I sometimes feel like I only use this blog when I wish to comment at some length on something taking place within Christianity/society. That's not bad, though, since college students find themselves inundated with information like this all the time in this digital age.
It's not the first time I've heard of the Conservative Bible Project, but I wanted to put in words what I've been thinking about this (and many other) notions going about Bible translation and the accuracy thereof.
While I applaud any attempt to translate the Bible into the English language more accurately than ever before, this attempt is so fundamentally skewed that I would warn Christians, especially conservative Christians, to avoid the product, whenever it appears.
The first statement that must be made in regard to rendering one text in a new language is this: every translation is an interpretation. Not all translations include the interpretations of the translators to the same degree, but all translation definitely involves interpretation, which makes its way into the new text. It's not only not avoidable; it's practically required. It is not possible to make a translation (except, perhaps, if it's just one word) without having to make choices in syntax, voice, mood, tense, etc. - even definition! Just as in English there are multiple words which look the same but mean different things, the same is true in other languages. Often context plays a role in rendering words into another language. It is desirable for us to make and have a translation that doesn't include the interpretive influence of the translator, but it is not possible.
Second, the most literal method to translate something into another language is to attempt a word-for-word translation. This is the best way to minimize the translator's interpretive influence over the text. Unfortunately, this means of translating tends to sacrifice fluidity and readability (especially out loud) in order to stay as close to the original as possible. Readers and hearers must be taught what certain idiomatic phrases meant in the original language, otherwise they can be confusing. This method is probably best exemplified in the New American Standard Bible - probably the most literal translation available - and King James / New King James Versions. NASB requires a grade 12 reading level, and NKJV requires a grade 8 reading level. KJV is a little hard to categorize, considering the archaic language it uses.
Another theory of Bible translation calls for the opposite effort, an attempt to render the Bible in the smoothest reading, most accessible fashion possible. In order to do this, difficult words and passages are rendered using simpler words and passages with the goal of rendering the original concept as clearly as possible. Familiar idioms are substituted for those actually appearing in the original text. God's Word, Good News, and The Living Bible are examples of this kind of translation, which is more accurately described as paraphrase.
It's not as if translators only subscribe to one school of thought or another, but rather that they sit somewhere on a spectrum ranging from word-for-word literalism to thought-for-thought paraphrase. The Revised Standard Version, New International Version, and English Standard Version sit somewhere in the middle - there is definitely an effort made toward a more accurate, word-for-word rendering in English, but at the same time they contain some fairly significant errors. Translation is extremely demanding on the translator regardless of where he is on the spectrum, but the closer you are to a paraphrase, the more the translator's interpretation of the text comes through in the translation.
All of this is fine and good - as a pastor I definitely prefer those translations that do their best to keep the interpretive influence of the translator to a minimum, but I also appreciate that it is not helpful for the Bible to be so hard to read that most people give up when they try. That said, I do not see this Conservative Bible Project as being helpful at all in getting to know the original text. Not only does it come right out and claim to be a 'thought-for-thought' translation (paraphrase) of the original texts, it also reveals that it has a clear interpretive bias - conservatism (whatever that is!)! This is, I'm afraid, the worst kind of translation attempt, not just because of the blatant paraphrase, but even more because of the preconceived notions the translators are carrying into the project.
Take a look for yourself at some of the examples provided at the link above. Eliminating some of Jesus' words because they can be taken as liberal? Eliminating socialist themes and vocabulary from the Bible because they were obviously added later? It's absurd. Anyone who comes to the Bible with these prejudices in place is using their sinful, fallen reason magisterially over Scripture, forming God in their own image and likeness, rather than hearing the Word of God and conforming their lives, as the Spirit grants it, to that Word.
History is full of individuals and societies that sought to choose which parts of the Bible are actually Scripture and which were added later for some other reason. Unfortunately, this is an entirely backward way to look at it. We don't put ourselves over God; God is God, and we are not! Or, as Ireneaus of Lyons used to summarize, 'God makes; man is made.' Only as we are continually being formed into the image and likeness of God (which we only fully receive in eternity) can we have any hope of understanding Holy Scripture, no matter which translation is read!
Friday, October 30, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
A church without the Law?
