The 4th temptation in Luke 4

"All spoke well of him". (Luke 4:22)

This passage is confronting to me.

Jesus had just been baptized and was full of the Holy Spirit. This description alone could cause endless debate but all I wish to point out is that, all that follows relates to a man powerfully working in the fullness of God's will.

So he is led by the Spirit into the desert where for forty days he is tempted by the devil and eats nothing.

It is interesting that Satan uses this time of solitude and separation to tempt Jesus. We often seek solitude for recharging, as did Jesus, but solitude by no means keeps us safe from temptation, computer screen or not.

And the temptations are very interesting. They vary from food to fame to amazing feats. But where Adam and Eve failed quickly without famine or need, Jesus in a physically weakened state, strongly and obediently resists.

The Spirit led him into the desert, but the devil led him to high places. It is not stated, but it seems Jesus had no choice but to follow the devil to these places and endure the temptation.

Each temptation was rebuffed with a clear knowledge, understanding and application of God's word. "It is written..."

But the devil also quotes scripture as part of the temptation, so clearly Gods word can be used with evil intent. Knowing God's word alone is not necessarily proof of holiness or of orthodoxy.

Vs 13 says that when the devil finished all his tempting he left him for a more "opportune time".

When is this time? In the Garden of Gethsemane? On the cross?

In my opinion it happens in the same chapter.

Jesus went back home to Nazareth, still full in the power of the Spirit. Everyone is now talking about this local boy who has amazing gifts.

He reads from Isaiah and proclaims that he is the fulfillment of the very words he reads. What an amazing and sublime moment that must have been. 

And "all spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips".

If I put myself in Jesus sandals at that exact point in time, I don't think I would have taken Jesus' next step.

Surely it would be good to enjoy the moment of popularity and positivity after your first sermon at your home church. Surely we would use the positive vibe to build on our momentum in our career as a stadium speaker? Surely this positive vibe is a blessing from God?

Jesus must be mad or stupid (from the point of view of our modern, commercial, money orientated world) because the next step he takes is to completely and irreversibly undermine his current preaching success. He destroys it in such a way that the event would go viral today if it had been captured to YouTube.

In his home synagogue, just after receiving a standing ovation, and without any provocation, he adds to his sermon the worst possible ending. If anything he incites the congregation.

It seems, though it isn't directly stated, that the people were now waiting for some miraculous sign, some special event for Jesus to perform, as he had done elsewhere. After all, this was his home town, and he had just read about giving sight to the blind and releasing prisoners etc. form the scroll of Isaiah.

Instead Jesus refuses, and reminds them about the fact that a prophet is never accepted in his home town. He then reminds everyone that God ignored the many, many widows in Jerusalem during a great famine, and instead sent Elijah to a widow in Zarephath. He doubles the pain of his point by adding the fact that God ignored many others with leprosy choosing instead to heal the Syrian general Naaman.

In other words, Jesus was saying, "you can talk me up as much as you like, but I'm not going to do any miracles here."
And just because he wasn't going to do miracles there, did not invalidate his fulfillment of Isaiah's passage.

The people were furious, not in the sense that they weren't going to invite him back to speak again, they wanted to kill him!

This seems like an over reaction to a bad sermon.

I would suggest that maybe this crowd became possessed by the devil (which by no means clears them of personal guilt for what they were about to do).

Where Hitler took advantage of crowd dynamics and stirred them to his advantage, Jesus rejected his popularity, recognized it as from the devil and unmasked their hearts and their desire to kill him with his deeply cutting comments.

He was taken to his third high place in that chapter, with the intention of being thrown off to his death.

He could have once again "tested" God to see if the Angels would buffer his fall, but instead, in the power and humility of the Spirit, he walked through the crowd and escaped.

Being spoken well of, in this circumstance, was, in my opinion, Satan taking his opportunity to thwart Jesus' mission. Satan failed. Jesus succeeded.

Before the Throne of God Above

"Because the sinless Savior died,
My sinful soul is counted free;
For God, the Just, is satisfied
To look on Him and pardon me."

This is a beautiful verse of a beautiful hymn.

I was listening to a modern version of this song originally written by Charitie Lees Bancroft.

As Christians, we are drawn to the wonderful forgiveness that Jesus bought for us by his own blood.

The thought that came to me as I was listening to these words is that I think we sometimes misjudge the Father. We love Jesus; He is our Lord and Saviour, who substituted himself for us so that we could be washed and sanctified and justified, and have a place in God's family.

