John3Thirty

Since Charles Sheldon’s book, In His Steps, came out in 1896, many Christians have dedicated themselves to seeking the proper course of action by answering a simple question: “What would Jesus do?” I say simple because on the surface it appears to be so. Sheldon challenged his readers to ask the question and think about the answer. Once sure of the course of action Jesus would take, they were to respond in that way no matter the difficulty or price.

Since the 1990’s this question has been popularized with bracelets and various other Christian merchandise with the letters WWJD. These are meant as a reminder to expose the decisions of life to this question, and to model one’s life on the life of Christ.

While it is commendable to ask this question and even more commendable to follow the answer wherever it leads there are some assumptions that must be made in asking it. Whether these assumptions are met or not, determines whether this question is a good formula for guiding life or a way to spiritualize bad decisions.

It is assumed the person asking knows enough about Jesus’ ways, personality and values to make a proper decision. Since Jesus lived 2000 years ago this assumption can be problematic—not impossible though. Too often people ask the question and assume what Jesus would do based, not on facts of his life, ministry and teaching, but based on modern values and personal criteria. It depends on how one sees Jesus.

When we ask the question we are assuming the following premise to be true:

If Jesus would take said action, then I will take said action.

If we take time to learn what Jesus would do then act accordingly we have treated this premise properly. However if we do not take the time to learn about Jesus but define as we prefer to see him then we misuse and falsify the practice. If I look at the modern world’s standards and what I should do here, then claim Jesus would take the same action I have committed a fallacy known in formal logic as affirming the consequent.

Unless you are going to learn about Jesus, this question, “What Would Jesus Do?” is useless as a guide. Let me use an example from my earlier life. A hunter must learn about the behavior of his prey. If he hunts deer he must learn about scrapes, scat and tracks, but also about how a buck will act during the respective hunting season (rut or not in rut, hot weather, cold weather), etc. Until he learns these, he may be hunting, but he is not a hunter. The details of behavior help him catch his prey. This knowledge allows him to foresee what the prey will do. I used to know a place in Montana where I could always find a buck napping under a certain tree, so long as the day was warm and the wind blew from the North. There was a certain track across the wind that could get a slow careful hunter within range. This was possible because I did not make assumptions about the deer. Instead I learned their true behavior.

I have in my office a sign that says: Never confuse the will of the majority for the will of God. This is perfect advice for those who would use WWJD to model their life—never confuse the values of today’s world for the values of Jesus.

So how can we prevent this and get to know Jesus well enough to truly and accurately answer this question? If I wanted to get to know you I would spend time with you. Spend time with Jesus in prayer. Now as you and I interact I would watch the things you do and then be able to differentiate you from others through these observations. How many of your friends do you know from the sound of their walk? With Jesus this is a bit hard to do because he has ascended to heaven. However, we can watch him though scripture. By reading the gospels and studying the picture they give of Jesus we can get to know him and begin to recognize him at work and recognize circumstances similar to those he faced. Another part of getting to know Jesus is learning from those who already know him and being around those who manifest him in their lives. In other words, we learn about Jesus by praying, reading scripture and being part of a body known as a church. Through the growth these produce we can actually see what Jesus would truly do.

If you are not going to take the time and put forth the effort to learn about Jesus you will not know what he would do in a given situation and cannot model your life on his. At best you are in danger of reducing Jesus to a proof text to support the life you already chose to live. He deserves far better.

As I read the Pentateuch again, I am finding the events surrounding the women’s lives fascinating. These women often come across as extras in the story of redemption, but we see things in their life that can be very real and inspiring of emotion.

In the story of Rachel and Leah we see two sisters used by their father and thrust into a competition for the affection of their husband. When Jacob worked for seven years to earn the right to wed Rachel her father, Laban, switched the sisters in the dark giving Jacob the older less attractive sister. Leah starts her married life as a trick of her father. In the morning light Jacob is angered to find Leah in his bed instead of Rachel. She would have seen the anger in his eyes, the disappointment in his words and the rage in his demeanor. Morning would have wiped out any tenderness experienced the night before. In order to get Rachel, Laban requests Jacob to complete the marriage week with Leah and then he will get Rachel—he can work another seven years for her afterwards. For an entire week dedicated to the bride and groom together consummating their relationship was instead spent by Jacob in anticipation of the wife he really wanted and by Leah in expectation of the loss of any possible love sprouting within her husband’s heart for her. She was reduced to a body for him to use until he got the woman he wanted. She will spend the rest of her life trying to be a good wife and earning her husband’s love.

