Hunger for Righteousness (pre-requisite for revival)

Revival is something many of us in the west long for.
Seeing many, even multitudes, coming to a sincere love of Jesus, and gratitude for his saving work on the cross. A changed life and the fellowship of believers, churches filling and going against the current trend. Old and young alike eager to be present together honouring the Lord and one another, eager to be under the word and built up in faith and looking forward to his return, together. Joining in prayer and praise and sings of worship willingly and thoughtfully, considering each other genuinely and in humility. 
How wonderful it is as in psalm 133 when the brethren agree in unity.

How does revival or even a single conversion come about? 
My answer at my current understanding as a Christian and reflecting in my own life is that at some point we must experience a hunger for righteousness.
I would also describe this as a need to be right with God and before God. Not for fear of punishment or a desire for reward (as Luther clearly stated) but simply due to an overwhelming understanding of the reality and holiness of God.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, they will be satisfied.
If there is no hunger, then we will seek more elaborate tastier, but not necessarily healthier meals. 
But hunger for righteousness can never be satisfied.
Never.
Except for the cross.
At the cross all the hunger and thirst of all humanity was experienced by Jesus on our behalf. He experienced our hunger because all of our unrighteousness was taken on by he, himself. When he uttered “I thirst”, those present interpreted this as physical thirst. And no doubt, anyone suffering the effect of crucifixion would be one severely dehydrated and lead to an intense physical thirst. But I would suggest that at this point in his process of dying, carrying the sin of the world, he would have had a sense of not the reality of separation from the Father, and at that moment, the thirst that can only be quenched by the full and open armed presence of the Father in all his holy love, and in full fellowship was now present, and would consider this thirst as the greater for the obedient, Father- loving and now suffering Jesus. He also uttered “My God why have you abandoned me”. Again this supports the state of Jesus bearing a of us, sinful and rebellious humanity, in himself. This identification with our fallen-ness was also demonstrated powerfully in his baptism by John. At that point John recognised that Jesus had no need to be baptised, yet this obedient act by Jesus was the beginning of his ministry, and showed his willingness to take on our sin, even our imperfect baptism, and then completing this at the cross.
In Jesus’ suffering and death, the dividing wall of hostility, the brick wall curtain that separates us from God was destroyed, and we are made righteous, as a gift. A gift we could never earn or achieve or even hope to achieve, no matter how many prayers, fasts, self giving, self deprivation, acts of repentance, deep water baptisms, or any other attempt at becoming holy we might undertake.
Yes we can experience a hunger for righteousness. How terrible it is to be in the presence of the living God, with nothing but our sin and rebellion, our broken promises, our impure motives, our pretence at goodness unmasked, our human morality now putrid, our self righteousness a worthless whimper. What a blessing to hunger for true righteousness, the presence of God himself, fellowship in his kingdom, the kingdom of the son he loves.
This hunger is a blessing for God himself satisfies it. He satisfies it by sending his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.

Hold Back.

 I can be easily upset. Maybe less so than when I was young, or maybe more so. I have many weak points.

For example, tell me I've gained weight, or that I'm playing out of tune, or that I did something I don't think I did, and even if I don't show it, I'm feeling wounded.

    But if I do show it, what comes out is often ugly and hurtful.

This is normal and excusable...

It may be normal, but is it excusable?

Moses struck the rock, when he was instructed to speak to the rock. The rock still gushed water, but Moses was not excused. He did not enter the promised land with Joshua and the rest of Israel.

When Jesus was struck during his interview with the high priest, he did not strike back, but he did respond. That response was a true question as to why he was struck.

 When Paul was struck he responded with offensive words, but later apologized.

The tongue is a source of evil. I know my words can cut deeply and quickly, as sharp as an evil sword.  It is much better for that sword to remain in it's scabbard.

Texting on the other hand, for people my age, takes longer and gives us time to think, time to hold back and reconsider if those words are appropriate and necessary.

Silence is also a good way to respond to hurt. Tears are also a gift.

The groans we groan in our anguish might also be heard by God.

The fruit of the Holy Spirit includes self control. Maybe one of the most important aspects of the fruit.

I find it deeply interesting that the Holy Spirit activates in us, the ability for us to control ourselves. He gives us the reigns to control the horse that is us. This must imply that there are other powers that seek to control us in less positive ways, and though we may think we hold our own reigns, we may in fact have given them up. 

