Nietzsche's phrase, "God is dead" is a phase that has either impacted or reflected our society for the past several decades. The rise of outspoken atheism in American culture is an indicator of our spiritual temperature. And it is clear that we have reached a place and time where many people are comfortable or even delighted to say with conviction..."God is dead."
But with God's burial we must admit that humanity has changed. Some would say this change is for the better. Others would disagree. From a Biblical perspective we find that Man's being is wrapped up in God's being. Man was created in God's image (Genesis 1:27). And although many would disagree about exactly what it means to be created in God's image, all would recognize that if God is dead, then His image is also dead. What I am saying is this: If we remove a most basic belief in God, then we also remove the foundational principle that allows us to say that Man is different from other creatures. Scripturally, the lives of human beings are specially protected from harm due to this doctrine that Man is created in God's image. According to Genesis 9:6 it is the reason that murder deserves capital punishment. So it seems that an assault on God's image is equated with an assault on God himself.
But if God is dead then His image is also dead. So now we find that we are confused about how we are supposed to view ourselves. Are we just an advanced species? If we are just a product of evolution can we really say that our lives are more important than other species? What right do I have to say that my life is more important than my dog's? The reason we have to ask these questions is because degree of importance is rooted in purpose. But if we exist only because of chance then there can be no purpose, and if there is no purpose there can be no importance. And if there is no importance then it is absurd to talk about degrees of importance.
So we find ourselves in a society where a group of people are outraged that the president swatted a housefly, yet they do not give a second thought to the the destruction of hundreds of thousands of unborn human babies. If God is dead, in what principle can human rights be rooted? If God is dead, you are no different than your dog, your house plant, or President Obama's dead fly.
Friday, July 24, 2009
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Bread of Life: How Does It Taste?
Suppose you are delivering a meal to a man who hasn't eaten in three days. When you go to the Chef to pick up the meal he has it in a special container and asks you not to open it. He tells you that this is the best meal he has ever prepared, and it is designed perfectly to satisfy the taste and hunger of the starving man. Now you know the Chef personally and trust him with your life, so you agree to deliver the unseen meal to the starving man. How do you suppose that you should convince the starving man to eat the meal once you reach him? To some this may seem like a strange question. The man will not have to be convinced. Obviously the aroma of the meal will cause him to go into a frenzy and tackle you in order to get to the food. However, as you are on your way you realize that you don't even notice the aroma of the meal. Perhaps the container is blocking the smell. Or maybe on your journey you have just become used to the aroma and do not notice it anymore. In any case, you begin to ask yourself some questions. Surely the Chef wouldn't mislead you, but what if the meal isn't as great as it's supposed to be? What if the starving man isn't as impressed with the Chef's cooking as you are? You look down and notice that you have a Snickers bar setting in the cup holder of your vehicle. So you begin to reason with yourself. You think, "This meal may not be very appealing to the starving man, so I will offer him this Snickers bar and tell him that he can have the Snickers bar if he will just take the meal."
This seems like a crazy scenario, and granted that no metaphor is perfect, but does it not sound familiar to you? Jesus said, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst."(John 5:35 ESV) I don't think it is by accident that Jesus associates Himself with a substance that we not only need to survive, but we also have a deep longing for. It is true that if we do not eat and drink we will die. But no one eats and drinks because he thinks, "If I don't eat and drink I will die of starvation." Instead, when we eat and drink we do so because we are hungry and we are thirsty. We eat and drink not just because we need to do so to survive. We eat and drink because we want to. So it is with the Bread of Life. We shouldn't partake of this Bread just because we think to ourselves, "If I don't eat I will die." Rather, we should partake because we are hungry and we want to eat.