To some, this is just what they've been looking for all their lives - a church where they can belong without worrying about upholding the Ten Commandments. Think about it - to this author, apparently, things like the Ten Commandments are 'religious', but not necessarily Christian. He claims to have spent a decade of his life miserable, because had been trying to keep those commandments. Now he says that the 'Naked Gospel', a Gospel without the commandments, is a radical way of rethinking the church. Here's my favorite quotation from the article:
It's not radical because this HAS been done before - for about as long as the church has been in existence. Marcionism is an early Christian heresy known for avoiding certain Apostolic Scriptures (such as all the Gospels except John, Paul's letters, and the Old Testament) because they offended the prevailing moral sensibilities. It was a Gospel apart from the Law, which sounds eerily similar to what the 'Naked Gospel' appears to promote. There have been many other instances, including the controversy over Gospel Reductionism/the Third Function of the Law in our own circles. This is nothing new.
It's also not revolutionary; it's actually more along the lines of subterfuge. In a clever ruse, the author is not actually doing away with moral guidelines and commands, even though that's what he'd like you to think - he's simply replacing them with the Gospel. The fruit of the spirit, which are, to my understanding, gifts from God according to this new life of faith which has been received from him, are used by this author as a new kind of moral standard. Can you see why anyone would rather have to live by, 'love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control,' instead of, 'you shall have no other gods, remember the sabbath by keeping it holy, honor your father and your mother, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not give false testimony against your neighbor, etc.'? To the current way of thinking, those first gifts/traits/qualities are what we ought to strive for, and those last qualities are oppressive and a big turn off. The problem with that kind of thinking, is that the author has set up a distinction where there is none. He has divided the Word of God into two different revelations - one for then, and another for now. What happens in another two thousand years - does the whole book become irrelevant? The fruit of the spirit and the Ten Commandments are not set up against one another in Scripture - they are complimentary, not mutually exclusive. Further than that, though, he's making the claim that one is the Law, and the other is not the Law. His ruse almost works - you hear the various fruit of the spirit and think it's great, because these are ideological terms that are begging to be defined on an individual basis (another topic maybe for another post), but what it really boils down to, is that you still have a moral standard to which you must live; it may be different in content (more vague), but it's still a moral standard.
Is it more biblical than the way it was done before? Is it even biblical period? No and no - while the Ten Commandments and the fruit of the spirit are definitely biblical, this (so called) new understanding of them is not Biblical. Does that mean that I'm preaching yet another Law to you? Does that mean that I hate the Gospel and that I have no use for it? Does that mean that I hold to salvation by the works of the Law? Absolutely not! I'm positing that this author does not understand the Law and the Gospel, nor how to distinguish one from the other. The Law serves three functions.
1. It sets a standard and carries the threat of punishment to all who would act against it in thoughts, words, or deeds.
2. At the same time, when we consider ourselves in light of this standard, we see that we are fallen and that we need a Savior. That we have received a Savior in Jesus Christ and that he is ours through the free gift of faith is purely Gospel!
3. While it shows us our sin, it also instructs us in the way we should go. The redeemed of the Lord love the Lord and desire to do his will. They want to live the Christian life, but our fallen natures do not know what the Christian life even looks like. The Law tells us this that we may go and do likewise. Will we fail? Of course - and that second function is always present to drive us to repentance and faith in the only one who covers up for our failings in keeping the Law.
I believe this author has been sadly mislead in his understanding of what the church is and what it means to be a Christian. In his desire to be a Christian and have everlasting life, he has somewhere along the way become convinced by the false notion that the substance of Christianity is essentially ethical and moral. This is why he solves the problem of his failure to keep the old Law, the Ten Commandments, by replacing it with a new Law, the fruit of the spirit, which he calls the Gospel.
Friends, we do not hold to the Christian moral code for our hope of salvation. We do not cling to the Christian ethic for eternal life. We subscribe to the Christian FAITH. That's right, the substance of Christianity is Christ, and he connects with us through faith given in his Word and Holy Sacraments. What is tragic about the 'Naked Gospel' is that it's no Gospel at all - it does not actually handle the human problem, which is sin. It tries to excuse it through redefinition. Sin is covered only through the forgiveness Christ won by shedding his blood on the cross. That doesn't free us from the requirements of the Ten Commandments, and it also doesn't free us from failing to live up to them in this fallen world. What forgiveness does, however, is free us from the eternal punishment for our failings. Our price is paid because Christ, the Son of God, has been sacrificed to make our lives eternal.
