Commentary on John 1:2-3a

Another semester, another Greek class. I am already enjoying the homework in particular for this one. This semester, my classmates and I each have to translate the first chapter of John's Gospel, verse by verse. We even get to examine verbs and diagram some of the sentences! That aside, after my teacher diagrammed the first verse in class, he paused for a minute to elaborate on how the sentence structure revealed the emphasis of John's thinking as expressed in his writing. Since then, as I have been translating the rest of my Greek assignment, I have constantly been writing down my thoughts and commentaries on these verses. Below is my translation of these first nine verses, and my exegetical teaching on the second and third verses:

¹ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² He was with God in the beginning. ³ Through Him all things were made, and without Him not even one thing was made. What came into being ⁴ by him was life, and the life was the light of men; ⁵ and the light shone in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it. (John 1:1-5, personal translation from the Greek)

Verse 2: "He was with God in the beginning." This verse repeats and emphasizes what was in the previous verse; although the Word was God, it was also distinct from God. Although the Word possessed the qualities and nature of God, it was still somehow apart from God. This is a concept relating to the Trinity--each Person of the Trinity is God, but each Person is also distinct from each other. By repeating that the Word was with God in the beginnging, John continued to attract the attention of his Jewish readers. Additionally, by saying that the Word was in the beginning, John was repeating that the Word was present at creation in Genesis 1 with the Father and the Holy Spirit (Gen. 1:1-2) and that the Word was therefore existant before the creation of the world. Again, if the Word was before the created universe, then it must have been uncreated--it must have been eternally co-existant with God.

Verse 3a: "Through Him all things were made, and without Him not even one thing was made." Again, John continues to compare and contrast how the Word was God and yet distinct from God. Even though the Word is distinct from God (as shown in the previous verse), John is claiming that He possesses the same attributes as God--namely, His creative power. As a matter of fact, John is stating that 'the Word' is what brought the entire creation into existence. Now, John is not saying that the Word (God the Son) created the universe, instead of God the Father, but that the Father used the Son to create the world (since the Word was with Him in the beginning); that is why John uses the word "through" in this verse. John also contiues to speak to his Jewish audience here; any Jew reading this would have been extremely familiar with how God created the universe with only His words--here, John is adding an entire new dimension to Gen. 1 by claiming that the words God used to fashion everything were actually the Word, through which the Father excercised His tremendous creative power.

To help you grasp this concept, imagine God the Father is like a painter carefully deciding how to begin His artwork. A painter possesses the artistic skill, and can express it directly (such as painting with his fingers), or indirectly (such as through a tool). The Father chose to use the Son as the means through which He created the world, instead of directly creating by Himself. This is similar to how a painter can chose to use a paintbrush to design a work of art, instead of expressing himself directly with his fingers. While this analogy is limited, it gets accross the point I am trying to make from John's Gospel: the Father and the Son had equal roles in the creation of the universe. (Yes, the Spirit also had a role that was just as important, but the Son's role in creation is the focus of this verse.) Here, John was giving clarification to the role that the Son played in Genesis; in the foundation of the New Testament, he was shedding light on the beginning of the Old Testament. Isn't it just incredible how the word of God comes together?

What Did Jesus Ever Do for You?

Earlier this semester, I was reading my Bible after breakfast. As I was reading, I came accross Luke 8:26-39, the story where Jesus drives out demons from a man into a herd of pigs. You are probably familar with this story, but in case you are not, I will relate it:

After Jesus demonstrated His divine power over nature by calming a storm, He and His disciples landed at the region of the Gerasenes. There, Jesus was met by a demon-possessed man. The demons dwelling within this man were completely scared of who Christ was, and begged Him to not torture them. Instead of commanding the demons to go into the Bottomless Pit, Jesus allowed the demons to flee into a herd of pigs that were grazing close by. Later, the people from a nearby city came and discovered the once-demon-possessed man calmly sitting next to Jesus. Out of fear for the power that Jesus wielded, the townspeople asked Him to leave. As Jesus was leaving, the man that He had saved from the demons wanted to come with Him--he begged to follow Jesus. So of course Jesus allowed him to come along, right? Wrong.

This might not make sense at first--after all, why would Christ reject a ready and willing disciple? Here was Jesus' reason: "Return home and tell how much God has done for you." Note, that Jesus was not rejecting a willing disciple, He was rejecting the man's intention. God's plan was different from the man's, and God corrected the man. This formerly demon-possessed man thus went out and told all over town what Jesus had done for him. He wasn't just satisfied with telling his family--he needed to get out and tell as many people as possible about what God had done for him and how He had saved him. This is something that we can all learn: God may not want all of us to actively witness to people in other countries--sometimes, He may want us to stay at home and actively witness to our neighbors. Regardless, we are all called to tell others of what God has done in our personal lives.

So--what about you? What has Jesus ever done for you? And how many people in your town have you told?

