Tag: written

Ready To Wait
Psalm 51:1–12; Isaiah 30:15–18; Hebrews 4:1–13

This passage from Isaiah was written for me. It sounds like my life. “Lord, help me figure this out.” “Wait.” “Argh! It’s too much! I’ve got to do something!” “Wait.” “I can’t wait! It’s too much!” [time passes] “Well, THAT was a stupid decision.” “I did say, wait.”

I’m sure it’s just me. I’m certain that God has never told you to wait, and then wait some more. I’m the only one. Right?

This, of course, is not to direct waiting at all times and in all places, but only when God says to. Then God adds the hard part, waiting in quietness (i.e., trust) and peace. The linchpin, however, is when to move.

There was a time, many years ago, where I could sit or lay awake quietly for hours. Now? I’m often just a jumping bean in a can.

Waiting is an art. Waiting in quietness and peace is a gift.

Sometimes, we just won’t wait. There can often be good (so we think) reasons. There are other times that we just cannot think beyond ourselves or the hour at hand. Despite all the bad that can happen when we don’t wait, God still promises to be there when we are ready to rest in his embrace.

Rest can be defined as many things. The author of Hebrews talks about the ultimate Sabbath Shalom rest that is beyond this life but can be experienced as a foreshadow in this life. There is always another rest until the final one.

There can also be many types of rest. This is important for often our waiting is a form of resting.

An athlete can only train so much before their body needs to rest and recharge. Many of the most successful entrepreneurs and leaders take a “rest” (sometimes to start their day) just staring out a window. Introverts will often rest by avoiding people (guilty). As a person in a family of 5 introverts, I actually have no clue how extroverts rest (do they?). Perhaps the commandment to rest was directed at extroverts? Not that introverts don’t need to rest, too.

What we can confuse, however, is resting when we are to be waiting (which often involves preparation) and waiting (preparing often for the wrong thing) when we are to be resting.

The beauty of the Church Year (e.g., Lent) is the combination of rest and waiting that are part of the plan. Not that many (even liturgical) churches do it completely, but the intent was to rest in God and wait for God.

※Reflection※
- Are you waiting, resting, or waiting and resting for God? How do you tell which one you are doing?
- If you are waiting, do you know what you are waiting for? If you know you are waiting, do you know how you will know to move?
- If you are resting, what are you resting from? If you don’t know what you are resting from, are you really resting?
※Prayer※

Lord, many of us feel that we have been waiting together for over a year. While we were waiting, many of us failed to rest. Help us to rest so that we are prepared for the coming storm of your Spirit. Amen.
2021-03-18
It Is Written
Psalm 110:1–4; Job 19:23–27; 1 Timothy 3:14–16

Job’s words of optimism amid the words of anguish provides quite the contrast. The context seems to be that Job wants his words of trust in God to be recorded (written on a scroll). Then he goes further and wants them engraved on stone. The implication being that a scroll is not permanent (or significant enough) to encapsulate the mercy and redemption of God.

The Book of Job is often thought of in the context of Job’s trials and misery. It might be that these few words of Job here show the heart of Job that every follower of God should also have. Imagine…if you can…how the church would be known…how the followers of Christ would be known…if they had the same trust as Job.

As people of “the Book” (as Christians are known in the Arab world), we speak as if we believe the Word (the Bible) was engraved in stone. Yet, we often don’t act that same way. The way we live out our lives often seems (and is) in conflict with the Word.

This is Paul’s concern for Timothy and the church in general. While the CEB (the primary translation being used for these devotionals this year) individualizes behavior (e.g., “you”) while other translations are more generic (e.g., “one”). The Greek as neither. Both “you” and “one” are interpretations of the “space” between the words (this really is an English problem).

I see the phrasing as being more like, “this is the knowledge required to live rightly as part of the household of God.” In the Greek, Paul is making clear that all who are known as/by “Christian” have certain rules and expectations to be part of the household of God.

In the current secular culture, the church has found itself in an awkward place. It wants to be welcoming to all (as it should be). On the other hand, it is also called to have expectations of behavior and spiritual growth (which it must be).

The sad reality is that the church may have to suborn the expectations to earn the reputation of being welcoming. Yet, the church cannot keep kicking that can down the road, either.

Ultimately, our hope is that our Redeemer lives, and our Redeemer seeks to redeem all of humanity.

