jesus having Passover (the Lord’s Supper) with his disciples (Mt. 26:17–30, Mk. 14:12–26, Lk. 22:7–39 and Jn. 13:1–17:26). The early church carried on this tradition (Acts 2: 42, 46; 20:7), where they did it regularly in remembrance of Jesus (1 Cor 11:24-25). The Lord Supper took on three principal dimensions. 1. The remembrance of Jesus’ death and resurrection (the new covenant) and the churches unity to Christ. 2. the unity believers had with one another. 3. The covenant’s performance or drama. As the local church takes up the elements (the bread and wine), they are acting out the establishment of the new covenant as the Spirit draws them closer into the presence of Christ and one another.  
  • Baptism: The occurrences of baptism in the Bible are numerous. First, we see Baptism in the New Testament performed by John the Baptist (Matt 3) and subsequently, Jesus being baptised (Matt 3:13-17). As He was being baptised, Jesus said, “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness.” Whatever this means, it at least proposes that baptism is extremely important, so much so that Jesus expected us to baptise people as part of the great commission (Matt 28:19). The early church took up this sacrament as it was an integral part of their life and ministry (Acts 2:38). It was an important part of the salvation process (Acts 2:38, “repent and be baptized”) and was accomplished via confession and prayer “in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5). Like the Lord’s Supper, Baptism took on three principles dimensions. 1. The symbolism of a new believers passage from death in the world to life in Christ (Rom 6:1-11). 2. The unity they now had with Christ (Gal 3:27). 3. the unity they had with other believers (1 Cor 12) hence the need for it before one becomes a member of a local church in some traditions (i.e. reformed traditions). As a local church baptises a new believer into the faith, they are publicly declaring their identification and unity to Christ and that new believer as the Spirit works through the drama of passing from death to life. What about Spirit baptism? Both baptisms are taught in the Bible and typically are inseparable (Jhn 3:5). No one denies that Spirit baptism is a thing, but to be baptised by the Spirit without water would have been an unthought of practice in the early church and vice versa. 

As I’ve explained, these sacraments are essential to any church for three main reasons. 1. The Bible and, in turn, God expects a church to practice them (this in itself should be reason enough). 2. They’re transformative in that the Spirit works through the practice of them to sanctify the participant in a similar way that He works through the Word. 3. They supplement good preaching and demonstrate the Good News to new believers and people we invite to church. 

Finally, all this presupposes the assembly of a local church which consists of members (1 Cor 12:21-26), elders and deacons (1 Tim 3:1-13; Tit 1), and discipline (Matt 18:13-17). 

With all these elements in place, a local church can image God and fulfil the great commission. Without them, a local church will become deficient and simply unbiblical. We should never trade a biblical principle for a pragmatic one, no matter how much it seems to work. If something is working, it might be cause for us to re-evaluate our theology, but never to compromise on it. God’s standards are there for a reason, and it’s our job to simply obey even if droves of people aren’t coming through the doors. 

Major on the Majors & Minor on the Minors

Five hundred years ago, the hammer fell, and the nail-pierced the door at Wittenburg, which gave birth to the Protestant movement which, over time, grew into the theologically diverse Church that we have today. Some say this is a bad thing, that Protestants never agree on anything, everyone in a sense is their own Pope, their ultimate authority. People argue that the Protestant movement is so fractured that it works against the unity that Scripture promotes (John 17:23; 1 Cor 1:10; Eph 4:11-13; Col 3:13-14). Indeed I say, the Bible encourages unity and even commands it. But you know the old saying; sometimes you have to crack a few eggs to make the perfect omelette. That omelette is still cooking (we’re always reforming). 

However, I believe as one friend told me a long time ago that the diversity in the Protestant movement is apart of God’s will to deliberately hold the entire Church accountable to interpreting His Word correctly. Rather than relying on just one or a few people to interpret Scripture accurately for us (this is the priesthood of believers). This was a huge part of the Reformation. The Word was placed into the hands of all of God’s people, not just a few “qualified” men. Praise God for that. We can’t, though, turn a blind eye to apparent differences in our movement. One can walk down a street and note a Presbyterian church next to a Uniting, next to a Baptist, next to a Lutheran, next to an Anglican, all within thirty seconds of one another. With the wealth of information (mostly thanks to the internet) and the progression of theological scholarship, even just one local church can have a diverse theological membership or leadership within its congregation. So, how do we then “major on the majors, and minor on the minors” so the speak? How do we minister with the vast range of theological differences even within our local churches?

Short answer – it depends. Read on.

1. Confessions or statements of faith:

Throughout church history, many confessions, creeds, and statements have been written and nutted out by men greater than most of us that usually major on the majors. These majors include the nature of God, the hypostatic union, the nature of humanity, inerrancy and inspiration concerning Scripture, the atonement, sacraments, and in one way or another the Gospel (repentance, faith, Jesus’ life, death and resurrection etc.). Reading through some of these confessions and even potentially adopting one for your church (or even for just yourself) will go a long way in avoiding potential pitfalls in the future.