Commentary on John 1:1

Another semester, another Greek class. I am already enjoying the homework in particular for this one. This semester, my classmates and I each have to translate the first chapter of John's Gospel, verse by verse. We even get to examine verbs and diagram some of the sentences! That aside, after he diagrammed the first verse in class, my teacher paused for a minute to elaborate on how the sentence structure revealed the emphasis of John's thinking as expressed in his writing. Since then, as I have been translating the rest of my Greek assignment, I have constantly been writing down my thoughts and commentaries on these verses. Below is my translation of these first nine verses, and my exegetical teaching on the first verse:

¹ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² He was with God in the beginning. ³ Through Him all things were made, and without Him not even one thing was made. What came into being ⁴ by him was life, and the life was the light of men; ⁵ and the light shone in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.

 ⁶ There came a man, having been sent from God; his name was John. ⁷ He came as a witness in order that he might bear witness about the light, so that all might believe through him. ⁸ He was not the light, but came in order that he might witness about the light. ⁹ The true light which enlightens all men was coming into the world. (John 1:1-9, personal translation from the Greek)

Verse 1: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Something I noticed here is how John treats the concept of 'the Word' (the pre-incarnate Jesus): "In the beginning was the Word." John is saying that the Word existed at the beginning of time and creation itself. Obviously, if "the Word" existed before creation, then it must have not been created, and John must be using it as a figure of speech for God, right? Well, yes and no. Yes, because logic dictates that the Word must be God, and the fact that it existed before creation illustrates that it possessed the divine attributes of eternal existence and timelessness. No, because John goes on to say that "...and the Word was with God..." ...What? If the Word existed before creation, then it must not have been created by God. If it was not created by God, then it must have been God, since God created all things. So why is John saying that the Word was with God, instead of saying that the Word was God?

Well, we need to look at the bigger picture: John immediately goes on to say that "...and the Word was God." So this resolves the question, right? No; it only compounds it! After all, John just said that the Word was with God, meaning it was somehow co-eternal with God and yet somehow distinct! But John then says that the Word was God, indicating that even though the Word was distinct from God, it was still God! How can the reader reconcile this seemingly opposite statements? First, realize that John was saying this: that although the Word was a separate person from God, it (or rather He) still possessed the characteristics and nature of God. So the pre-incarnate Christ possessed the divine attribute of eternality and timelessness, and so existed in the beginning, and yet could be with God (the person, in the form of the Father) while still being God, or rather, having the nature of God.

Additionally, the Word (Jesus) is not only equated with and distincted from God, but John also repeats the language of Genesis 1:1 ("In the beginning...") to evoke a better understanding to his readers, especially his Jewish audience. Also of interest to his Jewish readers, John uses the term "the Word was..." three times; saying something three times in Hebrew thought was to give it the utmost importance, similar to how in Isaiah 6, the seraphs proclaimed "Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty; the whole earth is full of His glory." This shows how the concept of the Word's divinity and personhood was the center of John's focus and thinking here, establishing the premise of his entire Gospel, almost like a thesis statement for a paper.

It's strange to think of it as such, but imagine it like this: John 1:1 is distillation of John's entire teaching about and defense of Jesus: Jesus Christ is God! All of the rest of John's entire Gospel is about proving and supporting this sole statement. This includes the ministry of Jesus, the miraculous signs and wonders he enacted, and the incredible sacrifice that He ultimately made to satisfy His own divine wrath and love. Truely, this is a powerful verse to begin the Good News about Christ--and think about the consequences if this doctrine--Jesus is God--was forgotten, ignored, or just plain rejected in the church! After all, if Jesus were not considered God, then "we are of all people most to be pitied." (1 Cor. 15:18-20, NIV) Upon this truth all of Christianity--the salvation of the elect--hinges, and it is truely this--Jesus is God!

P.S. --Something else that struck me in this verse was how "the word was" is a bit similar to Jesus' statements of "I am." While I don't know if the two have any relation to each other (especially considering the emphasis of Jesus' divinity in the Gospel of John), it still made me think about the matter.

Farsightedness

A few weeks ago, I was introduced to the youth book series The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel. I will not go into the pros and cons of the series here, but there is something about which I would like to speak: how immortality is treated in the series. At one point, an immortal character reflects upon how extreme long life altered his perspective--originally, he and his wife would plan ahead by weeks and months. However, after they gained immortality, they realized that they could plan ahead by years and even decades at a time. The character then briefly wondered that if he himself and his wife planned ahead by decades while they were only a few centuries old, how much more "farsighted" would a being thousands of years old be?

As a Christian, this is uniquely applicable to ourselves. While we are still physically mortal, spiritually, we have new life, and will spend eternity with God. However, non-believers will also experience eternal life--but apart from God. Therefore, both my life and the life of the non-Christian have eternal consequences. So, I as a Christian should not plan years ahead, but eternally ahead--storing up spiritiual rewards for myself in heaven (discipleship) and witnessing to non-believers (evangelism). We should not be focused on short-term pleasures, but work towards long-term, life-term, and eternal-term goals; not thinking about the here and near, but on the far and wide.