How easily can we be controlled by others? 

I have grandchildren. They can make me do things that others cannot, but that is partly me allowing them that control.

As Christians, we are given God, the Holy Spirit, to indwell us and to guide and inspire us, and comfort us.

His fruit (singular) includes self control. With his help we can hold back. And with a searching prayer, we can find better words, or no words to answer those who hurt us, whom we love.

And the grace of God is always present to keep us in the wonderful bosom of Abraham. 

 

 

 

Be fruitful and multiply

 Having children is arguably the first commandment from God to mankind. 
As I age I am seeing more clearly the value, beauty and joy in children. Yes they are our future. 
God planned them. It was and is the mechanism of bringing creation into fullness and fulfillment. 
It is more than interesting that; 1, after the fall, the spiritual death (so to speak) of Adam and Eve did not prevent procreation, and 2, it was through procreation that Satan and death would be defeated (the seed of woman would crush the serpents head).
Had Adam and Eve decided not to have children, there would have been no seed to crush Satan. 
Children are a gift not just to those of us who are parents and grandparents, aunties and uncles. They are a gift from God to all creation. Creation actually groans for the children of God to be revealed!
Without children the world cannot function. Countries with lower birth rates are aware of the damage this causes. 
We can suffer from the “small picture” of our own family units and our own family tree with the three or so generations above and below that we travel through as we age, and simply being satisfied that our family line is doing well. We cherish our loved ones and appreciate the constancy of the communities we are part of. 

But the big picture is of the sand of the sea or the stars in the sky. (Genesis 22:17)  This has always been Gods plan. It’s what he promised Abraham. It certainly goes well beyond 144000 in number.
Why God wants a vast number of children is well beyond my understanding, but it is a wonderful truth to ponder, and adds good hope to our prayer for revival.
Does the current western attitude of small, planned, "economically viable" families cost society more than we realize? 
And what of our acceptance of the vast number of unwanted pregnancies?
As Christian’s we honour God and our parents by honouring marriage. But marriage must have the fruit of children as one of its goals, if not the main goal.
This is my opinion. 

Families need children, churches need children, communities need children, nations need children. Jesus loves children. God has given us the blessing of childhood, and children. 

Abraham was the biggest failure in achieving revival in his lifetime

  

This week’s reading describes Abraham’s call. (Genesis 12)

In prayer circles, we are often praying for revival, and personally, I have longed for a visible shift in the tide of society back to faith in Jesus.

However, what I have seen and experienced is mostly the opposite to this.

In my circumstances and church experience, I have only seen attendance numbers overall decrease.

This can be disheartening.

This is why I was excited to read about Abraham.

In one sense, God, after calling Abraham, seems to achieve little in his lifetime, the miraculous birth of Isaac and the famous testing of Abrahams faith, but in terms of affecting the people around him, the scale is truly domestic.

Yet Abraham never stopped believing what God had promised, that the sheer volume of descendants would be uncountable. That he would be the father of many nations.

And we still have not seen the complete fulfilment of those promises to Abraham.

On a slightly painful aside, what do we do when our prayer for revival seems to be unanswered?

Sometimes we look elsewhere.

We look longingly at the churches that are overflowing, the other countries where revival appears to be happening, the campuses where God’s presence is affecting people in amazing ways. We look because the internet can bring these places to our screens, we not only look but sometimes we go to these places, simply to experience what we long for.

I found it very interesting to see the traffic and lines of people that travelled to a recent place of spiritual revival.

I state these things not as someone who is better, or “above it all”, I see the same longing in me, and probably I would consider travelling a fair distance if it meant I would experience revival.

Yet the domestic scale is, I believe, God’s main mission field.

I believe that our faith-walk, in our ordinary, domestic situations, in our simple jobs and our ordinary local churches is actually worthy of our full-hearted attention, and the place where God achieves his most significant purposes in our lives.

Of course it is wonderful if God uses us in large scale, and he does do this with people he specifically raises up for this purpose, but most of us have a domestic mission field, and how we walk in it is significant to God and to us.

And sometimes, God uses our work when we are best able to cope with its effect, when we are physically (not spiritually) dead, as was, and continues to be the case for Abraham.

Getting church right?

