Faith of Christ

I recently heard John Ortberg talk about Michael Novak's categories of the types of convictions that people have. He pointed out that there are three types of convictions. The first type is our public convictions that are characterized by what we say that we believe when we are around other people. They sometimes indicate what we really believe and many times we don't mean them at all. For example, I may ask my wife if I have started to gain weight. She may answer, "You look great." Deep down she may really think that I have put on weight and look a lot different (my wife would never do this because she is brutally honest!). We say things many times that we really are not convicted about. The second type of conviction that Novak points out is our private convictions. Private convictions are ones that we believe but can be convinced otherwise. I at one time thought I could play professional football. After my college football career was over I attended a rookie tryout camp. At that camp I came to the conclusion that my belief of my ability was a false belief. It was made painfully obvious that I was not good enough to continue my football career. Lastly, Novak points out that many people have core convictions. These are convictions that will not change. My belief of gravity does not need to be re-verified every day of my life. My love for my children does not need to be re-committed to each day. These are unchanging beliefs. Ortberg points out that Jesus had no incongruencies in any of these beliefs. His public, private, and core convictions were all in alignment.

My question is, "How do we come to the type of faith of Jesus?"
We many times talk about having faith 'IN' Jesus but I would purpose that the faith 'OF' Jesus is what we should be shooting for.
Many of the earliest followers of Jesus had faith in Jesus and trusted in Jesus but it was not until they came face to face with the risen Christ that those convictions became CORE convictions. In other words, their trust 'IN' Jesus changed to the faith 'OF' Jesus.

Mary Magdalene came face to face with Jesus in the Garden and thought He was the gardener. Her faith was transformed into action when she realized that Jesus had risen from the dead. She quickly became the apostle to the apostles.

Thomas at one point in the gospel narrative proclaimed that he was ready to go to Jerusalem and die with Jesus. It wasn't long after that he was telling the other followers that Jesus would have to prove to him that He had risen from the dead. In the account that John gives us we see Thomas face to face with the risen Jesus and he proclaims, "My Lord and and my God".

Peter is a great example of this transformation. Peter proclaims faith in Jesus but later denies Him. We see Peter go through his crisis of faith and later be told by Jesus to "Feed My sheep". After this we witness Peter acting with the type of faith that Jesus had. Peter goes from having faith in Jesus to having the faith of Jesus.

How do we accomplish this?

We trust in Jesus but we also live like Jesus lived. When we live a cross formed life of self sacrifice we will be introduced to the resurrection. The message of the Scripture is that New Creation began at the resurrection of Jesus Christ. As a sign post of what is to come in the New Heavens and the New Earth, God has established a kingdom of NEW people. We are the advanced sign of the resurrection to come by our changed lives in the shape of Jesus Christ.

Church and State Relations

How many times have we heard, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."? Many people use this sentence to justify a sharp Church and State separation. We see this interplay of Church and State in two extremes in the example of Emperor Theodosius I. Theodosius was raised to be a Christian and was an emperor in post-Constantine Rome.
One particular story illustrates how the Church's influence over the most powerful is used in a positive way. On one occasion Theodosius was angered at an uprising in Thessalonica. The Governor of the city was killed in a riot and the Emperor ordered the killing of 7000 people that were supposedly implicated in the murder. The Bishop of Milan, Ambrose, heard of this action and was outraged that a Christian Emperor would order such a thing. He blocked Theodosius from Communion and ordered him to do penance. Ambrose had such a strong influence over Theodosius that the logistics of how he could carry out the death penalty was altered and a 30 day wait period was instituted before the Emperor could carry out an execution. Ambrose was famously quoted as saying, "The Emperor is in the Church and not above the Church."

On the flip side we observe the opposite of Church and State relations with Theodosius making the Nicene Creed and dogma the official religion of the Roman Empire in 380 AD. No longer would paganism be the official religion of the Empire but now Christianity becomes the only religion recognized by the Empire. This would lead to many unsavory things that Theodosius probably never expected.

We look at the example of Theodosius and see the two visions of Church and State relations. This is a very complex subject that I definitely do not have the ability to answer. It is something that I have thought a good bit about because of the recent elections and many social issues that have come to the fore. Issues such as sanctity of life, justice for those less fortunate, and the struggle over all people being treated as if they are made in the image of God.

