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) 

 

 

 

Easter, again?

 Jesus’ rising from the dead may seem, to some, a bit over done.

How many Easter’s have we experienced?

Does it have any relevance for today?

How does someone’s miraculous resurrection of 2000 years ago, have any effect on the world today?

The effect is not necessarily mind blowing. 

It is largely internal.

Anxiety, anger, jealousy, hatred, hurt, offence, shame, guilt, depression, rebellion , rudeness, pride, boasting, addiction can all be treated to some degree with medication, counselling and other modalities. 

But a man named Jesus, can enter a person’s life, and bring peace and acceptance where there was once turmoil. This would not make headlines.

Faith in the name of Jesus can turn a person around, from a raging bull to a gentle giant. From anger to joy. From fear to peace. Again, not headlines.

People who trust in Jesus believe he is with them in every detail of their lives, even when they aren’t concentrating on him.

“Everlasting arms”, is the title of a hymn. It does apply.

If he rose, he remains alive today.

Not a skeleton, not a mummified body, not a fossil, not a zombie, but a man. A warm, breathing, heart beating, physically solid, communicating man. 
A risen man with a risen body which is still human but now stronger, beyond sickness, beyond death, un-kill-able.

People sometimes try to meet their idols.
For example, people continue to visit Graceland to experience something of Elvis, who certainly had a charisma that can be experienced even today from old footage.
But Elvis himself is no longer accessible, other than archival material to be viewed on a screen.

I would love to visit the birthplace of Mozart, or to touch an original manuscript, but I can never meet Mozart face to face, today.
There is a tuft of Beethoven’s hair somewhere.
 
We have no archival footage of Jesus, but we have the gospels and the New Testament. This is very good, and extremely valuable to all Christians. 

But because Jesus is still alive today and lives forever, he is theoretically accessible right now. Yes, this moment. 

40 days after the resurrection, He physically  rose into heaven, to the Father’s right hand, he is physically in heaven , and he will physically return in the future.

But in the meantime he promises to be present to us, whenever people gather in his name. He has this ability. 

And many will say today they have personally experienced Jesus’ presence. I believe this is true.
But we mostly experience Jesus through each other, his followers are considered witnesses, and we do radiate Jesus to others whether we realise it or not.

Celebrating the resurrection is partly reminding ourselves that we do have access even now, to a risen saviour.

But the other deeply important issue we are reassured about when we put our trust in Jesus, is that the resurrection confirms that his self-sacrifice was an effective payment for our sin and the sin of the whole world.

Those of us who are troubled by our thoughts and actions, who have not found true peace in life even with a stable job and family dynamics, who feel an emptiness regarding our true purpose in life,

we give thanks that there has been an event, a well recorded event,  that has dealt with all of the above (sin, failure, rebellion, the letting down of others, etc)

Those of us who are untroubled by our consciences, and simply want to experience anything and everything, prefer no moral impediments, we don’t need or want a resurrection, it is quite annoying to have to hear about it again and again.

But to those of us who are morally troubled, this event of the cross or crucifixion of Jesus was the way God pulled together all of the sin (past present and future) of the whole world;  “he (Jesus) became sin”, and destroyed it fully. He “took the grenade for us”, in Bruno Mars language.
This is why Christian’s believe their sins are forgiven. 
But without a resurrection the death of Jesus would not necessarily stand out from any other death.

The resurrection was an apt reward to Jesus for his surrender for our sakes, 
but it also was God’s way of assuring us that Jesus is his true son, and that the cross has the desired effect of atonement and propitiation. Words that basically mean our sin is done and dusted and no longer separates us from God who is holy*. 

 

(As an aside, Try getting in to Buckingham Palace. Besides physical barriers, locked gates, fences etc, there are plenty of armed guards. And if you did get in, somehow (without an invitation) would King Charles be pleased to meet you and give you his time and conversation? Even if we are interesting and intelligent, unless we are specifically invited, or we are part of the king's family, we have no place in Buckingham Palace, this is my way of explaining the word "Holy", which basically means especially separated )

Wouldn’t it be simpler if we didn’t sin, and simply got on with one another? After all this sounds like an excuse to keep sinning?

The reality is, I keep sinning even when I try hard not to. Obviously the idea is to live better lives once Jesus is part of our lives, and for the most part I think we do. But we really do need a payment for our sin that lasts forever. Jesus did this.

Believing in the name of Jesus, as God’s Son, King of all Kings, and Lord of all Lords, has an effect on our internal workings.
Whether we know it or not, we begin to change, some faster than others, but the change happens. It’s a good change. Like I said, internal peace, a calming of anger and frustration, hope and happiness starts to take hold, a desire to sing, and a deep gratitude for even the smallest things appears. 
It can be faked, it can be mimicked, and we can temporarily revert to our old selves, but in the genuine believer, it is real and lasting.
And as I mentioned, having Jesus in our lives, means that we are making him present to others. 