With so many ways to worship in Australia, so many traditions, so many conflicting views, how can a person feel secure and be assured that their seat in a pew or chair in their chosen place of worship is blessed by God?
How “easy-going” (an Australian term implying tolerance) is God, regarding the way and the place that we worship?
These are troubling questions, which are sometimes better not asked, as attempting to answer them leads to strongly conflicting, yet firmly held views by some, as well as insecurity and anxiety for those of us who hold to them less firmly.
Firmly held views do not guarantee correctness. But carefully thought out theology may aid a sense of security.
Jesus, in his teachings recorded in the four gospel accounts, did upset the religious status quo. The Scribes and Pharisees were clearly at odds with what he taught, yet they could not trap him theologically.
They were secure in their religious understandings but when they could not debate their points successfully they then relied on their pedigree, and contrasted Jesus’ apparent lack of pedigree.
Jesus used the following to authenticate his teachings. 
1 Scripture. Jesus was able to accurately quote passages from the Old Testament to support the truth of his teaching. He also uplifted scripture emphatically stating that not a jot would ever be removed. This, I believe, potentially sets a precedent. He clearly raised the scriptures above certain traditions that nullified God’s word.
2. Signs. Jesus repeatedly stated that his miraculous signs also testified to the reliability of his teachings. But he also ironically criticized the generation of his time for wanting signs and miracles, stating that the only sign they would be given would be the sign of Jonah, implying his resurrection as the seal of his authority.

I mention the above not to call into question the truth of Jesus being the true Messiah and Son of God, the Word of God, the King of Kings, Lord of Lords, God the Son. God. But to simply point to the lack of faith at the time of Jesus teaching. 

For us today, we too can easily fall into the religious status quo, relying on our pedigree for security, and potentially missing the possibilty of fellowship with others who are within the family of Christ. 
I believe we do well to remember that Jesus clearly identifies with the least of his disciples. (“Whatever you do to the least of my disciples, you do to me”). Hence, distancing ourselves from certain believers implies that we are missing out on fellowship with Jesus himself. 

My question is, at what point in our Sunday (or other day) services do we divide ourselves within a congregation?

What God has joined let no man separate.

Today I could not attend communion due to the clear (denominationally prescribed) definition of communion made before it was shared. There was the generous offer of a blessing to those who could partake, and I accept this without complaint apart from this reflection that was triggered by it. Communion, even by its less formal name, should by nature unify us as Christians, yet in my personal experience the practice and rules placed around the practice of communion seem to divide us, even strongly at times.

Yes, we should examine ourselves, we must recognise the body of Christ (which I would suggest includes the brethren who surround us), we should wait for each other, we should not belittle or humiliate each other at the communion table, but we should be unified by this most important meal.

Come to me all who are burdened and heavy laden and I will give you rest.

Being reliable is not necessarily enough. (Back to Thomas)

  

John 20:24-25 (NIV) 24 Now Thomas (also known as Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!”

But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”

 

Listening again to this passage I wondered once more about Thomas.

Why, after being told clearly by the other disciples that they had seen Jesus, would he not believe?

OK, some people need to see for themselves, I understand this.

BUT

Thomas wasn’t watching a television advertisement for a new stain removing detergent, he wasn’t listening to various people talk about their favourite politician.

He was listening to the other DISCIPLES!!!!

People he had shared three intimate years at Jesus feet with.

And it wasn’t just one of them saying that they had seen Jesus, it was a whole crowd of them, maybe even all that were left, ten, as Judas had taken his own life prior to the resurrection.

This, in my opinion, is like listening to all the members of your own family telling you that they had seen, alive, another family member who had died.

Why would Thomas refuse to believe people he previously trusted and respected?

These are my thoughts on Thomas’s possible motives for disbelieving.

1.        He believed they had seen a ghost, not a physically alive and risen Jesus.

2.        He believed they were suffering from mass hysteria. Sometimes crowds can together experience combined symptoms or behaviours fueled by tension or panic. (Feel free to look that up). I doubt that the idea of “mass hysteria” was present at that time.

3.        He refused to believe due to personal stubbornness, possibly fueled by a personal thought bias that he refused to let go of.

 

 

I would like to concentrate on number 3, though probably number 1 is the most likely answer.

 

I would like to propose that Thomas, along with all the other disciples and followers of Jesus, was deeply disappointed with the outcome of Jesus ministry, appearing to end in his execution. Thomas, along with others, may have held strong hopes that Jesus would politically succeed, gain political power, and overthrow Roman rule or at least bring into line a corrupt religious system.