We know that Jesus is the Son. We know that God the Father sent Jesus his Son, and we know the Spirit is the third person of the one God we worship. But today I am not addressing the deep truth of the Trinity.

What I want to focus on is the sometimes wrong assumption we have of God the Father and God the Son.

Just as Catholics sometimes look to Mary as the "gentle", "feminine", "approachable" person in heaven, who may have some sway over Jesus, and a deeper connection with humanity, (a view I don't agree with), other Christians sometimes see Jesus as the "gentle", "approachable", "merciful" member of the Trinity, as opposed to the "harsh", "uncompromising", "unapproachable" Father, God-head member of the Trinity.

But I think this is a BIG fallacy.

What if the Father is in fact the most merciful/ forgiving/gracious of all.

If there were (there isn't) a struggle of will between the Father and the Son, one being more on the side of the sinner, the other being more on the side of Justice, I would say that the Father is the one MORE on the side of the SINNER.
I will state it again.
If there is a pole of grace within the Trinity (there isn't), then, the one who most pleads our case is actually the FATHER!

What of that amazing prayer of Jesus "forgive them for they don't know what they are doing", if Jesus struggled with that deeply moving prayer (he didn't), his struggle may have been more to align himself with God's forgiving heart than with protecting his guilty murderers from a righteous judge.

These are hair splitting points I am making, and I'm not using scripture at the moment to support my thoughts, but I do know this: Jesus is not the gentle Son of a severe Father. He is of one mind and heart and will with His Father and with the Holy Spirit, who, in perfect Unity, planned and fulfilled the rescue of sinful man.

Grace is the wonderful work of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

We need not fear the Father, or, we need no less to fear the Son and Holy Spirit.

God "the Just"was not tricked into forgiving us by some clever move by Jesus.

God 'the merciful" SENT Jesus for this very purpose, and Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, was deeply glad for the opportunity to do his Father's will.

I hope these thoughts stimulate your mind and heart to greater love for our wonderful God.

?Saint Teresa?

I don't think Mother Teresa would want to be canonized.

Apart from other things, canonizing means the Catholic Church is certain she is in heaven. Which implies (like it or not) that to be fairly confident of your place in heaven you have to be in the mold of someone like Mother Teresa.
If you are "ordinary" then who knows?

This is how the media and the world in general would see it, as well as many ordinary Christians of many denominations.

The New Testament definition of a saint is simply, a believer. There is no separating amazing saints from ordinary ones. In fact Jesus identifies himself particularly with the "least" of his followers.

(St.) Paul described himself as the worst of sinners. And all believers know that they are sinners, especially leaders.

The word "saint" comes from the word sanctify which is from the word "holy".
"Holy" is a word that describes the otherness of God. He is "other" because of his moral impeccability, purity, and absolute perfection in all things, particularly with regard to his plan for creation and how he relates to all things. If there are degrees of holiness then God is actually most Holy.

Ordinary people are made holy. God does this. We don't deserve it, we don't earn it, and we never "achieve" it by living our lives a certain way, yet God "sanctifies" us making us (believers) his very own family. This is amazing and true and worth celebrating.

He does this in only one way. By sending his one and only begotten Son, Jesus, who took us into himself on the cross. By his death (the sacrifice of a perfect, sinless and innocent man, the only one who was worthy of the title "lamb of God") and rising from the dead, he purified us, washed us, remade us, sanctified us, filled us with his "Holy" Spirit and certainly that makes us fit for heaven, miracle or no miracle, life devoted to the poor, or to the rich or to any in between.

So now, as believers, our identity is in Jesus and we follow his teaching to love one another, and serve one another, and to forgive one another. That's what saints do.
What saints don't want or need, is to be elevated to a glory that we know only Jesus deserves.
Saints want to honour Jesus.
The church, which is the great multitude of gathered saints, also wants to honour Jesus.
Canonizing a particular person just does not make sense and is not helpful.
I don't think Mother Teresa would want to be canonized.

"Prodigal" Wedding

I was invited to a wedding. People I've known for many years though only as passing friends.
With excitement I was told; "It's happening! Come to our wedding."
The emotion was genuine, as was the invitation.

So of course I went.