※Reflection※
- From your perspective, how does the knowledge of permanent redemption (from Job) affect, influence, and guide your understanding of and living out the obligations of being part of the household of God?
- Do you find yourself to be more “welcoming” or more “conduct” oriented? How is that lived out in the faith community? How is that lived out in the wider (i.e., non-faith) community?
※Prayer※

Jesus, guide our actions through your example. Thank you for being our Redeemer. Amen.
2021-02-16
Wait and See
Psalm 110:1–4; Exodus 19:7–25; Hebrews 2:1–4

God tells the “master” (king) to “sit”. It is quite common today for rulers to sit while the armies go forth to wage war or defend the nation. When the Psalm was written, it was normal that kings/rulers went to war with the armies. So, for the ruler/master/king to sit was to say that the war/battle would be won without their presence. As it is God saying it, it’s more along the lines of, “I’ve got this.”

In our American thinking, we often think we have to do it ourselves. There is a reason why we think of “good” businesspeople having “pulled themselves up by their bootstraps.” If we analyze that phrase, we can see that it may have not been a positive statement, but a tongue-in-cheek quip that someone was quite arrogant in thinking they did by themselves.

As we read the Scriptures, it becomes apparent that often the call on God’s people is not to do great things, but to witness and testify to the great things that God has done. When God has done great things, the pressure is often taken off of us, because it is not by our strength of will. When we testify, often we have to testify to our weakness and testify to God’s strength in the face of our weakness.

When the people meet God at Mount Sinai, their actions are minimal. They are to prepare, listen and respond. You might think that “obey” would be part of that, but obedience would be lived out, and obedience would be part of their testimony to the world of what God has done.

The story of Exodus may have a lot of anecdotal stories of Moses, Aaron, and the people of Israel. However, most of the stories are witnesses of God’s glory and might. Even during the plagues, while Moses had his part, it was God who was the major actor.

Exodus was, along with the other books of the Pentateuch (Genesis, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy) are formational to what it meant to be an Israelite. The books were not only a witness of God, they were also the witness to and for the Israelites.

As they were formational, they were core to being Israelite. Yet, it is amazing how people can be formed by something they do not know. We’d say that this couldn’t be, yet even being an “American” is often based upon far too many things we only think we know.

The author of Hebrews speaks of drifting away. Often, especially in a country as blessed as ours, it is very easy to quickly forget our salvation. Our lives are (despite a bad economy, COVID, and grace-less politics) blessed. This is not to diminish the hardships that people experience here. In fact, because of the blessedness, it makes such hardships an even greater travesty.

Drifting away is subtle. It takes time. A quick divergence (or apostasy) is easy to grasp. It is when it happens over time (years, decades, centuries) that it becomes the hardest to recognize. When it happens over time, it also becomes hard to determine Truth versus fact.

We are in such a time as this, if we’ve ever left it all. Perhaps this should be our greatest fear as the church…we have lost what should make us different than the world.

The deepest, darkest, and saddest aspect of this drifting away is that we cease being witnesses of God, and our lives ceasing being witnesses to God. While we are called to wait and see what will do, we are called to say what God has done.

※Reflection※
- What ways have you been tempted to “drift away” from faith?
- What kinds of “drifting away” damages our witness the most?
- What is the danger in not “waiting and see” what God does? What is the danger in “waiting and see”? How does discern when to be still and when to act?
※Prayer※

God, you have called us to witness what you have done, and to be witnesses. Help us to be faithful to that call. Amen.
2021-02-15
City of Home

Zechariah 2:1–13; Revelation 21:15–27

COVID? The New Normal? Back to COVID? What really is normal?

After generations of ups and downs, the remnants of Israel were beginning to come home. The People of God were returning to the Promised Land.

Zechariah’s vision conveyed many things. First, of course, was that the people were returning to Jerusalem; the spiritual home of Israel.

The angel declared that Jerusalem would have no walls. It wouldn’t need them. Understanding that the walls of Jerusalem had been torn down to make it defenseless, and that it was only through courage that those walls were rebuilt, a city without walls would seem to be yet another slap in the face.

The angel’s point was that God would be the wall; God would be the ultimate defense. This harkens back to the times when God “placed a hedge” around Israel to protect them. However, a hedge can be easily destroyed and burned. Instead, God would be a wall of fire around them.

What is also interesting is that God stated that God would be the glory within Jerusalem. This implies being bodily present in Jerusalem. Surely, for the Jews, it was only figurative.