This is not to say that we should never do something short-term, but that we should perform short-term activities as part of a longer-term objective. It is one thing for me to read a book for the sake of reading a book--that is nearsighted. But if I read a book as part of learning to be a better student, a better father, a better husband, or a better Christian, then I am adding purpose to my immediate actions. I may have a short-term goal like teaching next week's lesson, but it is really part of a bigger picture--discipling part of the body of Christ. Aiming at long-term goals grants greater meaning and overall purpose to our short-term plans.

But wait--I am a finite being, who naturally plans in finite lengths. God is an infinite being, and so naturally thinks eternal-term. So I end my post with this: God, in His infinite wisdom, plans His actions not just at an immediate or short-term level, like when He answers the prayers of His adopted children. The Father works out His method of accomplishing His goals accross all of time itself--and beyond!

So--how farsighted are your goals--and do they match up with God's?

How Much Have You Been Forgiven?

A few weeks ago at church, the pastor's sermon was about the story of the woman who annointed Jesus' feet. Many of you are likely familier with this story, but I will retell it here: Jesus is feasting at the house of a Pharisee named Simon. While there, a "sinful" woman from the town came to Jesus and wept at his feet. Then, she poured perfume on his feet, and wiped his feet with her hair. Simon's response is initially negative and skeptical: "If this man [Jesus] were really a prophet, then he would know that this woman is a sinner." However, Jesus knew what the Pharisee was thinking, and responded with this parable:

“Two people owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he forgave the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?” Simon replied, “I suppose the one who had the bigger debt forgiven.” “You have judged correctly,” Jesus said. Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—as her great love has shown. But whoever has been forgiven little loves little.” Luke 7:41-47, NIV

What stood out to me in this passage was verse 47: "Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—as her great love has shown. But whoever has been forgiven little loves little." Those who have greater sin feel greater guilt and remorse when truly convicted by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, when they are forgiven of their sins, their greater guilt is replaced with a greater love for God in His kindness, and a greater longing to live for Him, and a greater witness to others of Christ's sacrifical living. This is not to say that the biggest sinners are always the greatest Christians, nor is it to say that children raised in a Christian home who have accepted Christ at a young age cannot become believers of great love and kindness--rather, that those who were formerly greater sinners are more likely to appreciate their salvation.

So: how much has God forgiven you? And how much do you love Jesus in response?

Choking Hazard

The other day, I was reading in my Bible, and I came accross these words: "No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, or grapes from briers. A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of." (Luke 6:43-45, NIV)

That got me started thinking--the condition of my heart determines what my words are. Actions might speak louder than words, but words reveal what's in our hearts. So, what are my words? What do I talk about? If someone were to listen in on a conversation with one of my friends, what would they walk away with? Would that person say "Gee, that young man is a dedicated Christian"? Or would they say this instead?--"Man, I just don't know about him. I think he's a Christian, but I also think that he's got his priorities mixed up. He's having his faith choked out of him by the weeds of this world, and he doesn't even know it."

In addition to reading the passage above, I also read this section immediately following: "Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say? As for everyone who comes to me and hears my words and puts them into practice, I will show you what they are like. They are like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built. But the one who hears my words and does not put them into practice is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. The moment the torrent struck that house, it collapsed and its destruction was complete." (Luke 6:46-49, NIV)

That also got me thinking: am I being that sort of hypocrite that Jesus is describing? Do I say "Lord, Lord," and not follow what God tells me to do? Am I being torn between God and this world, instead of fully belonging to God? Am I not putting into practice the words I have heard God speak to me? Am I praying one thing, but really doing the opposite of that?Do I fully realize the danger I am in, if I really am a hearer instead of a doer? Jesus described the the destruction of that house as "complete". Can I afford to ignore that?

O Lord, help me to avoid the choking power of weeds of this world and to continually focus on you. Give me the strength to give up the temporary things of this world (no matter how painful), and to instead work for the eternal things of the next world. In Jesus' name, amen.

How Deep the Father's Love for Us

A couple of weeks ago, we sang this song at church: "How Deep the Father's Love for Us". As we sang, it just hit me--how many songs do we have like this today? The entire point of this song is the misery Christ endured on the cross for me. The first line explains the rest of the song--God's love is infinitely great, that He sent His Son in the first place. The rest of the song almost entirely deals with the Son enduring the cross. The last stanza remind us of the results Christ's sacrifice: no more debt.

How many songs today focus on that? Don't get me wrong--songs like Matt Maher's "Christ is Risen" or Phillips Craig and Dean's rendition of "Revelation Song" are both beautiful songs of worship--"Christ is Risen" speaking of how the Christian is now free from sin, and "Revelation Song" speaking of God's sheer majesty and glory. Chris Tomlin's songs are also deeply moving. But how many songs do we commonly sing today speak about the utter horror, pain, and agony of Christ on the cross? Shouldn't we have more songs like "How Deep the Father's Love for Us"? After all, isn't the cross the only reason why we can sing to God in the first place?