Weddings speak strongly of God's love for mankind.
Like the morning sunrise over the ocean, the beauty of a lush green forest and the majesty of snow capped mountain ranges, weddings give witness to the love and glory of God, even when they are theologically silent.
Paul tells us that when a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife it is a grand mystery. It is the deep, unexplainable and illogical but wonderful truth of Jesus redeeming mankind in action.The conclusion of all history will be a wedding. No, it will be THE wedding. The wedding that all other countless earthly weddings have been pointing to. That of the bride and the Lamb, the saved and the Saviour, the church and her Lord, us and Jesus.

As Christians we believe that earthly weddings are ordained by God. It is God who joins a man and a woman, and that earthly union is broken only by physical death.

As Christians we honour marriage by strict celibacy outside of marriage. And we honour marriage by monogamy in marriage.

However today in western society, many choose to cohabit. For many and varied reasons. Even professing Christians are found in these unorthodox circumstances.

Some who clearly plan to marry, feel that once they are engaged, then they may as well start living together.

I don't believe this is how Jesus intended marriage.

I think engagement is the serious promise of marriage, which can be broken if necessary without dishonour to either party, when celibacy is respected. Therefore engagement should remain a time of celibacy in honour of God, and families, and each other. It need not be extended. Paul states that it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

Personally I don't believe girlfriends or boyfriends are a tenable Christian practice. As a Christian, either we are seeking/open to marriage, or we aren't. Once we are ready to marry, we seek wisdom and direction on courtship and marriage. Courtship is always with a view to marriage. In the meantime, when we are younger, and not mature enough to marry, friendships should be enjoyed, friendships which honour people's independence and availability for courtship as well as their celibacy.


I am well aware that society does not share my personal views. These views come from my faith in Jesus. It's how I believe we can best serve God as single and as married people of faith.




But what of the rest of society? Those that may have some faith, but are not as "religious" as others. Or those who profess no faith, or alternative faiths?

Sometimes a couple who has lived together will decide to marry. They may already share children or have had previous relationships.

Is this marriage to be shunned? Looked down upon? Ridiculed? Avoided? Is it a farce? What's the point????

I joyfully answer "no" to all these questions.

As a Christian I know everything that has come to me is out of God's grace and mercy.

My childhood, my abilities, my forgiveness, my faith and repentance, my job, my income, my marriage, my celibacy, my children; everything is a gift, nothing is earnt.

(on a seperate note, I have not been "rewarded" with a great marriage because I "suffered" celibacy. Celibacy is a gift that is of great worth, as is marriage.)

Who am I to say that the gift of a blessed marriage is only for committed Christians? What if God is present at every marriage? What if God approves of all marriages, no matter what has gone before?
If it is God who joins a man and a woman, does he do this from a distance? Or does he actually attend the wedding? Jesus certainly attended weddings, and often spoke of them in his teaching.

I guess the point I'm making is that all marriages, even delayed ones, can and should be honoured in a similar way to the returning prodigal son.
The ever loving father waited patiently for the returning son, and reinstated him freely at his own cost and to the dislike of the elder more outwardly compliant son.

Surely we Christians who understand the depth and true significance of marriage would/should celebrate all those who knowingly or unknowingly are witnessing to the coming great wedding when they themselves return/come to God's gift of marriage?



Of course all of these situations are more complicated than how I have described them, but none of us have perfect marriages or perfect celibacy leading into marriage. Yet God chooses us for his perfect Son.

Standing Out (Colossians 3:1-4)

For some reason, I like to stand out in certain circumstances. I suppose pride is the main reason. But there is also the sense of having a gift or skill or ability and receiving some *recognition for that ability.

Western culture is so immersed in television, that we are naturally drawn  to the glory that is bestowed by the media and the millions of viewers on those special few who have climbed successfully onto that stage.

We admire and identify with those idols of pop culture. 

We long for our own day of glory.

But for the Christian, self promotion and boasting has been forsaken in the light of  the great gifts of forgiveness, transformation, renewal and regeneration that God has poured upon us by the cross of his Son, Jesus.

As Christians we know that our hope lies with Jesus in heaven, we are to set our hearts on things above.

Somehow we have been raised with Jesus. We have died. Our lives are hidden. Hidden with Jesus.

When he appears, we will appear with him in glory.

I don't exactly know how to explain this amazing future event, but I believe it will far out weigh winning Masterchef, Idol, Australia's Got Talent, X-factor, Biggest Looser, the Olympics, the Arias. the Dove awards, the Acadamy awards, and any other major competition put together.