The returnees would say to themselves that God is the heart of Jerusalem, for God is who brought them back. Due to their return, God must be the center of their lives and worship if only to return some of the affection shown to them.

Returning to Jerusalem, the City of God, is a powerful image: the return of the exiles in the Old Testament; the journey of Christian to the Celestial City (The Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan); the establishment of the modern nation of Israel (1945); the political imagery of the “City on the Hill” used by US politicians.

It is an image of hope, a deep-seated hope in all of us. This hope is a place that we can call home from the very depths of our beings. It is also the place that we can belong without fear or comparison. A place like this is, ultimately, the desire of each of us.

In his epistle to the churches, John writes about this hope. This city where the children of God need never be concerned about being separated from God. This city would be, for all intents, the center of life. At the center of the city was God.

John’s hope continues in a strange and encouraging way. There would be no threats in the City of God. That nothing “unclean” or people who were “false” would be in the city was another thread of hope to people who were living in fear.

The underlying truth is that this city was the home of those written in the Book of Life.

※Reflection※

What makes someplace home for you? What would make Heaven home for you? How can you bring something of your Heavenly home into your earthly one?

※Prayer※

Lord of Hope, guide us into hope that is deeper than our fears. Amen.

2020-11-16
A Time To Sin

Job 1:9–22; Ecclesiastes 3:1–11; Ezekiel 18:5–18

You are probably familiar with Pete Seeger’s Turn! Turn! Turn! (To Everything There Is a Season). Written in the late 50s, it was commercially via The Byrds in 1965. It takes Ecclesiastes verses 3:1–8 and puts them to music.

Pete Seeger’s intent behind the song was to promote world peace. That’s a very laudable goal. The irony of that goal is that the lyrics are almost a fatalistic response to the fallen and unpeaceful ways of the world.

There are a lot of things not specifically mentioned as having time for. Certainly, singing and learning were part of life at that point, but they aren’t specifically mentioned (though singing could be inferred with dancing). The internet and driving weren’t mentioned specifically (of course) but would be covered under “everything”.

The “everything” is a pretty big catch-all. Does that mean, then, that there is a time to sin?

That might seem to be a stupid question, yet, depending on one’s view of God, it isn’t stupid at all. The answer to that question may very well display what you think about God in several significant ways (though we won’t get them all).

When you read the story of Job (whether allegorical or true) how do you “read” the conversation between Satan and God? Is God allowing or directing?

Based on the end of this section of verses, Job did not assign wrongdoing to God (blame), and as such, did not sin. Then should we conclude that God allowed this to happen?

For many, leaving it as “a mystery” is fine, except for the problem of blame. If God wills/desires it, and if God is omnipotent, then how can God be loving and full of grace and mercy. The rejoinder often is, we can’t know the mind of God. This is true, in so far as finite creatures (us) trying to fully understand the infinite (God).

Yet, the Scriptures (given by God) also provide us insights into who God is, so the conclusions we draw from the Scriptures also deeply affect how we view and relate to God.

Is this that important? Yes. When you sin, is it you sinning by your will, or is God willing you to do something then assigning the sin to you? That is the choice laid before us.

Ezekiel’s words reinforce one answer. Your sin is a result of your will (or weakness in the face of temptation).

What is also part of this is that your sin cannot be laid at another’s feet (God’s or human’s). It is yours. Own it. Yes, own your sin.

This is not go and sin again. It is own your sin so as to repent and restore right relationship with God.

“‘…For I take no pleasure in anyone’s death.’ This is the declaration of the Lord GOD. ‘So repent and live!’” (Ezekiel 18:32)

※Questions※

1) Repent is based on the root of “turn from” or “turn around”. What do you need to repent from? If you cannot think of a “sin” (or even if you can), what is something else that you might need to turn from to improve or deepen your relationship with God?

2) How do you define sin? How do you know/learn if something new (such as a behavior) is a sin, or not?

3) What your current or past Job moments? How do/did they affect your relationship with God?

※Prayer※

Heavenly Father, as we read your word, we learn about you. Help us to be stirred to read your word that we continue to grow in our knowledge of and relationship with you. Amen.

2020-09-24
It’s All About…

Psalm 5; 2 Corinthians 10:7–18; James 1:22–27

In this internet age, getting oneself out in front of potential employers has become a big issue. Whether it is the applicant or the HR Manager, differentiating is an issue.