But so often, like the previous story, when we are hungry we fear that the meal that has been prepared perfectly to satisfy our hunger and sustain our life will not really do what it has been promised to do. So we begin to look elsewhere thinking that something else might satisfy our hunger. And the things we choose to fill ourselves with, though they seem admirable, noble, and even religious, are like eating garbage compared to the Bread that is offered to us. And now, since we are full, when the Bread is brought to us we don't desire it as we were meant to desire it. I wonder how many times I have opened the Word of God with apathy. And I wonder how many times my ears have heard the Gospel and I have not savored it because I was already full on admirable, noble, religious garbage. It baffles me that Paul could say "For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain." (Phil. 1:21) and "For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us." (Romans 8:18). I think Paul was able to say this because he hungered for the Bread, he feasted on the Bread. It fulfilled him, and it tasted good.
This seems like a crazy scenario, and granted that no metaphor is perfect, but does it not sound familiar to you? Jesus said, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst."(John 5:35 ESV) I don't think it is by accident that Jesus associates Himself with a substance that we not only need to survive, but we also have a deep longing for. It is true that if we do not eat and drink we will die. But no one eats and drinks because he thinks, "If I don't eat and drink I will die of starvation." Instead, when we eat and drink we do so because we are hungry and we are thirsty. We eat and drink not just because we need to do so to survive. We eat and drink because we want to. So it is with the Bread of Life. We shouldn't partake of this Bread just because we think to ourselves, "If I don't eat I will die." Rather, we should partake because we are hungry and we want to eat.
But so often, like the previous story, when we are hungry we fear that the meal that has been prepared perfectly to satisfy our hunger and sustain our life will not really do what it has been promised to do. So we begin to look elsewhere thinking that something else might satisfy our hunger. And the things we choose to fill ourselves with, though they seem admirable, noble, and even religious, are like eating garbage compared to the Bread that is offered to us. And now, since we are full, when the Bread is brought to us we don't desire it as we were meant to desire it. I wonder how many times I have opened the Word of God with apathy. And I wonder how many times my ears have heard the Gospel and I have not savored it because I was already full on admirable, noble, religious garbage. It baffles me that Paul could say "For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain." (Phil. 1:21) and "For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us." (Romans 8:18). I think Paul was able to say this because he hungered for the Bread, he feasted on the Bread. It fulfilled him, and it tasted good.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
The Already/Not Yet Kingdom of Christ
When John came to prepare the way for the Christ, his message was, "repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." In other words, John told the people that the kingdom of God was about to crash down into their world with the appearing of the Christ and they needed to be prepared. And when the Pharisees asked Jesus when the kingdom of God would come He said, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed, nor will they say, 'Look here it is!' or 'There!' for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you." So it seems that the Kingdom of Heaven came to earth with Jesus. Still, there are other passages that suggest that the kingdom will come sometime in the future such as Luke 22:18 when Jesus says, "For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes." Furthermore, the Kingdom of God is typically associated with the end times. It is when everyone and everything will fully submit to the rule of God as King. So we have two ideas presented. The Kingdom of God has come to the earth with the coming of Christ. And the Kingdom of God is a government that will come in the future.
With the arrival of the textual criticism of the Bible, some tried to use this tension as a means to undermine the authority of Scripture. Some even said that Jesus changed His mind about the Kingdom of God. They said that apparently Jesus believed at the beginning of His ministry that God had brought the Kingdom through Him, but when the Jewish people rejected Him as their King, He began to view the coming of the Kingdom as a future event.
But in 1974 George Eldon Ladd articulated in his book "The Presence of the Future" what I believe the majority of the church had believed all along. He submitted that the Kingdom of God either coming with the incarnation or being a future event is not really an either/or discussion at all. Rather, it is a both/and discussion. Yes, the Kingdom of God was initiated on the earth with the coming of the Messiah, but it is not fully consummated until the King returns to rule. So in one sense the Kingdom of God has already come, but in another sense the Kingdom of God is something that we are still waiting for.