So do not be swept up in 'new' ideas about a Gospel apart from the Law. They may actually be very old ideas, very bad ideas, and very unbiblical ideas. Law and Gospel both have their functions within Scripture and the church, and the Gospel does not contradict the Law. It doesn't even complement the Law. The most correct way to talk about it is that the Gospel consummates the Law - they go together. When you see your inability to keep the Law, ignore the human tendency to look for a new Law to replace it. Ignore the human tendency to try to find a new Law that you can actually uphold. Instead of trying to beat the Law at its own game, which is impossible, look to Christ. He has overcome the Law on our behalf. We must still follow it and live by it, but through Christ we are forgiven and from an eternal perspective, through Christ it is upheld for us!
"The fruit of the spirit replaces the work of the law in the Christian. And the presence of Christ indwelling us is the reason that we can be free from the entire law," he explains. "We don't even need the moral law if we have Jesus Christ, who is moral."Isn't that radical? Isn't that revolutionary? Isn't that more biblical than the way it's been done before? Actually, no, on all three accounts!
It's not radical because this HAS been done before - for about as long as the church has been in existence. Marcionism is an early Christian heresy known for avoiding certain Apostolic Scriptures (such as all the Gospels except John, Paul's letters, and the Old Testament) because they offended the prevailing moral sensibilities. It was a Gospel apart from the Law, which sounds eerily similar to what the 'Naked Gospel' appears to promote. There have been many other instances, including the controversy over Gospel Reductionism/the Third Function of the Law in our own circles. This is nothing new.
It's also not revolutionary; it's actually more along the lines of subterfuge. In a clever ruse, the author is not actually doing away with moral guidelines and commands, even though that's what he'd like you to think - he's simply replacing them with the Gospel. The fruit of the spirit, which are, to my understanding, gifts from God according to this new life of faith which has been received from him, are used by this author as a new kind of moral standard. Can you see why anyone would rather have to live by, 'love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control,' instead of, 'you shall have no other gods, remember the sabbath by keeping it holy, honor your father and your mother, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not give false testimony against your neighbor, etc.'? To the current way of thinking, those first gifts/traits/qualities are what we ought to strive for, and those last qualities are oppressive and a big turn off. The problem with that kind of thinking, is that the author has set up a distinction where there is none. He has divided the Word of God into two different revelations - one for then, and another for now. What happens in another two thousand years - does the whole book become irrelevant? The fruit of the spirit and the Ten Commandments are not set up against one another in Scripture - they are complimentary, not mutually exclusive. Further than that, though, he's making the claim that one is the Law, and the other is not the Law. His ruse almost works - you hear the various fruit of the spirit and think it's great, because these are ideological terms that are begging to be defined on an individual basis (another topic maybe for another post), but what it really boils down to, is that you still have a moral standard to which you must live; it may be different in content (more vague), but it's still a moral standard.
Is it more biblical than the way it was done before? Is it even biblical period? No and no - while the Ten Commandments and the fruit of the spirit are definitely biblical, this (so called) new understanding of them is not Biblical. Does that mean that I'm preaching yet another Law to you? Does that mean that I hate the Gospel and that I have no use for it? Does that mean that I hold to salvation by the works of the Law? Absolutely not! I'm positing that this author does not understand the Law and the Gospel, nor how to distinguish one from the other. The Law serves three functions.
1. It sets a standard and carries the threat of punishment to all who would act against it in thoughts, words, or deeds.
2. At the same time, when we consider ourselves in light of this standard, we see that we are fallen and that we need a Savior. That we have received a Savior in Jesus Christ and that he is ours through the free gift of faith is purely Gospel!
3. While it shows us our sin, it also instructs us in the way we should go. The redeemed of the Lord love the Lord and desire to do his will. They want to live the Christian life, but our fallen natures do not know what the Christian life even looks like. The Law tells us this that we may go and do likewise. Will we fail? Of course - and that second function is always present to drive us to repentance and faith in the only one who covers up for our failings in keeping the Law.