Out of this has come the concept of a “personal brand”. In many regards, it often seems that personal branding is all about boasting and shining the spotlight on oneself. There is training for one’s “personal brand”.

Boasting isn’t all bad. By definition, boast means to have a strong affirming opinion of or confidence in a person. In black and white, that looks like a very positive. Already, we can see an issue.

The definition of boasting is not often the one we use. Our general definition (though the context may change that) is that it is groundless or overly inflated opinion of another, but usually oneself.

The Hebrew actually goes along well with the “official” definition. Often, such as in Psalm 5, it is translated as exult or praise and with God usually being the subject of it. That is very reasonable.

Even in the Greek, the issue is the same. What we miss through the written word is the modifier: empty, shallow, false, or something else. We will imply or infer when we hear or speak of “boasting”, but we often mislead others when we rely on inference or implication.

When Paul is talking about boast, the context is crucial to understanding what he means. It is also incredibly important that we see the “emptiness” that Paul is referring to. The false measurement that the nameless are comparing themselves to is…themselves.

Or, if we take James’ words into account, people who forget who they really are and then measure themselves by a false image.

Boasting, as said earlier, isn’t necessarily bad. It is groundless boasting that is the issue. People can boast for others (think of a job or personal references). However, the danger in boasting is the foundation upon which it is based.

When Paul talks about boasting in the Lord, that’s a pretty safe foundation. Yet, when Paul talks about it, it is more along the lines of “look what God did” rather than “look at what God did through me.” Still, either one is better than “look how well I did.”

※Prayer※

Lord, let our hearts be humble towards others and you. Amen.

※Questions※

1) Is there a difference between bragging and boasting?

2) How does the mirror concept of James help understand the concept that Paul is trying to convey?

3) Taking the opening definition of boasting and comparing it to our “street” understanding of it, what other words can you think of that have something similar? How might they affect how you read Scripture?

2020-08-26
What a Feast!

Matthew 22:1–14; John 6:53–58

When you’ve been invited to a party or some sort of celebration, have you ever received a little card that had you select from entree and/or other options? Or have you been to a buffet and been overwhelmed by the selection (or underwhelmed)?

Over the years there have been many tales of what the feasts in Heaven would look like. Some have used it to recruit people to their church or religion. For many, a gathering of family barbecues every day would be fantastic. So, of course, that’s would be what Heaven would be like (all the social introverts just shuddered)!

Making assumptions about things like that is often unwise, as it can lead to weird thoughts and even bad theology. The more serious part of that is that the primacy of feasts in the Scriptures is not to be diminished. This is especially true when we remember the feast that Jesus left to fill the gap while we wait for his return.

The feast that we have, though, is peculiar. Those who have been long in the church have been inured to the strangeness that is the Eucharist. As we read in John…eating human flesh and drinking human blood? If someone came to you and said that…how would you respond?

We read this and we immediately translate it into Christian language and thinking. If someone like Jeffrey Dahmer (real-life cannibal) or Hannibal Lecter (fictional cannibal) said something like this, we would not have such a Christianized response. That is the horror and revulsion that his hearers and likely even his disciples felt when they heard these words.

The Christian side of it is that we see the “spiritual” side of this as perfectly reasonable. We do have to keep in mind that for years Christians were accused of cannibalism because of the words of Jesus, and the regular Love Feast.

The Christian side of it also continues in two ways. First, by associated with blood, Jesus was associating with the Jewish belief of life was in the blood (from Levitical law). Second, by associating with the bread, Jesus was tying himself to the daily necessity (and often only food) of bread.

Lastly, though not often talked about, is the Jewish concept of eating the word of God. This was the Jewish practice of licking (literally) off a slate upon which Scripture was written (the Shema would make the most sense) with honey poured on it. There is some historical question if this was a 1st Century thing or if it developed later. However, there is some precedence from Ezekiel 3:3 who ate the word of God on a scroll.

Also, we understand that Jesus was the incarnate word of God (John 1:1–4). Thus, eating the word of God takes on a completely different understanding.

Especially now, when we are not taking Communion (Eucharist/Love Feast) in the communal way we have in the recent past, it is even more important to understand the gravitas of it. It isn’t just a little juice and a wafer (or bread)…it is the Word of God.