So how is this played out in our lives as Christians. First, Jesus did establish His Kingdom and it was established through the Church. When believers embrace the grace of God in Jesus Christ and then willingly submit their lives to Him we see a glimpse of God's Kingdom. As we have already noted, this Kingdom is not fully established on the earth, but it will be with the return of the King. So we have "already" and "not yet" aspects of God's Kingdom working within the Church. In fact, I would say that most things that we celebrate as believers are both "already" and "not yet" because God's established Kingdom is both "already" and "not yet." So when we place our faith in Jesus Christ we are saved from God's wrath. But we are not fully saved until the final day when we are numbered with the saints. We have been freed from slavery to sin, but we are not fully free from sin until we walk with Him in eternity. We live a new life, but our life is not completely new until the Resurrection. We have been born again, but our new birth is not complete until we are glorified in the new creation. We have been reconciled, but one day we will see Him face to face. We are called God's children, but one day we will share in the inheritance. We are the Bride of Christ, but one day we will celebrate the marriage supper. We see dimly now, but one day we will see fully.
How should we respond to this? Let us surrender to the authority of Christ as people who believe that though we may taste His goodness now, later we will feast.
With the arrival of the textual criticism of the Bible, some tried to use this tension as a means to undermine the authority of Scripture. Some even said that Jesus changed His mind about the Kingdom of God. They said that apparently Jesus believed at the beginning of His ministry that God had brought the Kingdom through Him, but when the Jewish people rejected Him as their King, He began to view the coming of the Kingdom as a future event.
But in 1974 George Eldon Ladd articulated in his book "The Presence of the Future" what I believe the majority of the church had believed all along. He submitted that the Kingdom of God either coming with the incarnation or being a future event is not really an either/or discussion at all. Rather, it is a both/and discussion. Yes, the Kingdom of God was initiated on the earth with the coming of the Messiah, but it is not fully consummated until the King returns to rule. So in one sense the Kingdom of God has already come, but in another sense the Kingdom of God is something that we are still waiting for.
So how is this played out in our lives as Christians. First, Jesus did establish His Kingdom and it was established through the Church. When believers embrace the grace of God in Jesus Christ and then willingly submit their lives to Him we see a glimpse of God's Kingdom. As we have already noted, this Kingdom is not fully established on the earth, but it will be with the return of the King. So we have "already" and "not yet" aspects of God's Kingdom working within the Church. In fact, I would say that most things that we celebrate as believers are both "already" and "not yet" because God's established Kingdom is both "already" and "not yet." So when we place our faith in Jesus Christ we are saved from God's wrath. But we are not fully saved until the final day when we are numbered with the saints. We have been freed from slavery to sin, but we are not fully free from sin until we walk with Him in eternity. We live a new life, but our life is not completely new until the Resurrection. We have been born again, but our new birth is not complete until we are glorified in the new creation. We have been reconciled, but one day we will see Him face to face. We are called God's children, but one day we will share in the inheritance. We are the Bride of Christ, but one day we will celebrate the marriage supper. We see dimly now, but one day we will see fully.
How should we respond to this? Let us surrender to the authority of Christ as people who believe that though we may taste His goodness now, later we will feast.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
What does Capitalism have to do with Christianity?
First of all, let me admit that much of what I'm about to write is purely opinion. Second, let me admit that I am no expert, and I am no politician. Having said that, I want to take a quick look at what I believe to be an important question: What does Capitalism have to do with Christianity?
The connection between faith and moral conservatism is clear enough. Christians believe that the Bible teaches specifically about some of the great moral issues of our day such as gender, homosexuality, abortion, marriage, pornography, capital punishment, etc. However, I think it's a little less clear why the majority of moral conservatives are also staunch Capitalists. Many people would agree that our nation is continually becoming more Socialistic, but it also seems that those who are pushing a socialistic agenda are moral liberals. So why this polarization? Why are moral conservatives speaking out for capitalism, and why are moral liberals pushing more socialism?