Appearing "in glory" will be worth the wait, and won't go to our heads as is often the risk with worldly success.

God does make some people stand out, but he also makes everything beautiful in its time. When is our time?

Soon

When Christ appears.


*The wanting to receive recognition is also a mixed bag. As we mature, the need for this recognition of our gifts lessens, I think.

Atonement

Recently, I had to deal with a complaint in our workplace.
A customer was rightly upset and wrote a strong letter.
I looked up the points that were made and discussed the issues, and realized that, although unintentional, an error was made, involving processes that could be improved, and minor misses by staff. The problem was that the letter was written directly and personally to me, although I had not personally been involved in the events, it even included the words "I should be ashamed".

It was a bad day for me, eventually I calmed down enough to make contact and write a letter. In it, I accepted responsibility for what had happened and apologized. Although I had not personally made an error, my workplace had, and I am a main leader in that workplace. I begrudgingly took responsibility.

Today I reflected on this.

Can I really be held responsible for the situation, even though I did not personally have a hand in it?

Yes.

Legally, I am culpable. Like it or not. This is the price you pay as a business owner.

Likewise, Jesus, by claiming to be our owner, is truly culpable for our actions.

We have an understanding that we have been "redeemed" by Jesus. To reclaim an item given at a "cash for items" loan center (pawn shop), a price must be paid. Once it is paid, the item is legally yours again, and it has been "redeemed". If the price is not paid within a certain period of time, the item is lost forever.

We have sold ourselves to Satan by sinning, and, unfortunately, we cannot afford the cost of being redeemed. Jesus paid the price, by his blood. Because he has bought us, he is now our owner, and is culpable for our actions. Again, he has paid the price for the penalty of our sin, by his blood.

Paying this price made us one with him, and with the Father. This is "at-one-ment", or atonement. We became his body, he is our head. He is the husband, we are the bride. He is the elder brother, we are the adopted children, He is the vine, we are the branches. He is the good Shepherd, we are the wandering sheep. He is the Saviour, we stand in awe.

Unlike me, Jesus was not reluctant to take responsibility. He loved us so much that he willingly laid down his life, knowing that this was the price he had to pay, to redeem us, and to make us his own, warts and all. And he did this before we showed any sign of wanting to belong to him. Willingly.

His incarnation, his perfect life amongst us, especially with respect to moral relationship with us and God, his sentencing to death, his dying, resurrection, and ascension to the right hand of God, and his coming again, is all on our behalf, and performed willingly, with his whole heart.

And his commitment to us comes out of the Father's commitment to us. Jesus did only what the Father told him, and he shared his Father's desire to redeem us. God gave us His son. He sent him for this very purpose. The Holy Spirit, equally shares in this commitment toward us. For this reason the Eunuch in Acts chapter 8 wants immediately to be baptized by Philip as he suddenly understands who the suffering servant is, and what he has done for us.  This is amazing grace.

What can we give to God?

We really have nothing to offer God.
He is the originator, designer and maker of everything. Anything that we have jurisdiction over is already his, and already a gift from him to us.
He is not tempted by our possible riches or influence. He is not starved of relationship, such that he needs our friendship. He is not craving influence, fame or power, as he already is all powerful. He is perfectly complete in every sense. If he needed subjects, he could raise them out of stones. We ourselves are originally dust.
More serious is the fact that he hates sin. He judges sin, he destroys sin. And, unfortunately, we are amazing at sinning.

BUT

God chooses to love us. He made us, and loves us and has a plan for us, despite our total and deliberate rejection of him.

Not because he finds something about us ugly, yet interesting, nor because he can see our amazingly disappointing potential.

It's about Gods commitment.

He has committed himself to his creation.

And he can fix it. With blood, wrath and tears.

Nothing but the blood of Jesus can wash away every stain of guilt. It makes a total failure shine with purity. Even murderers, paedophiles, drug addicts, suburban pharisees and even churchgoers, as well as drunkards and thieves, adulterers and liars. Not to mention politicians and doctors.

If we belong to God, it's not because we've done something to earn it.

Not because we have dedicated our filthy lives to him.

But because he wants to own us. He desires it. He makes us hunger and then he feeds us. He makes us thirst for righteousness, then he opens our hearts and minds and lives to the cross.

We have nothing to offer him.

And after coming into life changing faith, and devoting our lives to serving Jesus, carrying our cross, and foregoing the way of the world, we have twice as little to offer him.

We really have nothing to offer God.