I realized something else as I sang this song; at the point of the line "It was my sin that held Him there," it sorta clicked--just for a moment. It was my sin that kept Him up there! Below are the lyrics to "How Deep the Father's Love for Us"; I hope they impact you the same way they did me:

"How deep the Father's love for us,
 How vast beyond all measure
 That He should give His only Son
 To make a wretch His treasure.

"How great the pain of searing loss,
 The Father turns His face away
 As wounds which mar the chosen One,
 Bring many sons to glory.

"Behold the Man upon a cross,
 My sin upon His shoulders.
 Ashamed, I hear my mocking voice,
 Call out among the scoffers.

"It was my sin that held Him there
 Until it was accomplished.
 His dying breath has brought me life
 I know that it is finished.

"I will not boast in anything—
 No gifts, no power, no wisdom—
 But I will boast in Jesus Christ—
 His death and resurrection.

"Why should I gain from His reward?
 I cannot give an answer.
 But this I know with all my heart:
 His wounds have paid my ransom."

Winning the Battle, but Losing the War

Yesterday at church, the sermons (regular and children) preached were both on the Parable of the Sower and the Soils. Many of us are probably familar with this story: a sower went out to sow his seed, and scattered accross the ground. some of the seed fell on the path, where it was eaten by animals. Some of the seeds fell on rocky ground, where it was able to grow at first, but then withered up from lack of nutrients. Other seeds fell on a third type of ground--soil with preexisting weeds. There, even though the seeds were able to spring up, the weeds choked the budding seeds to death. Finally, some of the seeds landed on good soil, where it was able to grow and multiply by a hundredfold.

Now, almost a week earlier, I had heard someone else quote the old saying, "You win them to what you win them with." That made me start to wonder; after all, the problem with some means of witnessing now is that some rely on emotion to win converts to Christ. But if you win people to Christ with emotions, then you aren't winning them to Christ--you're winning them to emotions. And those people are the rocky or weed-filled soil; they are won to faith with emotion, but the emotion gradually fades. When faced with trials and temptations, or the pleasures of this world, those who have been won by emotion cannot stand up against them, because emotions are not strong enough--they will fade away, and the hard work of the Christian life suddenly becomes too much of a challenge for the one of little faith--assuming they had faith in the first place. Ultimately, to "win" someone to Christ through emotions is to win the battle, but lose the war.

I'm not saying that every person who has ever been "won" to Christ through emotion was actually a self-deluded pseudo-heretic who went to hell when they died. I'm simply saying that if you win a person to Christ through emotion, then that person will probably feed on emotion in their spiritual life, and rely on emotions to help them grow closer to God--and that doesn't usually work.

Some people might instead suggest to win others to Christ with conviction, or possibly logic. Bah!--really, you should win non-believers to Christ with Christ. That should make sense; if you were trying to convince people to come your new restaurant, then of course you would not try to convince them to come because of how pretty the outside of your building looks. Nor would you try to convince others to come because of how easy it is to come to the restaurant. You would emphasize how high-quality the food is, the gentle and polite attitude and behaviour of the servers, and back it up with the testimony of real servers and customers. That is how we shoud witness to others.

We shouldn't tell the atheist about how he can get popularity in his neighborhood by being Christian. Nor should we tell others to become a Christian simply because of how easy it is to become one. No! Of course not! We witness to others by telling them of the Christian life, how we can be set free from sin, from a guilty conscience, and from separation from God. We tell others about how now we can be at peace with God and with man, and that even though things might be rough, that it will be worth it because of Christ. Even if they don't agree with us, they can still see our life, how we behave ourselves--and that can be either a powerful testimony for or against you.

If a person is won to Christ by Christ, then that same person will rely on Christ to help them grow closer to God. They will depend on Christ to lead them, and feed off of Christ's words in their spiritual walk. Using anything less than Christ to win people to Christ is almost idolatry. Yes, you can use emotions, but sinners persuade others to do stuff by using emotions. And who gave mankind emotions in the first place? Yes, you can use logic or conviction in witnessing, but sinners also use logic and conviction to persuade others. Plus, who gave man his logical abilities--who convicts us of our need for Christ? Sinners won't use Christ to persuade a crowd of people. Christians should first and foremost use Christ to win others to Christ!

So--how were you won to Christ? And how will you try to win others to Christ?

Open Hearts

"Death and Destruction lie open before the LORD—
how much more the hearts of men!" Pro. 15:11 NIV

Earlier last month, I came accross this verse as I was working my way through the book of Proverbs. As I read it, it just hit me that God knows our hearts--our deepest emotions--and yet how often do I try to cover them up while I pray? How often do I forget?--since God created and patented emotions, He probably knows their depths and range better then anyone else, including me! Why do I not lay open my heart before God?