※Prayer※

Lord, John Wesley taught us that your feast is a means by which you deliver your grace to us. Let us not take it for granted and approach your banquet table with thanksgiving [eucharistia]. Amen.

※Questions※

1) How would you explain the why of Communion to a non-believer? How do you explain “eating flesh and drinking blood” without it sounding weirder than it already does?

2) Thinking of the king’s feast (Matthew 22:1–14), what does this tell you about coming to “the table” for communion?

2020-08-20
Summary Path

Malachi 4:5–6; Matthew 17:10–13; John 1:19–28

Jesus said that John was Elijah. John said he wasn’t Elijah. Who was right?

The question is, who is Elijah? The other question is, who’s asking?

First of all, let’s talk about Malachi’s words. Malachi prophesied that Elijah would come back to Judah heralding a massive change. Malachi spoke to the Jews post-exile.

Despite the restoration of the temple, the people were overcome with despair and ennui. God didn’t meet their expectation of restoring everything to the way they perceived it having been before (even if its perfection was figurative). They were walking on the downward slope away from God, again.

Malachi didn’t let them off the hook. God was coming, in God’s timing. People would come to God, or they wouldn’t, but something momentous would happen. The Day of the Lord was often synonymous with the end of the world. It was also used to indicate a God-driven cataclysmic change.

Malachi’s words had transformed as the precursor to the Messiah. Elijah would come before the Messiah. This not a literal thing, as reincarnation was not part of Jewish thought. This “Elijah” would be “in the spirit of Elijah” meaning a prophet of God, but with a particular focus on restoring the relationship between the people and God.

So, why did John deny being Elijah? Probably because he didn’t see himself that way. The problem with being compared to a legendary figure is that you know you’re not the legendary figure. There was a lot of weight and expectation, and John probably didn’t want to bear that burden.

Also, as there was so much build-up regarding the Messiah, there was likely just as much build-up around Elijah, and much of it was probably wrong. Why would John want to be a part of that?

There is also the last part of it, which is who Elijah was really couldn’t be evaluated until the Messiah completed the return. John was dead before the fulfillment, and without himself seeing the fulfillment, he certainly would have questioned being “Elijah”.

Jesus, on the other hand, knew what was coming, and knew what had gone before. He had the perspective to be able to call John “Elijah”. In the spirit of Elijah, the Messiah (Jesus) did indeed reset the Day of the Lord. It was only through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus that John could fully be called “Elijah.”

Often, our own perspective of our lives is twisted and/or minimized, for we (like John) cannot really see what came before and what will come after. We do not know the hearts we’ve changed, the paths we’ve diverted. Only at the end will God let us see it all from an eternal perspective.

That we are faithful to God. That we pursue God. That we follow God. That we try to help others follow God. This is what God will let us see at the end. For now, we can only put one step in front of the other.

※Prayer※

Father God, help us to accept that we cannot see the eternal effect of our lives. Lord Jesus, help us to follow you that the eternal effect brings you glory. Holy Spirit, guard and strengthen our hearts for those times when we are discouraged because we don’t see that we’ve made a difference. Amen.

※Questions※

1) There are 2 kinds of eulogies. One that is written by the deceased for reading at the funeral, and the ones that are written in the hearts of others. Which one matters most? In what ways does the eulogy matter for both?

2) What concepts and feelings come to mind when you hear the phrase, “The Day of the Lord”? Why might that be?

2020-08-03
3 is 1 and 1 is 3

Deuteronomy 6:4–5; Matthew 3:13–17; Matthew 28:16–20; 1 Peter 1:1–2 (read online ⧉)

This is one of those odd “Liturgical” Sundays in the Christian year. It set aside to specifically observe the creedal declaration of and faith in the Trinity. We have Sundays set aside for Advent, Lent, Christmas, Easter, Pentecost. These are event-based. It’s not that they don’t have doctrinal pieces in them; their beginning is based upon an event.

There is an additional oddity, especially for people who call the Bible the Word of God…Trinity appears nowhere, at least not as an explicit term. That’s also what makes this Sunday interesting. A foundational theological basis for orthodox Christianity is not found explicitly in the Bible, yet is one of the key doctrines upon which orthodoxy is defined (i.e., Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses being non-Trinitarian believers).