2. Humility and grace:

We must remember, especially those of us who are theologically trained, to maintain a position of humility and grace to those we disagree with on the minors. Minor doctrines are positions we might take that we believe to be evident in the Scriptures but don’t necessarily affect one’s standing with God. These minors issues might include eschatology, Calvinism/Arminianism/ Molinism, the age of the earth or universe (evolution and science etc.), continuationism/cessationism, again the sacraments (depending on one’s view, you can categorise some of these in different tiers), complementarianism/egalitarianism. We must always be ready to be wrong on minor issues while still believing we’re right on what we believe (otherwise, why believe it?).

3. Ecclesiology, prayer, and coffee:

Almost every Protestant denomination majors on the majors. You should be able to walk into a Presbyterian church, a Baptist church, a Lutheran church, and hear the same Gospel being preached to their members. However, secondary issues can affect how we minister together practically. For example, pedo vs credo baptism understandably affects the way one does church, and it has some bearing on how the Gospel is displayed, but the differences aren’t salvific. Something like this I would categorise as a secondary issue – significant enough that it affects our ecclesiology, but not so important that I wouldn’t consider the person I disagree with a heretic. A third-tier issue is something like eschatology or the age of the earth, these don’t necessarily have a bearing on your ecclesiology but are important enough to how one largely interprets the Bible and in turn the Christian life. These things can affect how we do church (depending on how militant the person is about their position), but they don’t have to. Third-tier issues can inevitably tie into second and even major tiered issues, so it’s understandable why, in some cases, people may not be able to minister together. However, if leaders and members can somehow embrace the differences, it would make for a theologically, robust church.

This kind of unity is fostered by taking the command to love one another seriously (John 13:34-35), to maintain a humble yet open disposition displayed first from the leadership and then by the members. Lots of prayers, as I’ve heard it said, you can’t hate someone you pray for often, and lots of conversations over good quality coffee with an open Bible. Finally, I’d say encourage mature theological discussion and training. Whether it’s from a seminary, college or your church, people can only grow if you’re willing to teach. If we can encourage this kind of unity and maturity in our theological development, it will hopefully flow out into our churches. It’s hard but not impossible, and I think the rewards are worth it. At the end of the day if the differences end up being too great, at least walk away in love trying to keep the unity of the faith.

The Image of God: Genesis 1-11 Part V

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them. – Genesis 1:26-27

The Imago Dei or the image of God has been discussed at length for a long, long time. Throughout history, some have assumed that the image of God refers to intelligence and the ability to discern between moral choices. Others have thought it’s more about the soul or spirit of a human. I believe that the image is something functional (something we do) and ontological (something we have). Let’s explore.

One of the most distinguishing characteristics of Yahweh is that He wants to be known, and He wants to know His creation as well. This is somewhat bizarre because most gods in the ancient world weren’t really concerned with the affairs of humanity unless thought they could get something out of them. Yahweh, on the other hand, is entirely driven by love, order, shalom and holiness. So what does this mean for the Imago Dei?

In the ancient world, kings were known to be the earthly representatives of their god. In Egypt, for example, the pharaoh was thought to be the incarnation and representation of whatever major or popular god that was in at the time. Furthermore, these representative kings were to rule over their nation as though the god itself was ruling, thus displaying all of the god’s attributes and character. Other examples in the ancient world also show how the representatives of the gods also played a mediatory role; a sort of middle man between the god and the nation. In Genesis 1-2, there is a similar message. Humanity (both male and female) are created and endowed with something of the Creator God. They intrinsically possess the divine (ontology) as they were made to image or display their Creator to the rest of creation (function). According to the passage, humanity was to image Yahweh by “having dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth” (Genesis 1:26) and to work and keep the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:15). What does this mean for us then?

In Genesis 3, classically entitled as the Fall, humanity meets a weird talking serpent (sin incarnate), they’re tempted, they take from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They are then exiled from the Garden because they failed in their vocation to be keepers of Eden and to rule over creation. Instead of ruling over the serpent (sin), they are ruled by it. Instead of protecting Eden (Yahweh’s dwelling space), they let chaos and sin come in and take over. So when someone does terrible at their job, they’re fired. So were Adam and Eve.

Genesis 1-3 is unique. There are several ways one could interpret and understand the story. One way I think we should understand Genesis 1-3 is that it’s the story of all of humanity. God has tasked all of us (Christian or not) with a divinely appointed job to lovingly rule over creation, to work it and to keep it so that God can live among us. From before even the very beginning, God’s intention for His creation and humanity especially was that He would dwell and live in loving harmony with them. This is where the Imago Dei kicks in. Every single one of us has been created to reflect and show God’s very being by doing the above tasks. Reflecting or imaging is inescapable for us, it’s a part of our nature. Now, however, we image and reflect the other gods (idols) we worship, namely death and chaos. Reflect on this quote by one of my favourite scholars G. K. Beale:

“People will always reflect something, whether it be God’s character or some feature of the world. If people are committed to God, they will become like him; if they are committed to something other than God, they will become like that thing, always spiritually inanimate and empty like the lifeless and vain aspect of creation to which they have committed themselves.”