Going back to the original comment about Rendering unto Caesar and the popular perception of modern day people's thinking on how Jesus thought about the Church and State may be useful.

Jesus had just cleansed the Temple and wheels were being put in place that would take Him to the cross. The Temple cleansing act would have been a very Messianic act to the Jews and highly controversial. The two groups that come to Jesus only have one thing in common and that is their common goal to trap Jesus. The Herodians were in the back pocket of the Romans and had compromised with the pagans. The Pharisees were the Puritanical bunch that one day would side with the rebellion in AD 66 that would see the utter destruction of Israel. Two completely different agendas are trying to trap Jesus. If Jesus answers soft on the question then He basically sides with the pagan sympathizers and will be discredited with all of the people. If he answers as a revolutionary and says, “hey stick the thumb in the eye of the Romans”, they would have immediately gone to the Roman authorities and shared the info with them. His answer is radically different and they are just floored by it.

1^st of all – having the coin itself is against the Jewish Law. Even Herod Antipas would not have his own image put on a coin because of the prohibition against the elevation of oneself by the image. But this coin is even more over the top. The Roman Denarius would have an image of Tiberius Caesar and would say the ‘son of Augustus.’ Augustus was a divine title given to the Caesar by the Senate in 31 BC. to Octavian.

We have a false impression by Jesus comment, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's.”

From a Jewish mindset they would know that Jesus was quoting and augmenting a statement by Mattathias Maccabeus some years before.

We find in the 1^st book of Maccabees a statement by Mattathias right before his death.

“Pay the Gentiles what is their due, and obey the commands of the Law”

By this statement Mattathias meant to rebel and expel the Greeks from Palestine and Judas his son took up the banner and did just that. The people went through a rigorous time of returning to the Torah and taking up the sword.

Jesus is cryptic on purpose. This statement could not be used by either groups for their advantage. At face value the Romans would not see this statement as a threat.

Is Jesus saying rebel against the pagan power? Yes. But not like the Jews wanted to do.

Jesus' Kingdom is more real than any other and the ones of this earth are mere shadows and caricatures. Jesus is calling out both mindsets. Jesus would see both the Herodian stance as compromise and also the eventual violent revolution as compromise. By taking part in a violent revolution they would play right into the hands of the way Rome does things. Compromise on both fronts.

I don't know if this blog brings up any points for discussion but I would like to know what others think about this debate. I am still working through all of this and I find Christ constantly calling me into account and I am reminded of His Kingdom and the fact that we are to pray, "Thy will be done in Heaven as on Earth."

If God were in charge how would He run this show?

Return From Exile

One cannot read the beautiful passages of Isaiah chapters 40-55 without being moved by the wonders of God's plans for Israel and the return from Exile. Isaiah paints a picture of God renewing Creation and sending forth a Servant that would accomplish His purposes. Isaiah 55 also gives us a picture as to how powerful God's word really is. Isaiah tells us that God's word will go forth and accomplish His purpose.
We know from history that Israel returned from Babylonian Exile after the Persians took over, but at the time of Christ many Jews were wondering if they had truly returned from Exile. Many read the passages of Isaiah and saw that they were still under bondage in their own homeland. Just a look at the Roman garrisons in Jerusalem would quickly remind them of this. Many of these 'Return from Exile' passage had not been fulfilled yet and many saw themselves as still in a state of Exile.
With this in thought we see the coming of Christ. In this post I would like to propose that John chapter 1 is a passage chocked full of connections to Isaiah's vision of the Return. John presents to us that Christ is the true Return from Exile that all of the Jews had anticipated.

First, we pick up in John chapter 1:1-3 and verse 14

“ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

4 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth."

We see here a parallel with Isaiah 55:10 -11

"For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, And do not return there without watering the earth And making it bear and sprout, And furnishing seed to the sower and bread to the eater; 11 So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding {in the matter} for which I sent it.

In John chapter 1 we see the very personification of the Word. We see God incarnate come into our world to accomplish the purposes of the Father in ways that the Jews could have never imagined. God's Word would truly accomplish His purpose by completing His rescue operation by returning man from the Exile of Sin.