I think that sometimes the answer is that I am afraid to fully realize the truth of God's omniscience. After all, if my heart is open before God, then not only does that include the good emotions, but also the bad ones. God aware of every positive feeling I experience--every moment and thought of happiness, joy, compassion, love, kindness, hope, pity, humility and more. However, God also knows every negative emotion I feel--all the bad and ugly ones. Anger and hatred, greed and selfishness, arrogence and pride, fear, lust, despair and sadness and everything else that enters into my head. God knows all of that--so why should I try to hide it from Him? Why do I try to keep it from Him, when He has always known about it? I know what I need to do--surrender my emotions to His will and power, but why can't I just tell God what I'm feeling?

Sure, one might say that I don't need to, since God already knows my emotions and anything that might happen with them. But how then can I learn to trust God, if I do not entrust Him with my heart? How can I grow in my love of God if I do not give my love to Him? Lord, I pray that I would realize just how much you know about me--everything, including my emotions--and that I would always remember that my heart is open before you, like a book. I pray that You would not just teach me this truth, but that You would also help me to apply it to my everyday life. Amen.

Puny Praying

"What is the cause of most backslidings? I believe, as a general rule, one of the chief causes is neglect of private prayer." --J.C. Ryle

Earlier this month, I recieved an e-mail with this quote in it. As I read it, I almost felt ashamed. After all, how often do I pray? At least twice a day, when I wake up and go to bed--if my thinking is clear enough in the morning, and if I remember at night. However, even Jesus--God Himself in human form--highly valued prayer.

In the Gospel of Luke, it says "[...] the news about him spread all the more, so that crowds of people came to hear him and to be healed of their sicknesses. But Jesus often withdrew to lonely places and prayed." (5:15-16) Think about this! If Jesus valued prayer to the Father so much--if He used it as communication within the Trinity--then how much more should I prize it?! How much more important should I consider it as access to the divine will and power of God? Yet how frequently do I get distracted while praying, or simply say "ThankyouLordamen"?

J. C. Ryle said this in his book Thoughts For Young Men:

I dare not lay down too strict rules on such points as these. I leave them to your own conscience. You must be guided by circumstances.
Our Lord Jesus Christ prayed on a mountain;
Isaac prayed in the fields;
Hezekiah turned his face to the wall as he lay upon his bed;
Daniel prayed by the riverside;
Peter, the Apostle, on the housetop.
I have heard of young men praying in stables and haylofts. All that I contend for is this, you must know what it is to "go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen" (Matthew 6:6).
There must be stated times when you must speak to God face to face, you must every day have your times for prayer — You must pray. (Kindle edition, locations 668-673; quote from another e-mail)

How often do I pray? And how often do I pause and appreciate the chance to come close to God? How often am I thankful for being able to speak to the One Who Hears my prayers? Oh Lord, help me to realize the importance of my prayer life with You and to grow closer to Your Son. Amen.

Hymnsights from the Past - Amazing Love

Yes, I have another "hymnsight" from worship, but bear with me--I'm trying to catch up from the last couple of weeks. Earlier this week, a couple of songs after we had sung "I Will Enter His Gates", we sang "Amazing Love" (aka "You Are My King"). The hymn began with this:

"I'm forgiven, because You were forsaken;
 I'm accepted, You were condemned;
 I'm alive and well, Your Spirit is within me
 Because You died and rose again."

Again, I had a moment of spiritual clarity. As we sang, it just really hit me about the contrast here--I was given a pardon by God, while He Himself was condemned and killed on my behalf. The finite was given infinitely long life, while the infinite was contained within a mere finite body. The guilty were granted righteousness through a divine sacrifce, while the Righteous One was made into that same sacrifice. The ultimate rags to riches story was only made possible by the rich becoming rags. Wow. Can I get an amen for that?

Another Hymnsight from the Past

The other week, while I was at my interning church, we were singing hymns (as usual). While I am still adjusting to singing older songs (and even beginning to enjoy them), already I am being taught by God how He can use anything to help us realize His great truths. This time, we sang this chorus:

"I will enter His gates with thanksgiving in my heart,
 I will enter His courts with praise,
 I will say this is the day that the Lord has made,
 I will rejoice for He has made me glad."

"He has made me glad, He has made me glad,
 I will rejoice for He has made me glad.
 He has made me glad, He has made me glad,
 I will rejoice for He has made me glad."

As we sang this, I realized the importance of the Christian to always be joyful in Christ. How often do I go about my life in a miserable or depressed manner? I understand that it is unreasonable to expect myself to be bursting with euphoria 24/7, but that is not equate with joy. Not only are we to be active in in our gladness by rejoicing, though, but we are also to passively rejoice in being glad. As a redeemed person, I can rejoice knowing that I am now no longer in danger of hell; additionally, I can rejoice that I am no longer separated from God's holiness and goodness.

So how can I apply this to my spiritual walk with God? Well, ultimately, I should pray that God would work within my heart, and change me more and more to be filled with a consistant joy in Him, regardless of my circumstances.