I have had the opportunity to talk to several women from a polygamous culture. I asked one woman how it would be if her husband decided to marry another woman and you could see the sadness come over her face. At that moment I was looking into the face of Leah.

After many years of hard competition between the sisters and the giving of their maidservants to Jacob to father children with we see Jacob re-enter the land of Canaan. He is scared because his brother is approaching with hundreds of men. We see again the life of Leah in how he divides up and sends out the families. The hope being that if Esau attacks the forward groups the latter groups would be spared. Jacob sends out first two groups made up of the maidservants and their children, followed by Leah and her children and lastly Rachel and her one son. Even at the point of possible death, after everything Leah has done, Jacob loves Rachel more. I feel deeply for Leah.

Yesterday I read Simon Wiesenthal’s book The Sunflower, recounting his concentration camp experiences and concentrating on the day he was summoned to the bed of a dying man. The man was an SS officer who had taken part in the horrible death of many Jews. He wanted to speak to a Jew, any Jew, to seek forgiveness before his death.

After hearing the man out, Simon’s response was to walk out without saying anything—refusing to forgive. The rest of the book is his wrestling with the decision—did he do the right thing? Several questions are asked throughout the book, the most important for me was whether one has the right to forgive actions done against another. In other words, “If someone sins against a person, does a third person have the right to forgive them for that sin?” Of course those I speak to say sins can only be forgiven by the person sinned against or by God alone. They would agree with Simon’s friend in the camp, Jakob, who said he had no right to forgive the man or even to consider it because those killed were the only ones with that right.

Whether he was right or not, based on his circumstances, I find hard to judge. He ends the book with the question, “What would you have done?” I am old enough to know that I cannot know what I would have done in the same situation because of the magnitude of the events. What Simon and his people were going through was horrible and the whole world was guilty to a degree.

I would contend that the man was not looking for forgiveness in the traditional sense—the removal of sins through confession and absolution—but was looking for a single Jew who would not hold him in revulsion for his crime. This, the author had every right to do and through the rest of the story he spent years wrestling with his own revulsion for the man’s actions.

When we, as Christians, are told to forgive it is for our benefit as well as the benefit of the sinner. It is also an expression of the work of Christ on mankind’s sin. I have spoken in several places about how sins against us are sins against God and his right to forgive those sins through the blood of Christ. We as Christians must come to grips with the fact that sins against us can be covered by the same blood that washes away our own sins. To refuse to forgive is to question the efficacy of Christ’s blood for forgiveness. The type of forgiveness in this book is seldom spoken of—letting go of our right, not to take offense as victim, but to take offense for another.

Forgiving those who sin against us is an admirable and beautiful act of obedience. However, when one sins against another we take offense to that and can feel justified in holding on to it. This must be released into the hands of Christ just like everything else. We must forgive the sins committed against us and forgive the sins done to others by giving up our right to hold the sinner in revulsion.

A couple weeks ago I returned to the Pentateuch for my devotional reading. During this time, my attention was drawn to several characters found within these well-known stories, and got curious about their participation in the events surrounding them. Over the next few weeks I’d like to look at several of these.

Sarah (Sarai) was told by her husband on two occasions to claim to be his sister upon entering a foreign land. I found myself wondering about her view of these events. In Genesis 12 as they enter Egypt her husband says, “I know what a beautiful woman you are. When the Egyptians see you, they will say, ‘This is his wife.’ Then they will kill me but will let you live. Say you are my sister, so that I will be treated well for your sake and my life will be spared because of you.” Abraham did this again when entering the land of Abimelech, king of Gerar (Genesis 20). Read the rest of this entry »

As the people near the Jordan and prepare to enter the land, God’s chosen leader send’s spies to gather intelligence. Unlike forty years earlier, when Moses had sent out twelve spies publicly, this mission will be very different. This will not be the people’s spies, but the leader’s personal spies. Joshua was not about to relive that. He secretly chose and sent two men with instructions to concentrate on Jericho. In Joshua 2 we can follow this mission.

The differences are evident from the beginning. In the first mission twelve men were chosen, one from each tribe, to spy out the land and bring back information on the people, the land and the strength of the cities. The tribes knew spies had gone out and saw this group as being their eyes and ears on the ground. They believed their report was for the purpose of determining whether they should try to take the land. This time was different—the people had nothing to do with picking, or sending out the men. They were hand selected by the man who would lead them into the land—a man, who had been one of the twelve earlier spies, and had been one of two not cowed by what they found. The people were not to be allowed to interfere with plans and were to be given no excuse for disobedience.