The resurrection of Jesus means that Jesus is powerful, in a supernatural way, even today. 

Even today any person can call his name, and he can and does hear us, and he responds!

 

 

*footnote.  

Try getting in to Buckingham Palace. Besides physical barriers, locked gates, fences etc, there are plenty of armed guards. And if you did get in, somehow (without an invitation) would King Charles be pleased to meet you and give you his time and conversation? Even if we are interesting and intelligent, unless we are specifically invited, or we are part of the king's family, we have no place in Buckingham Palace, this is my way of explaining the word "Holy", which basically means especially separated.

the disciple whom Jesus loved.

This will be a quick one.

I am convinced that John used this expression about himself very deliberately. (Eg John 13:23)

This way of talking about himself might seem somewhat boastful. He never refers to himself by name, or as “me” only as “the disciple Jesus loved.”

But my point of view is that he used this description as a deliberate alternative to “the disciple who loved Jesus”, which no doubt, he did.

John states in his first letter that “We love, because he (meaning God) first loved us.”

In other words, our ability to love as Christians (to love God and to love our neighbour) is the fruit and result of God’s amazing love towards us, working powerfully in us.

John is not suggesting Jesus loved him more than anyone else, but simply that Jesus loved him before John loved him back. From this point of view, I find this phrase quite touching and humbly true.

We likewise could refer to ourselves as the disciples Jesus loved.

a fig page?

a bove

 

f rom

i s

g ift

 

p erfect

a nd

g ood

e very 

What is the grace of God? (Family Christmas devotion 2025)

 

Luke 2:4-12 (NIV) 4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. 6 While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, 7 and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.

8 And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. 9 An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. 10 But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people. 11 Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord. 12 This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.”

 

John 1:14 (NIV) 14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Titus 2:11-14 (NIV) 11 For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. 12 It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

 

What is the grace of God?

  

When the news of Jesus rising from the dead started spreading around the world, the disciples, like Peter and John, and also Paul, started teaching new believers about Jesus our Lord, and about God our Father and about the Holy Spirit. They came up with a very important word about God. They taught about God being kind and loving and patient, but they also found a very important word that helps to explain how good God is, and that is the word; “grace”.

We sing that word in a famous hymn called “amazing grace”, and we use it for a name, and also we use it for the prayer we say before a meal, but even though that is the same word it has a different meaning.

We read it in the reading this morning from Paul’s letter to Titus which says that the grace of God appeared and brings salvation. Which means that this word grace, which belongs to God, has the power to bring us to a safe place, which is where Jesus is.

 

So, I want to try and explain this word; “grace”.

 

If you fell into a raging river and were running out of strength and you were about to drown, grace is like a rescue boat that comes out of nowhere and pulls you out of the water and brings you back safely to dry land.

If you got lost in the jungle, and had no money or food, and you were starving hungry, grace is like a food helicopter that comes out of nowhere and dishes out a beautiful meal full of chicken and gravy and tasty vegetables and then flies you to where your parents are looking for you.

If you get really sick and are almost dying, and your parents take you to hospital, grace is like a wonderful nurse that comes out of nowhere and gives you the most special medicine and then you wake up and are well again.

Grace is strong enough to help us even when we don’t want to be helped.

Grace fixes things, but it doesn’t fix everything, only the really important things in our lives.

What’s the most important thing in our whole life?

To be part of God’s family.

We all need to be part of a family, God gives us parents and grandparents and brothers and sisters and aunts and uncles and cousins and children and grandchildren, as well as special friends. These are so important to our lives, but the most important family is God’s family.

God started a family a long time ago with Adam and Eve, but they were tricked into breaking God’s rules which left them in really big trouble. It was like they were lost, but the worst thing was that they had broken God’s rules on purpose, and they felt really ashamed and had to hide from him.

We also break Gods rules, like when we think about ourselves and don’t love each other, and don’t love Jesus.

Being like that means that we also can hide from God and end up sad and lonely, which is like being lost in a jungle with no food, no family and no way home.

 

But God always knew that we would need something really special and strong, that would take away our shame, and bring us back home to him.

It was grace.

Grace means that God still cares for us, even when we are angry or upset with him.

Grace means that God still wants us in his family even when we slam the door in his face. Grace means that God loves us and will do everything that he can possibly do, to make sure we are safe, and will be part of his forever family.

 

In John’s gospel in the Bible, it says that Jesus was given to us so that we could be forever with him. (John 3:16) It also says that Jesus was full of grace and truth.

When the very first Christmas happened, Jesus was born as a tiny helpless baby.

God gave us his precious baby boy to live with and grow up with Mary and Joseph as his parents, but his true father was God.