I'm not really sure how to introduce my theory on this, so I'll just throw it out there and hopefully you'll give me some feedback. I think this divide has to do with our understanding of people and whether they are inherently good or evil. Christianity teaches that people are naturally sinful and rebellious against God. This means that all people are naturally self-centered, greedy, prideful, etc. All of this is due to the Fall in Genesis 3. In this view corruption exists in every facet of life and in every level of leadership. It has a more skeptical view of government because power doesn't necessarily corrupt; it just reveals the corruption that is already there. In Capitalism the financial power lies in the hands of the people. And yes, corruption will exist in this realm. But my theory is that whether we hash all of this out or not, moral conservatives are more comfortable with a corrupt business lead economy than a corrupt socialistic government. Moral liberals, on the other hand, usually have no basis for morality. Either good and evil do not really exist, or they are defined in terms of a humanistic framework. So it may not be evil to kill an unborn baby, but it may be evil to let rich people be rich and poor people be poor. Joined with this is a positive view on humanity. Either due to the Enlightenment or the view that the species is evolving to something better due to Darwinism, moral liberals usually believe that people are basically good. Therefore, there is a optimistic view of government. If we just have the right policies, then the government can make sure that our future will be bright.
I'm not saying that our current polarization is reduced to one's perspective on the morality of mankind. Events in history and media bias are definitely important factors. Nevertheless, I think the divide is clear, and I do think that our view of humanity, good, and evil will greatly influence our view of government and the amount of power we believe government should have.
The connection between faith and moral conservatism is clear enough. Christians believe that the Bible teaches specifically about some of the great moral issues of our day such as gender, homosexuality, abortion, marriage, pornography, capital punishment, etc. However, I think it's a little less clear why the majority of moral conservatives are also staunch Capitalists. Many people would agree that our nation is continually becoming more Socialistic, but it also seems that those who are pushing a socialistic agenda are moral liberals. So why this polarization? Why are moral conservatives speaking out for capitalism, and why are moral liberals pushing more socialism?
I'm not really sure how to introduce my theory on this, so I'll just throw it out there and hopefully you'll give me some feedback. I think this divide has to do with our understanding of people and whether they are inherently good or evil. Christianity teaches that people are naturally sinful and rebellious against God. This means that all people are naturally self-centered, greedy, prideful, etc. All of this is due to the Fall in Genesis 3. In this view corruption exists in every facet of life and in every level of leadership. It has a more skeptical view of government because power doesn't necessarily corrupt; it just reveals the corruption that is already there. In Capitalism the financial power lies in the hands of the people. And yes, corruption will exist in this realm. But my theory is that whether we hash all of this out or not, moral conservatives are more comfortable with a corrupt business lead economy than a corrupt socialistic government. Moral liberals, on the other hand, usually have no basis for morality. Either good and evil do not really exist, or they are defined in terms of a humanistic framework. So it may not be evil to kill an unborn baby, but it may be evil to let rich people be rich and poor people be poor. Joined with this is a positive view on humanity. Either due to the Enlightenment or the view that the species is evolving to something better due to Darwinism, moral liberals usually believe that people are basically good. Therefore, there is a optimistic view of government. If we just have the right policies, then the government can make sure that our future will be bright.
I'm not saying that our current polarization is reduced to one's perspective on the morality of mankind. Events in history and media bias are definitely important factors. Nevertheless, I think the divide is clear, and I do think that our view of humanity, good, and evil will greatly influence our view of government and the amount of power we believe government should have.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Hearing is Seeing, and Seeing is Becoming
Most of what I'm about to write is heavily influenced by John Piper's book "When I Don't Desire God." If you're interested in going deeper into this discussion I would encourage you to read it.
There are two kinds of seeing. That's why God laments in several places in scripture that "seeing they do not see." (Deut. 29:4, Ezekiel 12:2, Jer. 5:21, Matt. 13:13). But what exactly does it mean to say "seeing they do not see"? It means that we have both physical eyes and spiritual eyes. Almost everyone can see with physical eyes, but no one can see with spiritual eyes, because we are all blind when it comes to seeing spiritually. The reason we are all blind is because we all have the same cause of blindness....unrighteousness. That's why Paul says in Romans 1 that "...what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made." (ESV) However, Paul tells us that we suppress what is seen in unrighteousness, hence we have become blind. That's why millions of people can look at God's creation and give glory to chance and evolution rather than giving glory to God. Seeing they do not see. This isn't primarily an intellectual problem. It's a moral problem.