This mission also differs because he only sent two men. The earlier group of twelve was unwieldy, but probably necessary because they were to spy out the whole land. This small band was to concentrate on the first target—Jericho. With two there is less chance of the herd mentality when it comes time to report. Joshua was not going to risk another forty years in the desert. Another benefit of sending two—the two were able to get into a city and speak to the people. Twelve strangers showing up are likely to set off alarms so the earlier party probably had to stay outside the cities, simply seeing their strength from without. They had no way to determine the morale of the enemy as this smaller detachment did.

The conclusion of the spy mission is the most telling. While the first mission concluded with fear that they would be unable to take the land. This smaller, more direct, secret mission reported to Joshua: “The Lord has surely given the whole land into our hands; all the people are melting because of us.”

How quickly things change. Shortly after the greatest delivery they could imagine in which the very walls of a strong city had crumbled before them, the people now questioned God’s motives. Even their ordained leader lay on his face asking God, “Why did you bring this people across the Jordan to deliver us into the hands of the Amorites to destroy us?”

After forty years of wandering the people had finally crossed the Jordan. God did a great miracle by stopping the river, during flood stage. This boosted the morale of Israel and demoralized the enemy. The enemy had already expressed fear of Israel and their God in the words of Rahab the harlot: “When we heard of [your conquests] our hearts melted and everyone’s courage failed because of you, for the Lord your God is God of heaven above and on the earth below” (Joshua 2:11).

Their first campaign had been Jericho, one of the strongest defended cities of ancient Canaan. Rather than humanly besieging the city, they marched around the city once a day for six days then retired to their camp. On the seventh they walked around the city seven times blowing trumpets and shouting. Siege work was so difficult that it often took years to subdue a well defended and supplied city. A perimeter would be set up to keep out supplies and starve the city into either submission or a weakened state, for a costly assault. Not this time. God handed the city to Israel in a week. But how quickly people change when the situation changes.

Before assaulting their next target, Ai, Israel got proud. Spies reported they had no need of the whole people, only two or three thousand were needed. This force was dispatched but was quickly routed by the enemy. Now rather than asking what had prompted God’s punishment, they longed to be back on the other side of the Jordan (Joshua 7:7). We do the same thing in our own lives today.

We get wrapped up in situations and allow the moment to dictate our faith and feelings about God. When things go well, we feel warmly about God and his love for us. When things go wrong we quickly question God’s love and forget all the good things. God’s response to Joshua is something we need to hear, “Stand up! What are you doing on your face? Israel has sinned . . .” (Joshua 7:10f). Yes, it would be good if God would speak to us in this way and I don’t doubt that he can and that with some he does, but he can also speak to us through this story and his words to Joshua.

When the situations around us turn bad it is acceptable for people of faith to question our conduct and wonder if God is punishing us. If we find something, the situation can lead us to repentance.  The problem comes when we doubt God’s love and wallow in self-pity. Scripture tells us, “But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were yet sinners, Christ dies for us” (Romans 5:8). Paul goes on to tell us in Romans 8:38f that nothing can separate us from God’s love. Even when he punishes us it is as sons being corrected. God is not vindictive to his children; everything done is for their good—everything done is for our good. When you see the world pressing in, remember that his love will not falter and He will be there. He will permit things in your life to rebuke, to correct, to teach, or strengthen you. Rather than falling on your face in fear and trembling, fall on your face in awe that God loves and will never leave you. Keep in mind that you have something they did not have. You have God in the flesh, Jesus Christ, who came and died for you t rise again. Such apocalyptic love is all consuming and unwavering—never changing faltering. Rest in it and thank him for it. Express your love to him in the darkest moments and remind yourself of the good things He has done.

In reading the Pentateuch I was greatly blessed and decided to continue with the next historical book—Joshua. The movements of this Army and their responses to God’s commands say so much about what God had accomplished among the people. If you remember, shortly after leaving Egypt the people had complained about everything from lack of water to being sick of Manna without meat. They complained constantly right up the point they were to enter the land. Their lack of faith was evident in their response to the report of the spies, so God drove them into the desert to wander and die handing the promise to their children. Now, forty years later we meet the same nation, but a changed people. They have been fed by God for forty years and seen his provision over and over. As they come towards the land from a different direction God puts certain people’s into their hands and they conquer the lands northeast of the Jordan.

As they keep moving in obedience to God we see some amazing things. Their invasion force, including men, women and children, is not led by the infantry but by the ark of God. God’s presence must lead them into the land. As they progress we see another detail of who leads into battle. Those who had already been given land east of the Jordan—those already blessed by God—are to take the lead into the battle itself. This should speak to us today. When it comes to sacrifice and service, “who should act?” is answered by the question, “Whom has been blessed by God? We who have experienced the blessings of God in our lives should be the first to seek ways to pour these out on others.