That baby grew to be our Lord Jesus who died on the cross for us, and all of that happened because of God’s grace, God’s saving grace. Which comes out of nowhere and wipes away all of our fighting and arguments and disagreements with God and with each other, as well as our being greedy and nasty. Anything we do that we are ashamed of, God fixes with his grace, and gives us love and joy and a forever place with Jesus in heaven.

We call that really good news.

When we believe in God’s grace, which is his special power to change our lives through his son Jesus, then we do change on the inside in a beautiful way, and we learn how to live the way God wants us to live.

Christmas is when God’s grace arrived in the world through the baby Jesus. Jesus is full of grace. Jesus is, in a way, God’s superhero with the special power called grace.

And his grace will never fail.

Jesus Loves Me This I Know.

“But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler who will be the shepherd of my people Israel.” Matthew 2:6, Micah 5:2

Bethlehem currently is a city of just under 30,000 people on the west bank, south of Jerusalem. It is an ancient city going back more than 3000 years, and was at one point destroyed by the Romans, and then rebuilt by Constantine.

King David was from Bethlehem, he reigned somewhere between 900 and 800 BC

The quote above is from the Old Testament prophet named “Micah” which was written about 700 BC.

It is also found in Matthew’s gospel which was written by Matthew (one of Jesus’ twelve disciples) possibly as early as 40-50 AD.

The reason Matthew mentions this quote from the prophet Micah, is because he is telling the story of the “Magi”, the “wise men” who brought their gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh. Three valuable gifts from possibly three wise men? Matthew does not mention how many wise men came from the east following the star, but all the songs say three (including mine!).

These wise men, where exactly they were from we don’t know, maybe China, or somewhere else, but they were definitely not Jewish people. They were foreigners. But despite not being Jewish or from anywhere that was known for faith in the one true God, here they were, with expensive gifts, looking for God’s son, and they wanted to worship him!

So first, they went to Herod, the Jewish King at the time of Jesus’ birth. It made sense to them to ask him where they would find the newborn king that was clearly announced by this special star in heaven.

But Herod was caught by surprise (I don’t think he liked surprises). For some reason, he had not even the slightest inclination that a new king, a godly King, had been born in his country, God’s country. He was clearly not too interested in religious affairs, and suddenly needed the help of other wise men, the religious leaders of his land, to answer the question these strange but important travellers had asked, “Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star in the east, and we have come to worship him.”

How did Herod find the answer?

He had to get his old (but expensive- well he was the current King!) bible off the shelf and dust it off, and with the help of these religious leaders and bible teachers, looked up what had been written 700 years before (and kept preserved by those who knew it was important.)

There it was, towards the end of his Old Testament, in Micah’s prophetic writings, chapter 5, “Out of you (Bethlehem) will come a ruler of my people Israel”.

With that information, those travellers, the wise men, or “magi” went from Jerusalem to Bethlehem and found the baby Jesus and worshipped him.

God gave those wise men a beautiful star in heaven to follow, but without that old Bible, they may never have found Jesus.

Have we made communion too religious?

 

Have we made communion too religious?

The command Jesus gave was to do this in remembrance of him.

What was he wanting his disciples to do? What was he wanting us to do?

Was he asking some of us to take on his authority and lead a ceremony?

Was what he did at that last supper a ceremony?

 

There was ceremony involved in the Passover feast.

God had told Moses what was to be eaten, and how it was to be prepared and how those participating were to dress.

 

But did Jesus imply a similar ceremony in the sharing of communion amongst Christians for the coming ages?

 

Was the table of the last supper an altar?

 

Was a sacrifice made at that original meal?

 

Were those present reverent?

 

Were they dressed in a particular way?

 

Did they each bow as they received the portion of bread and a share in the cup?

 

Did Jesus have to quieten those present to concentrate on what he was sharing?

 

Would a live video of the actual last supper surprise us in how different it may have been to what we practice today? Or would it surprise us in its similarity?

 

Was Jesus wearing priestly garments? Was he praying for the elements to be transformed by the Holy Spirit?

 

Were those who shared in the bread and cup deeply reassured of their salvation at that time?

 

Was Jesus’ physical presence with them valued in the way it ought to have been? Or, unlike the transfiguration event, was his appearance ordinary and humble, with those present having an unclear or, at best, incomplete understanding of the significance of that meal?

 

What do we do today that gets in the way of what we are meant to experience and proclaim in the sharing of communion?

 

What do we do today that supports the sharing and proclamation of the true message of the communion meal?

 

How do we recognise the body of the Lord at communion? Is it the bread, or is it the gathered believers?

 

How do we enter an appropriate posture of reverence, and attitude of gratitude, inspite of distractions when we share communion?

 

Does the act of sharing in communion help us internalise the grace of God in a way that the inspired word of God alone, cannot?