 

Like the others, there was no room in his understanding for death and then resurrection.

 

I will add that at some point Thomas doubted Jesus words regarding “If you have seen me, you have seen the Father”, which Jesus stated in Chapter 14 of John’s gospel.

 

Thomas had earlier responded to Jesus’ declaration, “you know the way to where I am going” with “We don’t know the place you are going so how can we know the way?”

To which Jesus answered with “I am the way…”

Then Philip suggests “Just show us the Father, and we will be satisfied”

 

The point I am making is that Jesus had clearly stated that to see him is to see God the Father. I wish to suggest that though Thomas heard this, he did not believe it. And so up to this point, Thomas does not believe that Jesus is, or could be, God, and a resurrected Jesus would call into question all that he had become convinced of regarding the humanity and political failure of his leader.

 

To believe the other disciples was too big a threat to his own pride and world view.

 

Once again, I wish to mention this is speculation on my behalf.

 

The reason I go into so much detail is because I realised from this passage that when we tell others about Jesus, just because we are honest, reliable and well known to the person or people we are sharing with, (in other words, our witness is strong) this by no means will convince someone else that Jesus is truly the Lord. People have their own personal agendas, and a lot is at stake when they are called to believe.

(I am not trying to discourage anyone from sharing their faith, as people must hear the good news in order to believe, and many will and do come to faith as God opens their hearts)

 

Getting back to Thomas, I would go so far as to suggest that Thomas shares some features with Saul, regarding the need to be confronted directly by Jesus in order to come to faith.

 

But, true to his word, when Jesus did appear to the disciples with Thomas present, and addressed the exact points Thomas had asserted, commanding him to put his hand in his wounds, Thomas quickly declared, probably the first to do so, that Jesus is both Lord and God.

What do we need in order to believe?

I suggest that each one of us who calls themselves a follower of the Lord Jesus, has in fact had a visitation of the Lord, the Holy Spirit.

 

 

No Other Reconciliation

 Just a scary thought.

Most of us who profess to be followers of Jesus, have some degree of hope for eternal resurrected life at some point in the future, when Jesus returns, or after we die. Our hope in this ought to be strong, very strong, as this is what Jesus has achieved for us.

Eternal life with God is mysterious, as we have not experienced this, but, like the thief on the cross, we hope to be with Jesus in his Kingdom.

But what about the other Christians?

Are we happy to share that place with others who are also believers.

Of course everyone including myself answers with a resounding "yes". Until we think about it more.

The focal point of heaven will be the throne of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Mystery again.

Yet we also long to be with those we have lost. Family members, friends, our bible heroes.

But there are some we might not wish to share eternity with.

Now I am not discussing who is able to be saved, other than to stand by the words of Jesus, "I am the way, the truth and the life, no-one comes to the Father except through me". 

The point I wish to come to is the uncomfortable reality of divisions amongst us.

I don't simply mean denominations. 

What of the hurt between fellow believers, resulting in people changing churches or cease attendance, and of course many other situations of separation, for multiple, often painful reasons. 

If two offended parties are both in heaven, what would that be like?

Maybe I have already mentioned the way cemeteries are partitioned into various denominations, could heaven be likewise partitioned?

Unlikely. In fact, unimaginable in my opinion.

Will the disagreements suddenly disappear?

Possibly.

Revelations states that every tear will be wiped away, (by God).

Will our memories be erased?

Again, unlikely.

The point I wish to make is that I do not believe that there will be a courthouse in heaven for the resolution of disputes. 

On earth we do have these necessary places and people, that help with the resolution of disagreements, even within a church.

"Blessed are the peace makers"

BUT

there is only ONE place of reconciliation, in ALL of history.

The cross.

And this has already been completed. 

There will not be a further reconciliation process in heaven, in my theological understanding. 

If the cross has not achieved reconciliation for us, then nothing will.

If I dwell on this point, it helps me look at my life and my issues somewhat differently.

Maybe this is helpful.

The cross is powerful enough to reconcile the whole world to God, and to each other.

As people of the cross we are able to forgive those who trespass against us. 

Maybe this is why we are told to first be reconciled, and then present our offering at the altar? (Matthew 5:23)