In chapter 5 we see the people’s devotion exposed again. The children born in the desert had not been circumcised. Now the army was entering the field of battle, only a few miles from the enemy city, with no great terrain or river between them to stop an attack and the people stop to take flint knives and circumcise the entire army. The chapter says they stayed put until they had all healed. This procedure done on grown men would have left them in considerable pain and would have made defense very difficult—they were being left exposed to attack from a human standpoint. A cautious person would have put off circumcision until after they were secure.  Now this people who were unwilling to trust God to bring them into the land forty years before was willing to enter the land and right in the presence of the enemy put aside their ability to defend themselves, and do so in the name of God.

Of course we all know the praises for this people will not last. They will show their fallen natures before long, but to see their self-less obedience at this time is inspiring. They, whose parents crossed the Red Sea out of bondage, now crossed the Jordan into blessing. The desert lay between as a tool used by God to purify his people and prepare them for the blessings he was going to give them. So whether you find yourself in Egypt, in Sinai, in the desert, or crossing Jordan, keep walking in obedience of God’s Word.

Christmas, an important holiday in our country, has different meanings for different people. For retailers it mans sales and profits. For secular Americans it means family and warm feelings remembering Christmases of days gone by. For non-Christians it can be confusing as such spiritual significance is masked by materialism and greed.

Of course, for us who profess Christ, Christmas is a time to remember the greatest gift ever received—eternal salvation and cleansing from sin. We celebrate the babe in the manger, because he did not stay a babe. He grew to manhood and gave himself for our sins. For us, Christmas is a prelude to Easter.

Many Christians are concerned with the secular feeling of modern Christmas. There are calls to Keep Christ in Christmas. We often forget that it is only Christ’s people who can keep Christ in Christmas. The secular world, with its emphasis on Santa, reindeer and snowmen does not celebrate Christmas. Those who deny that Christ came in the flesh cannot celebrate the incarnation displayed in the events of Christmas. At best, such people celebrate a social holiday or a childhood recollection.

It is far more important how we as the church celebrate. Rather than following the world’s practices, overspending and rampant commercialism, let’s look for opportunities to share the gospel; to share the love of Christ, in spiritual and tangible ways.

People are far more willing to discuss Jesus and his message than at any other time of year. The babe in the manger does not frighten. The Jesus of Christmas is soft and cuddly—neither judging nor condemning. But Easter is coming. The babe swaddled in rags died on a cross and rose from the dead. He is seated at the right hand of majesty to rule and judge the world.

Look for opportunities this season to Keep Christ in Christmas. This includes far more than saying “Merry Christmas” in place of “Happy Holidays.” His people do this by sharing the meaning of the incarnation; what it means for us, and what it means for them. This year give the greatest gift you can—Jesus Christ: Savior, Redeemer, King, and Lord.

Have you considered what will be said about you after your death? Eulogies are an opportunity for family and friends to share impressions of your life. Great works are often inspired by the thought of being remembered and praised after death. We see this as a president nears the end of his time in office and questions arise about the legacy he’ll leave behind.  I remember one funeral that I did where no eulogy was offered by any of the family. This person had come to Christ late and had previously lived a hard, mean existence. None of the family had a single nice thing to say. Though it was good that this person had accepted the Lord it was sad imagining a life without praise. Other funerals left me thinking of eternity; this one left me thinking of life and how it’s lived.

Recently, after a brief moment of prayer, I found myself thinking again about life and what we leave behind. I had prayerfully said, “Lord, all I want out of life is to please you.” Immediately I felt a twinge of conscience and the thought came, “No, You are expending more effort building a life to please yourself than a life that pleases God.” I truly believe this thought came from the Lord to inspire me to refocus. This I am prayerfully doing. Though I do not expect this to change a great deal of what I am doing, it will shake up and realign my reasons for what I do and with that I expect a fresh energy in my life’s work.

If you find yourself wondering about the legacy you’ll leave behind, or the eulogy that will be spoken over your grave, I have the perfect one to hope for. Hopefully, when you pass on to the Lord those left behind will be inspired to say, “Your life brought honor to God.”

When discussing sin and righteousness the law quickly comes up. Many believe that one needs a certain amount of law to restrain sin and to bring to mind the consequences of disobedience. To imply that the law is no longer binding and has, as we are told in scripture, passed away inspires nightmares in the legalists among us. They imagine a church of no moral constraints and rampant debauchery.

Read the rest of this entry »