 

Does the office of priesthood truly confer authenticity to the transformation of the elements, and thus guarantee God’s physical presence to us in receiving communion?

 

Or does God preside, despite our mode of sharing this meal (for better or for worse)?

 

Who is truly free to partake of this meal? Who forfeits this invitation?

 

Is there a minimum age to share in communion?

 

Was Judas stopped from sharing in the cup?

 

Did sharing in the cup affect his decision to betray Jesus?

 

I may be implying some of the answers to these questions, but I would rather ask you to consider the questions honestly.

 

Unfortunately, the way we share communion tends to divide us in the Christian world.

 

I disclose my bias, that I do believe in leadership and eldership in the church, but I do not believe in a clergy/laity divide. 

Long Problems

If you have life experience, and once we have lived as adults for some time, we all do, we experience what I will call “long problems”. They are situations which are not able to be resolved quickly, no matter what action is taken. They are unpalatable, painful circumstances that will not go away.   They may seem to occur without invitation. We wonder how we could have avoided them. And they cost us time, money, joy, freedom, peace, comfort, and all the things we equate with success. 
Others may or may not think our situation is our own fault, and judge us as stupid for allowing something like this to happen, but from my perspective, I am my own worst judge. Kicking myself mentally for making an error of judgement and not avoiding the issue.
As we mature we can see these things approaching and avoid some of them, but others still happen.
The media portrays successful people, those who do not have "long problems", or have overcome them. But I suspect most ordinary people have them. 
They are our crosses to carry, our thorns in the side.
We may or may not have caused them, but once they are present they are there for a long time, sometimes for life.
Occasionally we see a way out and gain hope of freedom, only for the door to cruelly close. And sometimes we exchange one long problem for a worse one, hence the saying “better the devil you know”.
But what I have not said is that God is with us in our long problems, even when we have caused them, even when we deserve them. He gives us some of them, for our sake.
He wants us to continue behaving as Christian’s in those circumstances, which includes gratitude, and prayer.
“Rejoice always, pray continually, give thanks in all circumstances.” Said by the man with a thorn in his side who prayed for relief but was granted only grace.
I say “only” because I must admit that grace at times, seems little, though really it is the full tsunami of God’s holy love. 
And there will be a day when all creation (including us) stops groaning under the strain of long problems. Until then,
Rejoice. Even in our sufferings, which produce, amongst other things, true hope.

Service or Proclamation?

Question: Service or proclamation?

Answer: Yes

Some strongly believe that speaking the gospel is the only way people will hear and have opportunity to repent. Others believe service is the best way to witness and would struggle to find the courage and correct words to proclaim the good news of Jesus.
But Jesus both spoke and served. 
And his Spirit enabled people like Peter to speak and people like Dorcas (Tabitha) to serve.
But both of them spoke and both served.
We are all gifted in many ways, and we have particular gifts and skills in which we are very good. With the gift of faith, other abilities are often released or given. I say “released”, because maybe some of those abilities were already germinating within. 
So, someone who previously would not speak publicly, now has the courage and understanding to do so.
Someone who previously was uninterested in working with children, now finds a new willingness and joy to be involved.
And that word; "willingness", is an important one. As many abilities are more to do with a willingness to try, and keep trying.
Once you try to do something ten, twenty, fifty or a thousand times, you notice an ability that was possibly hardly there before.
Practice is what brings out what appear to be to be natural gifts. Things we feel able and ready to do.
That includes sharing our faith with others. That includes folding clothes. 
God gives us willingness. 
Another way to describe willingness is putting a purpose or goal ahead of a natural desire. Putting someone else’s need above other priorities. Fitting in something that wasn’t initially planned, or more simply; love. 

I just want to to take this opportunity to honour Mrs Hill, who many years ago came and helped clean up my flat where I was living, and made a meal for me, fully out of love.  

Loving one another as Jesus loved us.

He was willing to heal, and willing to forgive, and willing to die for our sake. 
If we are willing, God will use us.
Jesus asked Peter “Are you willing?"...

"Feed my Lambs”.

Angry About Being Angry

This is probably something that happens later in life, at least for me.

Knowing that I identify as a Christian, and knowing that gentleness, kindness and anger are hard to reconcile, being angry, and behaving/ speaking with anger is a strong way of not looking like a Christian. It hurts others. It hurts and humiliates others.

The effect of that may be that the person I am interacting with, and others in the vicinity will see how un-christian I really am. Not a great witness, not a great example etc. Maybe that person will be repelled from ever considering faith in Jesus.

And all because I allowed myself to express my correctness and authority in a particular situation, maybe tinged with frustration of many other things. “Martha you are concerned about many things”.