I believe this author has been sadly mislead in his understanding of what the church is and what it means to be a Christian. In his desire to be a Christian and have everlasting life, he has somewhere along the way become convinced by the false notion that the substance of Christianity is essentially ethical and moral. This is why he solves the problem of his failure to keep the old Law, the Ten Commandments, by replacing it with a new Law, the fruit of the spirit, which he calls the Gospel.
Friends, we do not hold to the Christian moral code for our hope of salvation. We do not cling to the Christian ethic for eternal life. We subscribe to the Christian FAITH. That's right, the substance of Christianity is Christ, and he connects with us through faith given in his Word and Holy Sacraments. What is tragic about the 'Naked Gospel' is that it's no Gospel at all - it does not actually handle the human problem, which is sin. It tries to excuse it through redefinition. Sin is covered only through the forgiveness Christ won by shedding his blood on the cross. That doesn't free us from the requirements of the Ten Commandments, and it also doesn't free us from failing to live up to them in this fallen world. What forgiveness does, however, is free us from the eternal punishment for our failings. Our price is paid because Christ, the Son of God, has been sacrificed to make our lives eternal.
So do not be swept up in 'new' ideas about a Gospel apart from the Law. They may actually be very old ideas, very bad ideas, and very unbiblical ideas. Law and Gospel both have their functions within Scripture and the church, and the Gospel does not contradict the Law. It doesn't even complement the Law. The most correct way to talk about it is that the Gospel consummates the Law - they go together. When you see your inability to keep the Law, ignore the human tendency to look for a new Law to replace it. Ignore the human tendency to try to find a new Law that you can actually uphold. Instead of trying to beat the Law at its own game, which is impossible, look to Christ. He has overcome the Law on our behalf. We must still follow it and live by it, but through Christ we are forgiven and from an eternal perspective, through Christ it is upheld for us!
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Salespeople
It frustrates me to no end when I'm working in my study on a Tuesday (the one day when we don't have a secretary at the chapel) and I get a sales call on the telephone. I try to be polite, but the fact of the matter is that most of the time it is a waste of both of our time (the caller's and mine) to be talking in the first place.
Most of our supplies, 'overhead', etc. are operated out of Zion Lutheran Church, and aside from that we don't have a lot of money to spend either. When it comes to things like software and publications, we're generally supportive of the things our own church body has worked together to create - CPH is our first choice for materials, we use the Concordia Plan, the Church Extension Fund is where we turned first when we were building. These organizations exist to serve LCMS congregations and because of this they are often better suited than others to cater to our particular needs.
Today I get a telephone call from someone interested in sending us medical insurance. Doesn't tell me where he's calling from, says he's not selling anything, and asks me to confirm the address so they may send information. He gives it to me, and I confirm it, okay so far. Then he asks my name, which I give him (it's on the website, very publicly available so I'm not worried about that). Then he asks my age, and I lie (it's none of his business). Then he asks my wife's age, and I say that I prefer not to give that information out. He asks about children, and again I say that I'd prefer to not share that information. He then asks whether we have insurance (yes), and then which kind. I tell him it's the Concordia plan, which only LCMS congregations may participate in, and that we're very happy with the plan and its coverage. Then he asks if he can send me information from them. I repeat that we're very happy with the insurance we have. He just says, 'Rude Pastor!' and hangs up. Thanks for wasting my time, friend.
Why do these companies believe that churches have money to burn? We don't! If we wanted your stuff we'd have found it. Thanks!
Most of our supplies, 'overhead', etc. are operated out of Zion Lutheran Church, and aside from that we don't have a lot of money to spend either. When it comes to things like software and publications, we're generally supportive of the things our own church body has worked together to create - CPH is our first choice for materials, we use the Concordia Plan, the Church Extension Fund is where we turned first when we were building. These organizations exist to serve LCMS congregations and because of this they are often better suited than others to cater to our particular needs.