Why is it important that we see? I think there are two reasons. First, it is in seeing the majesty of Christ that we have ultimate joy and God is ultimately Glorified. This is why Paul says in 2 Cor. 4 that Satan works to blind the eyes of those who do not believe. And he is seeking to blind their eyes from something specific..."the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." Satan's primary desire is that God not be glorified, and Satan knows that God is glorified the most when people truly see the majesty of Jesus Christ. When our eyes become truly opened to see Jesus the result is that our hearts delight in Him and He is glorified in our joy.
The second reason that we need to see is that in order to be with Christ we have to become like Christ, and we become like Christ by seeing Christ. It is a perpetual plunging in the grace of the Gospel of Christ that conforms us to His image. We do not move beyond the Cross in order to grow in His likeness. On the contrary, it is in diving deeper into the grace and mercy that is revealed in the Cross that we grow in His likeness. So the way that we see spiritually in this lifetime is by hearing the Word of God. When our ears are opened to hear the Gospel, our eyes are opened to see the majesty of Jesus. And this process continues throughout life. We hear more fully and deeply, and the result is that we see more clearly. And the result of seeing more clearly is that we have greater joy and give God greater glory. Yet we will never fully be like him this side of eternity because we will never fully see this side of eternity(1 Cor. 13:12). However, John tells us that a day is coming when we will see Him as he is, and the result is that we will be like Him. (1 John 3:2) So the process of hearing the Gospel in order to see the majesty of Christ, in order to delight in Him, in order to bring Him glory will be culminated on the day that He returns and we see Him perfectly both spiritually and physically. On that day, we will have ultimate joy, He will have ultimate Glory, and we shall be like Him. May God grant that we will be people who truly see the majesty of Christ. May He not say of us, "Seeing they do not see."
There are two kinds of seeing. That's why God laments in several places in scripture that "seeing they do not see." (Deut. 29:4, Ezekiel 12:2, Jer. 5:21, Matt. 13:13). But what exactly does it mean to say "seeing they do not see"? It means that we have both physical eyes and spiritual eyes. Almost everyone can see with physical eyes, but no one can see with spiritual eyes, because we are all blind when it comes to seeing spiritually. The reason we are all blind is because we all have the same cause of blindness....unrighteousness. That's why Paul says in Romans 1 that "...what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made." (ESV) However, Paul tells us that we suppress what is seen in unrighteousness, hence we have become blind. That's why millions of people can look at God's creation and give glory to chance and evolution rather than giving glory to God. Seeing they do not see. This isn't primarily an intellectual problem. It's a moral problem.
Why is it important that we see? I think there are two reasons. First, it is in seeing the majesty of Christ that we have ultimate joy and God is ultimately Glorified. This is why Paul says in 2 Cor. 4 that Satan works to blind the eyes of those who do not believe. And he is seeking to blind their eyes from something specific..."the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." Satan's primary desire is that God not be glorified, and Satan knows that God is glorified the most when people truly see the majesty of Jesus Christ. When our eyes become truly opened to see Jesus the result is that our hearts delight in Him and He is glorified in our joy.
The second reason that we need to see is that in order to be with Christ we have to become like Christ, and we become like Christ by seeing Christ. It is a perpetual plunging in the grace of the Gospel of Christ that conforms us to His image. We do not move beyond the Cross in order to grow in His likeness. On the contrary, it is in diving deeper into the grace and mercy that is revealed in the Cross that we grow in His likeness. So the way that we see spiritually in this lifetime is by hearing the Word of God. When our ears are opened to hear the Gospel, our eyes are opened to see the majesty of Jesus. And this process continues throughout life. We hear more fully and deeply, and the result is that we see more clearly. And the result of seeing more clearly is that we have greater joy and give God greater glory. Yet we will never fully be like him this side of eternity because we will never fully see this side of eternity(1 Cor. 13:12). However, John tells us that a day is coming when we will see Him as he is, and the result is that we will be like Him. (1 John 3:2) So the process of hearing the Gospel in order to see the majesty of Christ, in order to delight in Him, in order to bring Him glory will be culminated on the day that He returns and we see Him perfectly both spiritually and physically. On that day, we will have ultimate joy, He will have ultimate Glory, and we shall be like Him. May God grant that we will be people who truly see the majesty of Christ. May He not say of us, "Seeing they do not see."