I can picture a confident child who has somewhat mastered the ability to juggle 3 balls, showing their father their newly acquired skill. But a father like me, rather than encouraging, adds difficulty to the situation by adding a fourth ball, and then a fifth, so that everything falls apart and the child is now humbled.

Who would do something like that?

Satan does it with Job, and presumably enjoys doing it with us.

But that does not excuse mature Christians like me, from their failure.

And that is hard, hard enough to make a person like me angry. Angry about getting angry.

Reminds me a little of Jonah getting angry about the worm.

 

The truth and reality is that we,… I,... am a sinner.

Despite my desire to live without sin in my life and be a good witness to the Christian faith, it is impossible for me. But not because I don’t have the capacity to resist. I do (and don’t) have that capacity.

I can juggle 3 balls for a while, but not 5, but if I practiced, I might get to 5, but not 7.etc

I do have the capacity to juggle, for a certain time, with a certain number of balls.

But God wants truth from the inward parts.

Behold, You desire truth in the inward parts, And in the hidden part You will make me to know wisdom. Psalm 51:6

 

It’s not about how well I can juggle, or how I look as a Christian to others. It is about the deep parts of me, my deep motivations and hidden desires. My chronic deep anger at people and at God.

Who can actually see this clearly?

Not even me, only God.

Who can change that part of me?

Only God.

How can God change that part of me?

By becoming me on the cross. By killing me on the cross. By resurrecting me in himself.

I am nothing. I am nothing good. I am nothing good, but Jesus is risen, and I believe and trust that I am in him, and he in me. He has washed me, sanctified me, justified me.

Why?

For God so loved the world that he sent his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.

The Christian Faith

 

The Christian faith is a gentle, humble, patient faith.

It is not a boastful, proud, forceful, or dominating movement that fearfully and demandingly converts those who are weaker.

Nor is it a deceitful, scheming, wealthy or clever faith.

It is a serving faith, willing to do what others would not. The menial tasks, the jobs that most would avoid.

It is a giving faith. Giving and forgiving.

It is a joyful faith, secure in the love of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. 

It is a singing faith, joyful in the love of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

It is an expectant faith, knowing that God blesses us and keeps us in all circumstances.

It is a patient faith, knowing that the seasons God provides will be effective in bringing about the harvest that God is preparing.

It is a suffering faith, understanding and accepting that we are supported in our struggles, and gain wisdom and maturity as well as humility through these.

We accept all that God provides for us, and also what he removes.

We do falter in our Christian walk, and are prone to wandering, but the true Shepherd is faithful to guide, restore and lead us to the goal he has planned.

We are not ashamed to call on his name. Jesus, our Lord.

“Woman, why do you involve me?” Jesus replied. “My hour has not yet come." John 2:4 (NIV)

This verse has probably caused unrest between denominations. Even being familiar with it, as I am, I still feel uneasy reading these words. For full disclosure I wish to state that I hold to a reformed understanding of Christianity. However, I have a Catholic upbringing and have some understanding of the sentiments held from that perspective. I will also state clearly that I am not able to, nor have I tried to translate this verse from the original Greek. I have simply read a number of English versions of the verse.

Some would argue that this verse is evidence of Jesus being convinced or coerced into action he would not have taken, if not for his mother’s suggestion/request.

The language Mary is quoted to have used is not coercive. “They have no more wine”. A simple statement of fact. 

As a son to a loving mother, I can envisage myself in a similar circumstance, and I sense the quiet concern in the statement, and my implied responsibilities as a son with potential means to rectify a problem.

Both Mary and Jesus (as well as the disciples) were invited to this wedding feast. 

Were they close relatives? Were they distant relatives? 

Were they from Mary’s side, or Joseph’s side of the family?

Why were all the disciples invited?

Were the hosts rash or overly optimistic, inviting more than they could cater for? Were wedding invitations inclusive of more distant relatives (and therefore large numbers) simply an expected norm, no matter the financial means of the hosts? Or were numbers of invited guests deliberately larger than numbers of available seats, knowing that some would likely not attend, like the bookings of some airlines?

Did they have a little bit of that Australian attitude of, “she’ll be right”, meaning, “don’t worry, it will all work out”, (despite poor planning)?

I find myself thinking about the feeding of the five thousand when Jesus asks the disciples to feed the crowd. The disciples knew full well that there was barely food for them to share. In that situation I could almost hear Jesus stating “O you of little faith”, though he does not.

If nothing else, Mary seems to lack no faith in what her son is able to achieve, regarding the catering of wine.

Is it possible that Mary was close enough to the hosts to have previously reassured them in their invitation of “extras”, such as the disciples, knowing that Jesus would be able to save the situation? Could I go further and suggest that she expected this outcome, maybe even engineered it?

These last comments (of a "meddling" Mary) are clearly going beyond the written word, and I am on thin ice even suggesting them, nowhere is Mary's character maligned in this way.