Now consider this passage from Psalm 115:4-8:

Their idols are silver and gold,

the work of human hands.

They have mouths, but do not speak;

eyes, but do not see.

They have ears, but do not hear;

noses, but do not smell.

They have hands, but do not feel;

feet, but do not walk;

and they do not make a sound in their throat.

Those who make them become like them;

so do all who trust in them.

If there’s one thing humanity loves more then themselves its flat out drama (chaos). We’re confusing little things. One the one hand we protest and petition for peace on earth, we desire to see the end of famine and disease, we boil and rage at corruption in government, and we weep and wail over death and genocide. Yet we send people into war (sometimes a necessary evil). We spend $50 on a shirt made in Taiwanese sweatshops. We hate sexual abuse and fight against rape culture, yet we watch porn and get excited over shows like Game of Thrones that perpetuate that culture. We “know” what’s wrong and what’s right, yet we’re in a constant struggle to live consistently. You could say that we “suppress the truth in our unrighteousness” (Rom 1:18). All the technology and scientific advancements in the world won’t give us what we need, a new heart, with new desires, and the ability to live consistently (Ezekiel 36:26). Once, that’s solved, then we can once again image and reflect God who is life and love rather than the gods of death and chaos. How do we obtain new hearts?

Great question. Ezekiel 36:26 (cf: Eze 11:19-20; 18:31; Ps 51:10; Jn 3:3; 2 Cor 3:3), is something God wants to do to everyone in Christ to restore the Imago Dei and have them return (to greater heights) to their intended role in the cosmos. Jesus lived, died and rose from the dead as a perfect human being, as our representative (Rom 5:12-14), so that by grace, through faith (Eph 2:8-9) we can be united to this new and perfect human (1 Cor 15:22) by the Holy Spirit (Jhn 3:5-6). When we’re united, we’re then washed clean and made pure (1 Cor 6:11) – we’re made genuinely human in the Messiah Jesus. Now we’re able to truly love, rule, reflect and keep as God created us to be.

The Sin of Scepticism: Finding Wisdom in an Age of Criticism

The Age of Reason gave birth to the sceptic in a way never before experienced by humanity. All of a sudden, everything we read and believed was to be grounded in evidence and reason. If it didn’t make sense then it didn’t exist. In a lot of ways, this was really great. We could call in to question once held to beliefs, challenge them, and we could see if they held ground. This paved the way to a lot of what we have today technologically and even what we’ve rediscovered historically. Unfortunately, scepticism has become the default position of our generation, it has become one of the greats gods of our era. Recently, a good friend of mine asked me “Why do you reckon we find it easier to be negative and sceptical than positive?”

Love is the quintessential epicentre of Christ and ergo, the Christian faith. We are seriously terrible at loving people because we’ve learnt to hate our entire lives. What I mean is this. Consider one of the great meta-narratives making its way throughout our time. “You’re special. You’re smart. Whatever you put your mind to, you can achieve. You’re important.” This narrative perpetuates the notion that the individual is the most important thing in existence. We’re taught to love ourselves, to think highly of ourselves, and to believe we can do anything if we just try… and even then we’re still utterly amazing if we don’t. However, in the never-ending quest of self-love, we actually end up seeing others as less important, less special, less intelligent, less capable, and less wise. One can see how steeped in pride this is, easily leading to hating your brother and thinking him a fool.

Let me be clear if you’re reading this: in and of yourself, you are extremely mundane.  This is hard for us to come to terms with because every movie we watch, or book we read, the world is telling us that we’re destined for greatness, that we’re the chosen one who’s going to bring balance to the Force, that we can destroy the Matrix, throw the ring into Mt. Doom, and save the princess. Reality sucks. People go their entire lives and die without ever finding love, purpose or meaning. It’s tragic but nonetheless real.

Second, is change and challenge. We automatically disagree with new or different positions because change is an incredibly hard thing to have us do. Why? Because realising that you have to change and grow is admitting to yourself and to the world around you that you’re not as perfect as you thought. It’s an immensely humbling and often painful process which is why it might take years for someone to even shift their perspective on a certain issue let alone change the way they live.

Third, positive reinforcement, and having an open disposition to others’ opinions rather than being immediately dismissive means believing that another might have more wisdom than you. This is a big struggle for a lot of us because we’ve lived our lives acting (never admitting) that we’re always right about anything and everything we hold to. All of a sudden, someone else might know better than you and that’s a huge kick in the backside – extremely deflating to one’s ego (especially mine).

Finally, let me say this. I think God holds Christians to a high standard. The Scriptures tell us that Christ has become the wisdom of God, and we’re in Him (1 Cor 1:26-30), and if the Fall was about us living by our own wisdom and not God’s (Gen 3), then we’re called to not be wise in our own sight (Rom 12:14-21), to uphold one another in honour (Rom 12:10), and to even consider others better then ourselves (Philip 2:3). Now we’re getting somewhere, no we’re displaying the love of God. So, instead of coming into a conversation or situation with an attitude of disbelief or with scepticism, we should be asking “what can God teach me through this person. Especially, if all things are worked out for my good (Rom 8:28), even this conversation?”