Hymnsight from the Past

At the church where I am interning, we regularly sing hymns. This is something that I'm not really used to; where I'm from, hymns are treated as ancient songs--we have a more "contemporary" service. So, adjusting to hymns has been a bit of an experience for me. However, my opinion of these old songs has been changing now. While I used to wonder if the hymn-writers used to have way too much time on their hands, now I am beginning to appriciate these same hymns. In fact, last week as I was at church, one of the hymns we sang stood out to me in particular:

"My faith has found a resting place
 Not in device nor creed;
 I trust in the Ever-living One."

It hit me there that my faith, and the faith of all us Christians, are to rest only in Jesus' atoning sacrifice--NOT in "device or creed". But how often do we Christians call ourselves "Baptists", "Catholics", "Pentecostals", or something else? How often do we use our creeds to define ourselves instead of our faith? I understand that there are sometimes differences in faith that require us to form different creeds, and thus we need to identify ourselves by our creeds, but how often do we consider our creed to be more important that our faith? That day in the service, I realized the importance of me personally doing what I can to avoid ever having my faith being weakened or misguided to such a degree that I would place my faith in the Apostles' Creed, a statement of beliefs or mere works.

A creed is a statement of beliefs. It is that, and just that: a statement of beliefs. Ultimately, our creeds are an indication of our faith, but they are not greater than our faith. A statement of belief cannot save us--only belief can.

Journaling in Genesis 1-3

This last year in college, I took an Old Testament History class. As part of the homework for this class, I had to read through and comment on sections of the Old Testament. Below are some of my summaries of and reflections on the first three chapters of Genesis:

Gen. 1—God creates the entire universe and all that is in it over a period of six literal days, during which He demonstrates thoughtful planning and the intention of setting an example for the human race to emulate (ruling over creation on earth). Ultimately, He finishes His ex niliho creative acts by carefully crafting Adam out of the dirt (as compared to merely speaking him into existence) and breathing “the breath of life” into him.

Gen. 2—The account of the creation week begun in Chapter 1 is finished, ending with the establishment of the 6-day workweek and the day of rest. The chapter then goes into greater detail about the sixth day (before plants had become widespread) and describes the Garden of Eden and its location. God gives Adam His one command and later brings the animals to Adam to show him his need for a partner like himself. After Adam realizes that he is alone, God creates from him Eve, and brings her to him for the purpose of marriage. Chapter 2 ends with a declaration of the perfect state of the creation up to that point (by emphasizing the nature of the relationship between the man and his wife), thus setting up a sharp contrast for Chapter 3.

Gen. 3—The chapter begins in the Garden of Eden with the spontaneous appearance of Satan (as a snake), who craftily tempts Eve into crossing the boundaries that God set for her. Unfortunately, Adam follows her into sin, destroying their relationship with God and corrupting their innocent nature. (Note: Just because Adam was with Eve at the time of her temptation, yet did nothing to stop her, does not necessarily indicate a pre-sin failure to be there for Eve when she needed him. Adam could have simply stood aside so as to let Eve make her own choice, similar to what God did with Adam and Eve.) After drawing a confession out of the man and woman, God punishes them for their sin, banishing them from the garden. Despite this, God gave mankind a ray of hope, in that the Seed of Eve will eventually conquer Satan.

Happy Father's Day, Part 2

Yesterday, while I was at church, the pastor's children sermon prompted me to ask myself a hypothetical question: if someone were to ask me what about my father I most remember and enjoyed, how would I respond? After a few moments of thinking, the answer occurred to me: how my father treated (and still treats) my mother.

I will be honest: my dad loves my mom. They have been married for almost twenty-three years, and nineteen of those have involved raising their children. Now, I have heard it said that of all the lessons that a parent will teach their child, the ones most likely to be absorbed and emulated are the ones that the child sees their parents doing over and over again; I really hope that that is true, considering what I have seen.

As I said earlier, my dad loves my mom. Whether he's trying to give her a kiss after eating a jalapeño (mom hates "spicy kisses") kissing her right in front of my siblings and I, or simply looking for an excuse to spend time with her after dinner, I can tell that my dad still deeply loves my mom. On nights where my siblings and I go to home bible studies, my dad will sometimes say "Alright, I'll take your mother out to eat, since it's just the two of us." While he doesn't do anything fancy, simply the fact that dad will occasionally use his time alone with mom to eat out shows me that he still likes getting to spend special time alone with her.

Something else my dad likes to do is to sit next to mom and rest together on the couch. Whether it's during the morning, afternoon, or evening, and whether it's during a movie, watching a sport, or something else, dad will sit next to mom, and the two of them will rest. Mom and dad both enjoy simply spending time with each other, and even just sitting next to each other, to the point that they consider it a tradition (or at least a regular activity). They will even be playful with each other; dad might sometimes pretend that he has other "manly" things to do, but that he will "sacrifice" his time to be with mom. Mom, of course, knows that dad is only being silly, and she says that "spending time with his wife is one of the most manly things he can do."