Does Mary have special sway with her son, Jesus?

Is she able to influence his actions more than another?

The Catholic understanding is; if we are in need, approaching Mary may help things happen more than approaching Jesus directly. At least that is my understanding of common Catholic thoughts regarding prayer, and needs.

For many Catholics, Mary, is much more “approachable”, being "fully" human, and a mother, and an “ordinary” person. (Yes I grew up with a strict, stern father, and my mother was able to soften his resistance to some of my requests/wishes as a child, that he otherwise would have simply said “no” to.)

Yet Catholic teaching (I believe) is that Mary is not an ordinary person, she is “immaculate”, meaning she was born without original sin, and remained a life-long virgin, and ascended to heaven without going through physical death.

My reading of the New Testament gives no clear teaching regarding this last paragraph. What I have read states that Mary remained a virgin until the birth of Jesus (Matthew 1:25), and that Jesus then had other brothers (Matthew 12:46) and presumably sisters (Matthew 13:56). I also do not hold that she was "immaculate", this understanding is a theological construct, based on the belief that God would not choose the womb of a fallen woman for the incarnation, and that by default, an embryo in Mary;s womb, would inherit fallen genes, but God does not explain how the embryonic gene is formed within Mary, and whether any of Mary's DNA resides in Jesus. 

I do believe she was an ordinary person of faith who was greatly favoured by God, in his choosing of her to be the mother of our Saviour.

I also believe that Jesus is fully human, and does not need mediators between us and he. We are able to approach him directly with all our needs as well as our gratitude and worship.

There is no other miracle in the New Testament which describes Mary’s intervention or influence, though there are many miracles that describe certain other people intervening, eg the centurion for his servant (Matthew 8:5). 

As Christian leaders, elders, ministers, and clergy (I do not hold to a laity-clergy divide), we must be careful not to become mediators for others, but rather help people understand that we all have direct access to Jesus, and are free and invited to call on his great name.

And there is that short passage where Jesus is told that his mother and brothers have arrived, yet in response Jesus declares that everyone who does the will of God is his mother, brother and sister. (Matthew 12:46 and beyond) This verse, if nothing else, seems to state that Jesus counts faith (the desire to follow God) as the main influencing factor of his favour. Hence his often mentioned response "your faith has healed you".

Getting back to the verse in question.

Yes, I do believe mothers have sway over their children.

We, as Christian children of all ages, are to honour our parents, this is a command of God, the 5^th I believe.

And Jesus would certainly do this. He quotes that specific command (Matthew 15:3-6) as an example of how the Pharisees have nullified God’s word, so it would be hypocritical of Jesus not to honour his mother and father. (We presume at this point Joseph is no longer alive, though it is not stated anywhere.)

Mary understood this as well, and therefore expected Jesus to follow her concern, despite the fact that, from Jesus’ point of view, his ministry had not yet started.

Was Jesus short with Mary?

“My hour has not yet come” is a strong statement.

I believe Jesus was correct. He knew clearly when his ministry of signs and wonders was to commence. He was not suffering stage fright. He was not simply avoiding a relatively trivial situation of need. He knew the significance and preciousness of his works of power, and would not use them for show, or without the intended purpose of displaying the kingdom of God, nor would he go beyond what he knew his Father in heaven intended. In other words, just because he “could” didn’t mean he “should”.

I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah’s time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. Luke 4:25-26 NIV

I also do not hold that Mary had a greater understanding than Jesus as to when his ministry was to begin.

When exactly was this “hour” that had not yet come?

The other gospels describe the baptism of Jesus, followed by the forty days in the wilderness, followed by the calling of the disciples and then his preaching in Galilee. Luke's Gospel, implies that he has performed miracles in other places eg capernaum, prior to his preaching in Nazareth.

John’s gospel does not mention the forty days in the wilderness, so it is possible that this wedding took place after the forty days in the wilderness, but before his preaching at the synagogue in Nazareth.

I might suggest that Jesus reading from the scroll in Isaiah and proclaiming that “today this reading is fulfilled in your presence” was the beginning of Jesus public ministry. (Luke's timeline puts the calling of the disciples after this event, so it is hard to place the wedding banquet in this timeline)

Was he to announce his prophetic fulfillment of being sent to give sight to the blind and release of captives, and the year of God’s favour, before he actually did it?

If this is the case, then a miracle before this proclamation of God’s word, was somehow, out of place. This is my explanation of Jesus’ reluctance to perform a public miracle at this point. If this is so, then Mary is in an awkward position asking Jesus to help this situation of embarrassment for the wedding hosts who for unknown reasons, have under-catered. Mary clearly feels for the situation, more than Jesus.