Today I get a telephone call from someone interested in sending us medical insurance. Doesn't tell me where he's calling from, says he's not selling anything, and asks me to confirm the address so they may send information. He gives it to me, and I confirm it, okay so far. Then he asks my name, which I give him (it's on the website, very publicly available so I'm not worried about that). Then he asks my age, and I lie (it's none of his business). Then he asks my wife's age, and I say that I prefer not to give that information out. He asks about children, and again I say that I'd prefer to not share that information. He then asks whether we have insurance (yes), and then which kind. I tell him it's the Concordia plan, which only LCMS congregations may participate in, and that we're very happy with the plan and its coverage. Then he asks if he can send me information from them. I repeat that we're very happy with the insurance we have. He just says, 'Rude Pastor!' and hangs up. Thanks for wasting my time, friend.
Why do these companies believe that churches have money to burn? We don't! If we wanted your stuff we'd have found it. Thanks!
Monday, July 27, 2009
SOLA Conference in Grand Rapids
Last week I attended what was, for me, the best single week event in my life as a Lutheran pastor. I've had days to equal the days I had last week, but never all together like that. Never before has a week so refreshed, so energized, and so excited me about being a Lutheran pastor.
I'm speaking about the Higher Things 'Sola' youth conference held from July 21-24 in Grand Rapids, MI on the campus of Calvin College. This year, as I did last year in St. Louis, MO for the 'Amen' conference, I served as the manager for the Christ on Campus Volunteers (CCVs), the people who help make everything work for the conference by doing a lot of jobs that simply needed to be done. I couldn't have been blessed with a more cheerful and willing staff to work with and they made the week so wonderful.
The highlight of the conference for me was definitely all of the services in the chapel (and Compline in the dorms). Every day began and ended singing the Lord's praises to one another as we received the gifts of forgiveness, life, and salvation through word and sacrament. I know that receiving God's gifts isn't about 'the experience', but it is a profoundly moving thing to be joining with angels and archangels, and all the company of heaven, and 900 fellow young Lutherans in the liturgies of the church, singing with our full voices of the hope we have in our Lord Jesus Christ.
Aside from the services, it was simply great to be around so many young (and some not-so-young) Lutherans who care so much about being Lutheran. In four years, nearly every one of those youth will be in college or university somewhere, some may even be here at CMU. I pray that they continue in the faith as they mature and grow more and more curious about the depths of the riches that are there for them and us in God's Holy Word.
'Dare to be Lutheran' is the Higher Things slogan, and that's what I intend to continue doing with the college students here in the fall, Lord willing!
I'm speaking about the Higher Things 'Sola' youth conference held from July 21-24 in Grand Rapids, MI on the campus of Calvin College. This year, as I did last year in St. Louis, MO for the 'Amen' conference, I served as the manager for the Christ on Campus Volunteers (CCVs), the people who help make everything work for the conference by doing a lot of jobs that simply needed to be done. I couldn't have been blessed with a more cheerful and willing staff to work with and they made the week so wonderful.
The highlight of the conference for me was definitely all of the services in the chapel (and Compline in the dorms). Every day began and ended singing the Lord's praises to one another as we received the gifts of forgiveness, life, and salvation through word and sacrament. I know that receiving God's gifts isn't about 'the experience', but it is a profoundly moving thing to be joining with angels and archangels, and all the company of heaven, and 900 fellow young Lutherans in the liturgies of the church, singing with our full voices of the hope we have in our Lord Jesus Christ.
Aside from the services, it was simply great to be around so many young (and some not-so-young) Lutherans who care so much about being Lutheran. In four years, nearly every one of those youth will be in college or university somewhere, some may even be here at CMU. I pray that they continue in the faith as they mature and grow more and more curious about the depths of the riches that are there for them and us in God's Holy Word.
'Dare to be Lutheran' is the Higher Things slogan, and that's what I intend to continue doing with the college students here in the fall, Lord willing!
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Confessing on Campus
Today is the 479th anniversary of the presentation of the Augsburg Confession. Even though others included in the 1580 Book of Concord are considered equally normative for Lutherans, the Augsburg Confession has a place of primacy because it was the first official statement of faith from those who were disputing the false practices of the Pope's church, some of which remain to this day.
To this day it remains the starting point for dialogue with non-Lutherans and even with other Lutherans who subscribe to these confessions in a different way. If someone is serious about learning what Lutherans believe, the catechisms are great, but nothing puts it forth point by point like the Augsburg Confession.