What was the most important lesson my father ever taught me? How to love my spouse and let her know that I consider her to be so special. I can't wait until I get married. Happy late Father's Day, Dad.

Happy Father's Day, Part 1

While I was at church today, the children's sermon was on fathers, As part of his point, the pastor asked each of the children what they liked most about their father. That got me thinking: if I were asked what I liked most about my father, or what first came to mind when I think of my father, how would I respond? What would I say?

Initially, I wasn't sure of what I would have said, or how to approach the hypothetical answer. After all, I didn't go fishing with my father. We never had a "guy's day" or a regular "father-son" time; we didn't often share emotional moments, and we hadn't played together (wrestling or baseball, etc.) since I was in middle school. However, one thing stood out in my mind, with another incident occuring later to me.

The second thing I thought of was an incident of character with my father. After I accidentally crashed my car, I called my father to let him know what had happened. Even though he was almost home, he insisted on coming all the way back to my college to look at the damage and see if I was fine. When he got to the parking lot, he didn't even raise his voice at me. All he said was, "There's no point in yelling; it's fine."

I was completely blown away by my father's suprisingly gentle response to the incident. In fact, I had seen him get more upset over scratching the bumper. I realized that my father was more concerned about my safety than the car's safety, but he didn't even glare at me for damaging the left side of my car. Overall, my memory of my father that day reminds me not just of the importance of being able to control and simply release my anger, but also of being able to keep my priorities straight in life.

Defending Hell, Part 5: The Consequences of Denying Hell, Part 2: Also regarding sin

By removing the severity of sin, there is less of a need for God to forgive us of our constant sinning. If sin is not that big of a deal to God, then His punishment for it will also not be that important. That is the undermining of the forgiveness of sin. As an extension of this, if we are all going to end up in heaven because God will forgive us at no cost to Himself, then why should we even waste our time trying to reach others with the redemptive news of Christ? After all, we all end up in the same place (eternity in heaven with God). Thus, undermining the importance of the forgiveness of sin also leads to undermining the need for missions.

So, by rejecting hell, we are chipping away at the foundation for missionary work and spreading the Gospel. If we are going to go to heaven anyway, when why should we even bother repenting? Ultimately, if we deny the existence of hell, then we are giving a free license for sinning, as God will not truly punish us for what we have willfully done. Thus, undermining the forgiveness of sin also leads to undermining the restraint of sin and removes the need to repent from sin.

Additionally, this would also hold true for fallen angels. If hell does not exist, then demons will not get punished for their sins either. If hell does not really exist, then are demons to be reinstated as angels at the end of days? Is God going to pardon the unclean spirits for their evil and welcome them back into heaven? And what about Satan? Will he finally return to God as a prodigal son and rise once more as Lucifer? Well, if God is a God of love and forgiveness and nothing else, then that might be true. However, God is more than just love. He is also a God of anger.

This may come as a surprise to some, who might try to work around this free license for sinning and God's anger.

Defending Hell, Part 4: The Consequences of Denying Hell, Part 1: Regarding sin

"It's been clearly communicated to many that this belief (in hell as conscious, eternal torment) is a central truth of the Christian faith and to reject it is, in essence, to reject Jesus. This is misguided and toxic and ultimately subverts the contagious spread of Jesus' message of love, peace, forgiveness and joy that our world desperately needs to hear." --Rob Bell

I don’t think that Rob Bell has thought through the logical implications of denying the existence of hell. To begin with, denying hell’s reality undermines other biblical doctrines; one of which is the severity of sin. By denying hell, one implies that sin is not so great as to completely alienate us from God; it is merely an obstacle that He will eventually remove from us. So if sin is not nearly as bad as it seems (that is, utterly offensive to God), then its respective punishment is not nearly as bad (that is, final and eternal). Thus, as an extension, the undermining of the severity of sin leads to the undermining of the consequences of sin. After all, if there is no such thing as hell, then there is no final and eternal punishment for sin; we have only the punishments God gives us in this life. God will not punish us in the next life, since He is "a loving God". Thus, undermining the consequences of sin also undermines the punishment of sin. But that is not all.

Logically, without hell, sin does not deserve eternal punishment. In fact, if hell is not real, then I (a Christian) and everyone else (Christian and not-Christian) can sin as much as we like without repentance in this life. We can lust and anger and hate and murder and torture and reject God in this life because we will eventually end up in heaven in the next one. (I am not sure if we even have to repent to get into heaven after we die.) Thus, the undermining of the severity of sin eventually leads to undermining the importance of the forgiveness of sin. But that is not all either.