Her own wedding, if she had one, would have been a quiet affair, having been scandalised by her untimely pregnancy. She may have had more emotion invested in the smooth running of this anonymous wedding, and again I wonder how closely related she was to the family of the bride or groom. Jesus on the other hand seems to have little concern other than that he is now in the situation of honouring his mother, yet preserving his anonymity and obedience to the wise Spirit-planned path of his ministry.

 

Was Jesus surprised and unprepared for this request?

Was he annoyed?

Was he short with his mother?

By faith my answer is no, no, and no.

By faith I believe Jesus always spoke the truth in love.

We cannot gain the tone of his statement to his mother from the written word.

He may have been smiling as he said what he said. Yet he was serious and truthful, and I believe Mary knew she had forced his hand prematurely.

In conclusion

Do we need Mary’s intervention in our lives today as Christians?

Although my Catholic friends and brethren would likely say yes, my answer is no. 

If we are in need, in the depths of trouble, despair, suffering, fear, or danger, we have a faithful high priest and saviour who is able to hear and answer our prayers.

Is Mary able to hear our prayers?

As a young man, I used to believe that my deceased grandmother, whom I remain convinced was strong in faith, and therefore, saved, as a catholic who loved Jesus, I used to believe that she (as well as God) could see everything I did, now that she was in heaven.

But as a more mature Christian, I don’t see that the Bible supports this understanding.

Nothing is hidden from God. And Jesus who is God, is able to see everything. But deceased humans, in heaven, with the Lord, are they able to see everything?

And if they somehow could, are they able to intervene?

 

These are difficult questions to answer dogmatically, but the safe and simple answer is to rely on what scripture clearly teaches, and that is that we are to pray in Jesus’ name to our Father in heaven, who knows what we need, even before we utter a word.

Surely when our minds and hearts are focused on the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, that is the most useful and joyful and obedient place to be. And any other image or name that is put in that place is potentially a distraction from true worship.

Events in Jesus life prophetic of the cross and resurrection.

The climax of each gospel account is clearly the arrest, trial and crucifixion of Jesus. This is sometimes referred to as the “passion” of Jesus. I mention this because, in terms of volume and detail, this part of each gospel is significant, outweighing the other described events of his life and ministry, including the resurrection. In those chapters, it is as though time slows down, and events are described hour by hour, moment by moment. These passages are at the end of each of the four gospels and take up a large volume of the gospel narrative. The resurrection itself is given a relatively brief treatment, despite its major effect and implication.

 

Having reflected on the baptism of Jesus, which occurs close to the beginning of each gospel, and is considered the beginning of Jesus earthly ministry, I wish to suggest that this, along with other events in Jesus’ ministry and life prior to his death and resurrection, have an added significance, beyond the actual event. I believe the baptism of Jesus was both an image of, and a true entering-into the work of the cross.

 

Paul states in the book of Romans, and elsewhere, that when we as Christians, are baptised, we are baptised into the death of Jesus, and rising from the waters, we are also rising as with the resurrected Christ.

I believe that Jesus understood his own baptism in exactly this way, that he was foreshadowing and willingly entering into his death and resurrection in being baptised, fulfilling all righteousness.

His baptism shows Jesus’ willingness to identify himself with sinful humanity. He was ready to take on the sin of the world, (John announces and identifies him as the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world) as he approached the time and place of his baptism.

This understanding of his baptism I believe escaped John, who was awed by his presence and the understanding of his purpose and authority. John questioned his own worthiness to baptise Jesus, knowing he himself was the lesser of the two, and was in need of his own redemption, being born of Adam, and a sinner in his own right, not that any of this is mentioned other than his doubting when he was in prison.

But Jesus makes things clear that it was right to be baptised, to “fulfill all righteousness”.

This is an interesting comment, and it is these words that lead me to consider that his baptism was in fact a willing and effective entering into the carrying of the sin of the world, in other words, Jesus is stating physically that he is willing to be crucified and has the true hope of resurrection in his act of being baptised. He is surrendering himself to God’s will, and, in a definite manner, actually accepting death and resurrection, which we know is the path he will soon tread.

God blesses this action, God the Holy Spirit visibly descends on him, and the voice of the Father is heard declaring “This is my son, with whom I am well pleased”.

I will add a few points to these thoughts.

 

Firstly, when the “sons of thunder” are asked by Jesus if they can undergo the baptism that he is to undergo, he is clearly speaking of his crucifixion, as well as in Luke 12, when Jesus talks about the baptism he is to undergo, again he is talking about the cross.

 

Secondly, when we confess, as Paul teaches, that there is one baptism for the forgiveness of sins; if I were to ask specifically what is this one baptism? my answer can only be the baptism of Jesus.