It is a great reminder to campus pastors and others involved in campus ministry that Lutherans are confessors - we exist, we grow, we live, and ultimately, we will die as confessors. There is a temptation in academic environments to breathe deeply of the rarefied air of enlightenment and higher wisdom. This air will tell you that there is great knowledge out there to be found if you wait for it patiently without closing your mind to new and strange ideas. Constructing truth for yourself in this way takes time, and one only impedes such 'development' if one exercises hasty judgment upon one idea or another. Contributing knowledge to the discussion is only for those who are sure that their constructed realities are appealing enough to all. This air is abundant at the public university, but if you breathe deeply enough of these notions you'll suffocate in the noxious gas of relevance and tolerance.
Lutheran ministries on college campuses serve students best when we represent ourselves as we really are - confessing Christians who know what we believe and aren't afraid to say it. Talk about fresh air in this kind of environment! This doesn't mean we proselytize nor does it mean we have to be mean or arrogant about what we believe. We have a treasure in this confessed faith and it is a treasure for sharing. On this anniversary which commemorates the presentation of the Augsburg Confession, take some time to read what the confessors wrote in the face of a hostile environment, and let us learn from them to boldly confess the same faith in our time wherever we are.
To this day it remains the starting point for dialogue with non-Lutherans and even with other Lutherans who subscribe to these confessions in a different way. If someone is serious about learning what Lutherans believe, the catechisms are great, but nothing puts it forth point by point like the Augsburg Confession.
It is a great reminder to campus pastors and others involved in campus ministry that Lutherans are confessors - we exist, we grow, we live, and ultimately, we will die as confessors. There is a temptation in academic environments to breathe deeply of the rarefied air of enlightenment and higher wisdom. This air will tell you that there is great knowledge out there to be found if you wait for it patiently without closing your mind to new and strange ideas. Constructing truth for yourself in this way takes time, and one only impedes such 'development' if one exercises hasty judgment upon one idea or another. Contributing knowledge to the discussion is only for those who are sure that their constructed realities are appealing enough to all. This air is abundant at the public university, but if you breathe deeply enough of these notions you'll suffocate in the noxious gas of relevance and tolerance.
Lutheran ministries on college campuses serve students best when we represent ourselves as we really are - confessing Christians who know what we believe and aren't afraid to say it. Talk about fresh air in this kind of environment! This doesn't mean we proselytize nor does it mean we have to be mean or arrogant about what we believe. We have a treasure in this confessed faith and it is a treasure for sharing. On this anniversary which commemorates the presentation of the Augsburg Confession, take some time to read what the confessors wrote in the face of a hostile environment, and let us learn from them to boldly confess the same faith in our time wherever we are.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Sermon for Easter 7
The Heart of Easter
John 17:11b-19
Seventh Sunday of Easter B 2009
Pastor Jonathon Bakker
Grace to you and peace from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ, amen. The Holy Scripture for our consideration this day is the Gospel from
[Jesus said:] “Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one. While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. But now I am coming to you, and these things I speak in the world, that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves. I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth.”
Dear brothers and sisters in Christ, it appears to be a little out of place for our Lord to be saying these words to the disciples at the particular point in time he was saying them. These words seem even further out of place when we consider that this is still the Easter season, the season of celebration of Christ’s resurrection. Yet today we are directed to these words Jesus prayed with his disciples not after he was raised from the dead; nor even at the time of his ascension into heaven, which the church observed this past Thursday; no, our Lord prayed this prayer on the night when he was betrayed. It was so far along in the events of that evening, in fact, that Judas had already left them. Our Lord had already washed the disciples’ feet, and he had instituted the Lord’s Supper.
With so little time left before he would be handed over by Judas, surely there were more important things for Jesus to be doing than praying with and for his disciples. Yet here we hear with our own ears the words of his prayer. No more miracles for the pleading public; no more casting demons out of the possessed; and no more teachings for the gathered masses. Jesus instead took the time to pray for his disciples, and on this, the last Sunday of the Easter season in our church year; we are directed to this prayer of Jesus to send us forth next Sunday into the Pentecost Season.