Defending Hell, Part 3: Understanding Hell

Francis Chan speaks about Hell

In his video, Francis Chan also considers how we sometimes dismiss the reality of hell. Supposed Christians and blatant unbelievers might say, “Oh, well I don’t understand how God could do such a thing like condemning people to hell for eternity.” However, that is precisely the point: we do not understand God. And it is because of that incomplete understanding of God that leads us to misconstrue His actions, intents and purposes. God is not like man. Man naturally tries to cover his sins, and sweep the sins of others under the rug. God does not. Unfortunately, some men don’t seem to realize this.

Case in point: Rob Bell, in his recent book Love Wins, says: "It's been clearly communicated to many that this belief (in hell as conscious, eternal torment) is a central truth of the Christian faith and to reject it is, in essence, to reject Jesus. This is misguided and toxic and ultimately subverts the contagious spread of Jesus' message of love, peace, forgiveness and joy that our world desperately needs to hear." Essentially, Bell is claiming that it is possible to reject the doctrine of hell as conscious, eternal torment and still accept Jesus’ teachings. This is where Bell is fundamentally and heretically wrong. Jesus Himself talked about hell, and described it as a place of conscious and eternal torment (Mark 9:43, 48; Luke 16:19-31).

Defending Hell, Part 2: The Biblical Evidence for Hell

Francis Chan speaks about Hell

While the Bible speaks of hell by name only 14 times (per NIV, 1984), it also uses other terms for it, like outside, and darkness. In fact, Jesus used the term darkness to refer to hell specifically at least three times (Matt. 8:12; 22:13; 25: 30). Elsewhere, darkness is described as part of what hell is like (2 Pe. 2:17; Jude 6, 13).

However, that is not all; in fact, hell is described in far more graphic terms than simple darkness, or even “blackest darkness … reserved forever.” In Jude, fallen angels are described as being bound in “everlasting chains” in hell. Additionally, in all three of the accounts in Matthew (8:12, 22:13, 25:30), Jesus describes hell as “outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” All of these accounts portray hell as a location outside of God’s kingdom, where there will be those unfortunate enough to spend eternity in it.

In the Gospels, Jesus is very descriptive of hell, describing it as containing fire (Matt. 5:22; 18:9), a place where one’s entire body can be physically thrown (Matt. 5:29, 30; 18:9; Mark 9:45, 47; Luke 12:5), a place of condemnation (aka punishment, Matt. 23:33), a place where God can “destroy both soul and body,” (Matt. 10: 28, Luke 12:5 explains this), a place where there is "weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt. 8:12), a place where “the fire never goes out,” (Mark 9:43), a place of continual torment (Luke 16:23), and a place where “gloomy dungeons” are located. In Mark, Jesus quoted from Is. 66:24 three times in quick succession to illustrate the horrors of hell, where “‘their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.’” However, all of this imagery is meaningless if one does not consider it to be real.

Defending Hell, Part 1: The Question of Hell

Francis Chan speaks about Hell

Earlier today I got an e-mail from the pastor that I work under, pointing me to this video. Initially I thought, "Alright, this is probably important--I'll get around to watching it sometime today." However, when I actually began to watch it, this fact began to sink in: people are trying to convince other people that hell is not a real place. What does the Bible really say about this, though, and what happens if the people who teach against the reality of hell are wrong?

As I watched this video, something occurred to me: this video addresses the topic of hell, but not as a straightforward approach, such as "Hell is real, and the Bible teaches it--even Jesus taught about it!" Hardly; instead, this video is an apologetic defending the validity of the topic of hell.

Francis Chan spends some of his time emphasizing the importance of hell; as one of his points, hell is not a doctrine. It is a place--a place to which some people are condemned. To address hell as an abstract concept is about as wise as talking about heaven in such a manner. Would you want your family to be comforted by the fact that your dead relative is happily living in an abstract paradise for eternity?...No. I know I wouldn't. For that same reason, none of us should be satisfied with speaking of hell as an abstract reality, almost as if it didn't really exist. Hell is real, and the Bible speaks frequently about it in the New Testament.

Angry Birds Need a Soft Word

The other day as I was driving to church, I kept encountering idiots in cars. Fast idiots, slow idiots, idiots that clearly didn't know what they were doing... And you know what? All those "idiots" irritated me. By their disrespect for the traffic laws (and slowing me down), they made me angry. Then, in a moment of sudden clarity, I thought to myself, "I bet we're going to be talking about anger in our bible study today." In God's sovereignty, that is exactly what we talked about. Later, after I came home, I looked up my daily bible verse from Proverbs. As you might guess, it was this:

"A gentle answer turns away wrath,
but a harsh word stirs up anger." Pro. 15:1, NIV

That's when I stopped and thought about it. The Bible constantly commands us to control our anger. Obviously, if we could not control our anger, and never restrain it, then there would be no point in ordering us to control our anger. However, sometimes we just have so much trouble restraining ourselves (at least, I know I do). That's why this verse is so important to us as Christians: it shows us a way to defuse anger in others and even ourselves.

So next time you play Angry Birds, keep this in mind: maybe those birds just need a gentle answer from those pigs.