One of the biggest things that the Trinity teaches us by its very example is that not everything can be explained by science or even a sound rationalization of the faith. The Trinity can only be believed (ultimately) by faith. The concept that God (the Father) is God, Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, while, God (the Father) is neither Jesus nor the Holy Spirit, Jesus is neither the Holy Spirit nor God (the Father), and the Holy Spirit is not God (the Father) nor Jesus (An aside: even writing that sentence, which is a simplified excerpt of the Athanasian Creed, hurt my head a bit).

The beauty of the Trinity is that by the above (for example), we are automatically brought into the realm of knowing that we can not fully understand God. Which is good. When we think we fully understand God, we are in deep danger of having made our own god who is not God.

While the Trinity does not expressly as a word in the Scriptures, that does not mean it is not present. We need to start with the beginning, though. God is one. One of the biggest dangers with the Trinity is that the confusion that we are talking about 3 gods, rather than 1 God.

In the Gospels, Matthew has the 2 best almost explicit statements regarding the Trinity. With Jesus’ baptism, Jesus is baptized, “laid upon” by the Holy Spirit, and blessed (and proclaimed) by God (the Father). All 3 persons of the Trinity are present and noted as being present (rather than in other places where they can be assumed to be present).

In many respects, however, it is Jesus’ Commission of the Disciples (now Apostles) to baptize in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit that there is an expression of the doctrine and persons of the Trinity (yet, still no word “Trinity”).

While this is so, there is something critically important in Peter’s letter. Peter all but declares the Trinity in his opening. There are several reasons this is important. First, it’s Peter. His place as one of Jesus’ core disciples, and his place as commissioned leader of the church (by Jesus) makes his words critically important to our understanding of the church.

Before the “doctrine” was declared, before the Athanasian Creed was written, before the understood writing of the Gospels, Peter brought the Trinity to the church.

In lieu of prayer or questions, and in honor of the tradition in more “liturgical” churches to speak it on Trinity Sunday, below is the Athanasian Creed.
※Athanasian Creed※

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic[1] Faith. Which Faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this, That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance.

For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.

But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is all one, the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal.

Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.

The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.

The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.

The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.

And yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal.

As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible.

So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Spirit Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty.

So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.

So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord.

And yet not three Lords, but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity, to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion, to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords.

The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten.

The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten. Likewise also the Holy Spirit is of the Father, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons, one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other, none is greater, or less than another; But the whole three Persons are co-eternal together, and co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation, that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds, and Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world; perfect God, and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting; equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead, and inferior to the Father, as touching his Manhood.

Who although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but one Christ; one; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the Manhood into God; one altogether; not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven; He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.

2020-06-07
Believing Works

John 14:6–21; John 21:24–25 (read online ⧉)

Often, we operate as if following Jesus is just the thing to do. If you were raised in the church, as a (at least a theoretical) Christian, the “Jesus” and “Christian” thing “sort of” happens. It is a “sort of, as our whole life should be each day taking one step closer to being like Jesus.

The disciples, especially the 12 closest, should have really gotten this themselves, but just as we are often blind with what is right before our eyes, they were too.

Jesus’ question to Philip, “Have I been among you all this time and you do not know me?” That is a really amazing condemnation of Philip, and probably the other disciples, as well. They were not getting it.

Now, the reality is that Jesus was saying that he was equivalent to God the Father. This was a very bold statement. It is only through the doctrine of the Trinity that these words make any sort of sense. The disciples, however, didn’t have a framework to use to understand.

So, Jesus skips the belief (doctrine) part and says believe the actions. Truly, this is an interesting statement. If you don’t believe the words of Jesus, look at Jesus’ actions. Then the really hard part comes.

Those who believe in Jesus will do the same works. That list of works includes: helping the mute speak, casting out demons, healing internal injuries, healing the lame, and raising the dead. John also says that Jesus did a lot more miracles, but John chose to not record them, as the ones written of were enough to believe. Were they, though?

If we are supposed to be able to do the same works? How’s that for high expectations? Raised anyone from the dead recently?

Now, there are those that say we aren’t all called to do these miraculous things. Partially, it’s trying to explain away the lack of miracles (outside of medical science). There is also the reality that while Jesus did miracles, it wasn’t a constant thing.

※ Prayer ※

Jesus, you said that we would do works like yours, if we believed. Help our unbelief! Amen.

※ Questions ※

1) What physical miracles have you seen?

2) What is the difference between believing in Jesus and loving Jesus?

3) Why do you think that John chose not to write more on Jesus’ works?

2020-05-23