It may seem like a strange way to leave Easter by focusing on the events of Maundy Thursday, but it is not so out of place if we consider that we are concerned with more in this season than the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead alone. We heard the testimony of the women, of Thomas, and of Jesus himself to the Emmaus disciples establishing that he bodily rose on the third day, according to the Scriptures. We have even learned from the passages these past weeks from John’s Gospel about the vine and the branches that we receive the fruits of Jesus’ resurrection as we abide in him and he abides in us. Today, however, Jesus’ prayer teaches us what he desired that his death on the cross and resurrection from the dead would give to humanity. Not that he did not already know what was coming – he was the subject of the prophecies and writings of the Old Testament; he knew that his death would mean forgiveness for humanity and that his resurrection from the dead would set the pattern for the eternal life of all who believed in him. Jesus’ prayer was not that his death and resurrection would accomplish what he already knew it would accomplish; his prayer was instead that the people for whom he would die would be kept and protected in the faith he had given them during their lives. It should also be said, though it is not included in the portion of this prayer that makes up our reading this morning, that Jesus was also praying for those who would believe through his disciples. In other words, Jesus has the Christian church in mind as he prays. In this Gospel, Jesus prays these things for us.
Jesus knew the weaknesses of humanity. He knew that the next few days of his disciples’ lives would be very trying. The Scriptures tell us of the denials, desertion, and disbelief of the Twelve in the days following this prayer. Jesus also knew the temptations humanity faces from the devil and the world. He conquered the temptations of the evil one in his own life, but he knew that others did not have his capacity as the Son of God to resist temptation in thought, word, and deed.
Our Lord knew all of this, and so he prayed for his disciples, and for us. ‘Holy Father,’ he said, ‘keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one.’ It is no small thing to consider the unique relationship of the Father and the Son and then to have it applied to Jesus’ followers, but this is what Jesus prays. Like a son bears his father’s name and receives the inheritance, Jesus also gave them his Father’s name – a name that would be fully revealed to them as he instituted baptism – so that they might also receive the inheritance of his Father in heaven.
Jesus went on, ‘While I was with them, I kept them in your name…but now I am coming to you, and these things I speak in the world, that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves.’ For Jesus to pray to have his joy fulfilled in his people creates an awful juxtaposition with what is about to come – even before he will go through his arrest, trial, scourging, and crucifixion, he will pray again in anguish to his Father in the Garden of Gethsemane. The fulfillment of Jesus’ joy in himself is being one with his Father and carrying out the work he was sent to accomplish. The fulfillment of Jesus’ joy in his followers, though, is different. He prayed before that they would be one as he and the Father are one, and now he asks that his joy would be theirs as well.
This is an important aspect of Jesus’ prayer because it teaches us a crucial distinction of which we must always be aware. Jesus’ death forgives the sin of the entire world, but that alone does not mean that the entire world receives everlasting life with the Father and Son in heaven. There is a difference between the accomplishment of salvation by Jesus on the cross, and the delivery of that salvation by the Holy Spirit to humanity through the Means of Grace. A hungry infant is not nourished by the fact that his mother has plenty of food in the cupboard – his parents must prepare the food and feed it to him for him to receive the benefit of the stores in the cupboard. In the same way, humanity does not automatically receive the benefits of Jesus’ victory over sin, death, and the devil simply because the events took place – the Holy Spirit must create faith in each person that Jesus did all of these things for us, so that we might live forever in heaven with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Even though he willingly went to his death on the cross, Jesus’ joy was not solely in his obedience to the Father and his resurrection from the dead. Jesus’ joy was not merely that he did what he had to do to defeat sin and open the hope of eternal life to humanity – Jesus’ joy is fulfilled in humanity when the Holy Spirit causes us to repent and call upon God for forgiveness. Jesus’ joy is fulfilled in humanity when the Holy Spirit speaks the creative word of faith into the hearts and souls of fallen men, and guards and keeps us in that faith so that there will be a harvest of believers when our Lord returns for judgment. The death and resurrection of Jesus for the forgiveness of sins does not grant its benefit apart from the faith that he did it for us – just as staring at a pill in the doctor’s hand does not cure us of our illness. Likewise, faith in anything apart from Jesus’ death and resurrection receives nothing from God – it is as beneficial to a truly sick person as receiving a sugar pill. Eternal life requires both Jesus’ victory over sin, death, and the devil and the Spirit given faith that Jesus’ accomplishments are also for us.