 

Finally, if we do see Jesus’ earthly baptism as the beginning of his crucifixion, his first step into carrying the sin of the whole world, or a foreshadowing of it in a powerful and God ordained way, then this adds to our understanding of the meaning of our own baptism, which is our physical way of entering into the way of the cross. By being baptised we are metaphorically and physically, by faith, entering into the death and resurrection of Jesus. It adds weight to Pauls statement that “I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I that liveth but Christ that liveth in me!

Having pondered this, I also wondered about other events in Jesus’ life. For example, his being left behind, or temporarily lost by his parents at age 12. It was after 3 days that his parents found him, in his Father’s house.

This is by no means an indefensible thought, but those 3 days of Jesus absence could also be compared to the 3 days between crucifixion and resurrection. Certainly, for his mother and father, with an understanding that Jesus is the Lamb of God, their concern for his absence must surely have brought thoughts of whether his time had already come.

They had already experienced the escape into Egypt to avoid Herod’s wrath, and the words of Simeon that a sword would also pierce her own heart was potentially present during the time of frantic searching. And finding him well and in the ministry of God’s word, was a form of returning from the dead from the point of view of his parents.

Lastly, I will mention the 40 days in the wilderness, which occurred immediately following his baptism.

For that period of time, it is not mentioned that anyone missed Jesus’ presence, but being in the wilderness was surely a place where he may have come to injury and even death. Had he listened to the tempters suggestion, he may well have died by falling from the high place at the temple. Again, his entering into the wilderness and return, could be considered also a foreshadowing of the events of the cross and resurrection.

Certainly Jesus spoke a number of times to his disciples regarding his approaching death and resurrection, and on the mount of transfiguration, he met with Moses and Elijah, and there too they discussed his coming departure.

In conclusion I wish to suggest that there were a number of events in Jesus’ life and ministry, and possibly others I have not mentioned, that foreshadow the cross and resurrection, but most particularly, his personal baptism in the Jordan river with John the Baptist. This baptism, in my opinion, is the one true baptism that we all enter into by faith, and by our own baptism. Our own baptism, by nature, is an imperfect act. Who can say that enough preparation, meditation, prayer and study went into our own baptism to achieve true godliness. What if the baptiser were distracted, what if our pride was triggered at the wrong time. What if we were not fully immersed? And what of the issue of who has true authority to baptise today?

There are so many ways of not achieving what we can never achieve, that being true sanctity in Christ, but thanks be to God, who sent his Son, who willingly entered the waters of baptism on our behalf, in order to go to the baptism of the cross, where he carried us, we were crucified in and with him, and then he rose with us, victorious over death and sin, destroying all the works of the devil.

We are given the gift of baptism, to allow us to enter into what Jesus has already achieved for us. The tearing of the curtain, and our passing through to the Holy presence of the almighty. Jesus our Lord.

 

Morality and the Church

I am reasonably convinced that a big reason (largely unspoken) why people do not wish to go to church, or take on the Christian faith in the west, is due to what is perceived as the need to take on unfavourable moral attitudes and standards.

Yes, it is true that Christians are encouraged to live as godly people. It is a deep desire in all Christians to live according to the teachings of Jesus. To love our neighbours as ourselves, to love God with all our mind, strength, heart and soul, and to love each other as Christ loves us. And the agreed implication is also the Ten Commandments, to a strict degree (eg if you look at a woman with the wrong motives it is considered adultery, if you hate your brother it is considered murder) but there is also the beautiful description of the fruit of the Spirit, in Galatians 5, which we also long to express.

The reality is that as Christians, we fail at all of these continually, yet we love these characteristics and continue to model our lives on them. The reason that this is so, is because we have been given the precious gift of forgiveness. Forgiveness both now and into the future for our inability to do anything exactly as we should, and for all our past moral failures.

This was achieved by Jesus on the cross.

However to those outside the church, especially those who have had some Christian upbringing or contact, the idea of a life with strong moral values is probably repulsive. 

No matter how good the music or sermon or shared meals, this is likely a deal breaker for many. Added to this is the strong sense of God being unjust and uncaring (“If he does exist”), and the current alternative moral system that not only ridicules but chastises the “narrow mindedness” of Christian teaching. Especially to those of us who take the Bible literally.

So, the likelihood that someone on that side of the fence will be "attracted" into the church or the Christian faith is, in my opinion, quite low. 

 

But there is still hope.

God can and does change people.

He does this through sometimes unpredictable circumstances, but they might include suffering, a moral dilemma and the right person at the right time. The good news must be heard sooner or later by this person, as this special word from God combined with the presence of God’s holiness, ( the person of the Holy Spirit) can and does effect powerful, convincing, convicting and converting of those, like us, who would otherwise prefer to continue on with our personal godless plans for our lives.

That word of truth, the message of the cross, is both offensive and repulsive, except to those who are being saved; then it is powerful.

And so we go on in faith and hope and with prayer, hoping (and expecting) for that miracle to occur in those around us.