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Is Jesus the Only way to Heaven?
I was getting my taxes done last year and a lady at the tax office asked me what I did. At the time I was a youth pastor, so I explained a little about what it involved. I told her that I got paid to have fun with teenagers and teach the Bible. She seemed pretty intrigued and told me that she went to church. She proceeded to tell me something to the effect that church was important to her, but it aggravated her when people where close-minded. When I probed a little about what she was referring to she said that she just didn't think that anyone could say that they had the only answer when it comes to faith. She said that maybe God dealt with different people groups in different ways, and maybe He revealed Himself to one group of people in the form of Jesus and revealed Himself to another people group in the form of Ali, or Buddha etc. I probably didn't respond in the best way possible, but since she claimed to be a Christian I asked her what sin she thought seemed to anger God the most in the Bible. She said she wasn't sure, so I said, "What about Idolatry?"
I tell this story because it is disturbingly common for professed Christians to think that Jesus is simply one of many ways and not THE ONLY way. In fact, one of the leading "Evangelicals" of our day commented on Larry King Live that he just couldn't say that people of other faiths won't be in Heaven. What's wrong with this picture? Are we really being closed minded, fundamentalist, haters if we say that Jesus is the only way of salvation and all people are condemned without Him? Well, that depends on what the truth is. If it's not true that Jesus is the only way, then yes...we are being closed minded, fundamentalist, haters to say that He is the only way. But if Jesus is in fact the only way, then we are doing the most open minded, loving thing to tell the world this truth.
So the question is: Is it true that Jesus is the Only way to Heaven? The Bible clearly leaves no room for discussion on this issue. Verse after verse declare that confession and belief in Jesus Christ are necessary for forgiveness and redemption.
But the question I want to ask is: Why? Why does the Bible say that Jesus is the only way, and why should people who claim to be Christians be absolutely unswayed when defending this truth? I believe the answer is very simple, but Americanized Christianity has left us with a distorted understanding of Salvation and Jesus. Regular church attenders have been conditioned to see Jesus as a ticket to get to the destination (Heaven). Since Heaven is the destination and Jesus has been taught primarily as a means to get there, many "Christians" have begun to allow for other possible "tickets." But this way of thinking is completely wrong. What we need to see is that Jesus IS the DESTINATION, not merely a means to get there. Heaven is Heaven because Jesus is there. Yes, He is the means, but He is also the end, the goal, the prize, the treasure. We need to let that soak in. If Jesus really is the destination, does it even make sense to claim that there could be another way?
I tell this story because it is disturbingly common for professed Christians to think that Jesus is simply one of many ways and not THE ONLY way. In fact, one of the leading "Evangelicals" of our day commented on Larry King Live that he just couldn't say that people of other faiths won't be in Heaven. What's wrong with this picture? Are we really being closed minded, fundamentalist, haters if we say that Jesus is the only way of salvation and all people are condemned without Him? Well, that depends on what the truth is. If it's not true that Jesus is the only way, then yes...we are being closed minded, fundamentalist, haters to say that He is the only way. But if Jesus is in fact the only way, then we are doing the most open minded, loving thing to tell the world this truth.
So the question is: Is it true that Jesus is the Only way to Heaven? The Bible clearly leaves no room for discussion on this issue. Verse after verse declare that confession and belief in Jesus Christ are necessary for forgiveness and redemption.