Jesus’ prayer is that, in spite of the assaults he knows his followers will face in this world, we would not be left to face the evil one. He does not pray that we be removed from the world; in fact he asks that we be protected while in the world, that we be guarded from the attacks of the devil. Christians are not of the world just as Jesus is not of the world, but that does not mean that we have nothing to do with the world. This is why, I believe, this prayer is actually a profound bridge from the Easter season to Pentecost. Next week at Pentecost you will hear of the Spirit coming upon the Apostles as the Christian church begins its missionary work to the world. The salvation Jesus accomplished on the cross is delivered throughout the world by the power of the Holy Spirit working in unworthy men.
So, dear friends, this is the heart of Easter – this is why Jesus went to the cross. He did it so that we may be one – one with one another in love and service; one with one another in the hope we have in the Christian faith; but above all else, he did it so that we may be one with himself and the Father in heaven; our earthly lives sanctified in the truth of the forgiveness of sins, consecrated for everlasting life, and delivered in the end to eternal salvation.
To Christ alone be all the glory, forever and ever, amen.
The peace of God which passes all understanding keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus our Lord, amen.
June Newsletter Article
For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.
1 Corinthians 15:3-4
Dear Brothers and sisters in Christ, there are important things, and then there are important things. Knowing what time we must show up for our jobs or classes is important. Making sure you have all the ingredients before you begin baking a cake is important. Remembering which child goes to which practice at what time – and when to pick them up – is also important. None of these things, however, is equal to another in importance.
I think we would all agree that while we want to be sure to have everything in place before we begin mixing the shortening and the sugar, we would first want to watch the clock to be certain we can arrive in time to meet our work or school commitments. I think we’d also agree that if forced to make the choice, we would sacrifice time for our career to ensure our children are not left alone for hours, waiting for a ride. Everything is important, but not everything is equally important.
I write this because I have been struck in recent weeks at how carefully and cleverly the world, the devil, and our own fallen flesh work to undermine the gifts our Lord has given us. Christians are generally well prepared for the obvious and blatant attacks – few of us, I hope, would give credence to the so-called scholarship of Dan Brown in his popular novels, just like few of us are convinced that James Cameron will ever find the lost tomb of Jesus. We Christians struggle, however, when we assume that things are fine and that there is no assault taking place on our soul and against the faith we have been given, for that is when our enemies work the hardest – when they can fool us into believing that nothing is happening at all.
Our enemies often accomplish this toxic task by simply adjusting our priorities. The one I see (and experience myself!) most often is the gentle shift from seeing Christianity as ‘the Christian faith’ to seeing it as ‘the Christian moral code’ or ‘the Christian ethical guidebook to life.’ It is not that we are denying the former and asserting the latter – again, the world, the devil, and our flesh do not work against us so visibly – but rather that we acquiesce to the temptation that God cares just as much about what we do as he does about what we believe. Both are certainly important, but in God’s eyes they are most definitely not equal in importance!
The Apostle Paul, writing to the Corinthians – a congregation exhibiting a multitude of moral and theological problems – puts our priorities in order when he writes that he delivered to them (and us) first of all that which he also received: that Jesus Christ died for our sins and that he was buried and rose again the third day, all of this according to the Scriptures. In other words, the most important thing to Paul (and to God!) is not a moral exhortation to bring the sinful flesh into submission; the most important thing is that Jesus Christ died for our sins, and that he rose again as the victor over death! Paul did also wrote about the moral problems in Corinth, and those words are no less true today than they were then, but Jesus’ death and resurrection is, first of all, the most important thing and the essence of Christianity. As we celebrate one year in the new facility this coming month and embark upon a much anticipated summer of warm weather, let us not give any way to the world, the devil, or our sinful flesh in rearranging the important things in our lives as Christians. Christ has risen from the dead and our sins are forgiven!
To him alone be all the glory, forever and ever, Amen.
Pastor Bakker
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)