But the question I want to ask is: Why? Why does the Bible say that Jesus is the only way, and why should people who claim to be Christians be absolutely unswayed when defending this truth? I believe the answer is very simple, but Americanized Christianity has left us with a distorted understanding of Salvation and Jesus. Regular church attenders have been conditioned to see Jesus as a ticket to get to the destination (Heaven). Since Heaven is the destination and Jesus has been taught primarily as a means to get there, many "Christians" have begun to allow for other possible "tickets." But this way of thinking is completely wrong. What we need to see is that Jesus IS the DESTINATION, not merely a means to get there. Heaven is Heaven because Jesus is there. Yes, He is the means, but He is also the end, the goal, the prize, the treasure. We need to let that soak in. If Jesus really is the destination, does it even make sense to claim that there could be another way?
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
How Heavy Is A Cross?
1) "My yoke is easy and my burden is light."
2) "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and
follow Me." (emphasis added).
These two statements came from the same man. Jesus said both that the yoke he would place around our necks is an easy yoke and that if we want to be His disciples we have a cross to carry.
In saying that His yoke is easy Jesus is essentially saying that His yoke is not like the yoke of the Pharisees. It's not a yoke bound up in following a code in a legalistic way without any understanding of grace. His yoke is not burdensome like the yoke of the Pharisees. His yoke is easy.
Then, in another place we find out exactly what Jesus' yoke is. Jesus' yoke is a cross (Remember that a student is not above his teacher). But how exactly is a cross a light thing to carry? Jesus is not speaking in puns or playing with words. He makes it clear that following Him means that we must truly deny ourselves...even die daily. So how can he say that this is an easy thing? How is it easy to deny one's own passions, plans, preferences, goals, ambitions, etc.? How is it easy to consider one's own life as being nothing, meaningless, even dead?
I think the best answer comes from the Apostle Paul. Paul had been beaten, shipwrecked, imprisoned, and nearly killed for the sake of the Gospel. When reflecting on all of his suffering Paul said "For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us." (Rom 8:18). The key word here is "compared." Paul says that whatever suffering we may endure for the sake of the Gospel is not even worthy to be placed on the same set of scales as the glory that will be revealed to us in Christ Jesus. Compared to the glory of Christ Paul testifies that his suffering (his cross) is light. And this is also what it means for our cross to be light. It is a comparison game. In view of the Beauty that is Jesus Christ...in view of the weight of His glory, our cross is light. It is only when our eyes are fixed on the world that daily death is a hard thing. But when our eyes are fixed on Jesus we can say with Paul that the weight of this cross is not even worth comparing to His Glory.
2) "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and
follow Me." (emphasis added).
These two statements came from the same man. Jesus said both that the yoke he would place around our necks is an easy yoke and that if we want to be His disciples we have a cross to carry.
In saying that His yoke is easy Jesus is essentially saying that His yoke is not like the yoke of the Pharisees. It's not a yoke bound up in following a code in a legalistic way without any understanding of grace. His yoke is not burdensome like the yoke of the Pharisees. His yoke is easy.
Then, in another place we find out exactly what Jesus' yoke is. Jesus' yoke is a cross (Remember that a student is not above his teacher). But how exactly is a cross a light thing to carry? Jesus is not speaking in puns or playing with words. He makes it clear that following Him means that we must truly deny ourselves...even die daily. So how can he say that this is an easy thing? How is it easy to deny one's own passions, plans, preferences, goals, ambitions, etc.? How is it easy to consider one's own life as being nothing, meaningless, even dead?
I think the best answer comes from the Apostle Paul. Paul had been beaten, shipwrecked, imprisoned, and nearly killed for the sake of the Gospel. When reflecting on all of his suffering Paul said "For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us." (Rom 8:18). The key word here is "compared." Paul says that whatever suffering we may endure for the sake of the Gospel is not even worthy to be placed on the same set of scales as the glory that will be revealed to us in Christ Jesus. Compared to the glory of Christ Paul testifies that his suffering (his cross) is light. And this is also what it means for our cross to be light. It is a comparison game. In view of the Beauty that is Jesus Christ...in view of the weight of His glory, our cross is light. It is only when our eyes are fixed on the world that daily death is a hard thing. But when our eyes are fixed on Jesus we can say with Paul that the weight of this cross is not even worth comparing to His Glory.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)