Secondly, we pick up on the idea of God's Presence in the Temple. Many pre-exilic prophets envisioned a time when God's Glory would leave the Temple because of Israel's sin. God would leave the Holy of Holies and leave the Jews to the Babylonians. We see in John 1:14 that God's presence has returned in a new and more full sense. John tells us that the Word became flesh and Tabernacled (skene- or Templed) among us. God's presence had truly returned to His people and it was found in Jesus of Nazareth.

Thirdly, we see John the Baptist as the fulfillment of the prophecy of the forerunner. In Isaiah 40:3-4 we see that passage about the one that would prepare a way through the desert for the return. The Jews in Isaiah's day saw this as a literal highway that would be plowed through the desert that separated Babylon from Israel. The path the Jews would normally take to Babylon would have them travel north and then South East. This new path would go directly to Zion. John the Baptist in John 1: 23 tells us that he is the fulfillment of this passage and he is the voice that calls in the wilderness. He is the one that makes the paths straight. It would not be a literal path through the desert but it would be a spiritual path of repentance that would lead people to the true return from Exile through the Christ.

Lastly, Isaiah presents to us a mysterious figure of the Servant that would become like a Lamb to fulfill God's purpose of Return From Exile. This Servant would suffer for the people and be vindicated. He would be punished for Israel's sin. Many people in Jesus' day saw the Servant as the nation of Israel but Jesus would take on the role of the Servant and would represent the entire nation. We see in John 1:29 that John the Baptist identifies Jesus as this Servant by calling Him the Lamb of God. Jesus would be the one that would suffer for the people but be vindicated.

In this post I tried to lay out a case that John 1 is giving us a message of a true Return from Exile in Jesus Christ. This return is God's ultimate purpose to lead us from the Exile of Sin and into a New Creation.

Promise, Prophet, King

In the Great Commission found in Matthew 28: 16-20 we find the wrapping up of three of the great OT themes. The Israelites all knew well of the promise made to Abraham in Gen 22:15 that all nations would be blessed in the seed of Abraham. In other words, a descendant of Abraham would bring about the blessing of all people (Gentiles included). Also, in Deut 18:18 we see Moses' prophecy that there will be a great prophet raised up among the people of Israel. This great prophet would bring teachings that would be adhered to by all. Many of the Jews of Jesus day saw this prophecy as Messianic. We also find the next great OT theme in the promise made to David that a descendant of his would sit on the throne of Israel forever as found in II Samuel 7. Many Jews saw this as a Messianic prophecy in which God's anointed would come to Zion and sit upon a literal throne. So thus far we have laid out the three great themes that are the subject of this post: Promise (Abraham), Prophet (Moses), and King (Davidic).

In the Great Commission given by Jesus we see all three of these. We see Jesus state in verse 18 that all authority was given to Him. With this statement we see the Kingly role of Jesus in that He has authority. Next, we see Jesus state in verse 19 that they are to go and make disciples of ALL nations and this would be the fulfillment of the prophecy to Abraham that all nations would be blessed through his seed. Finally, we witness Jesus in verse 20 telling the disciples to teach others to obey His teachings. This would be the fulfillment of His role as the great prophet or teacher.

A Unifying Creed

In this blog I will set out to show that the early Church was a creedal Church. In the modern Restoration Movement the idea of any creedal formula is rejected as an innovation of man and a corruption of pristine Christianity. The standard plea of the Restoration Movement is, “no creed except the New Testament”. The Protestant mandate of Sola Scriptura is vehemently held to in this context. I was born and raised in the Restoration Movement and continue to attend the Church of Christ. Recent studies have brought me to the the fact that our heritage may have been a little too hard on the oldest creeds of the church.

J.P. Moreland states:
“Paul's letters contain a number of creeds and hymns (Rom. 1:3-4;1 Cor. 11:23 ff.;15:3-8; Phil. 2:6_11; Col.1:15-18;1 Tim. 3:16; 2 Tim. 2:8; see also John 1:1-18; 1 Peter 3:18-22; 1 John 4:2). Three things can be said about them. First, they are pre-Pauline and very early. They use language which is not characteristically Pauline, they often translate easily back into Aramaic, and they show features of Hebrew poetry and thought-forms. This means that they came into existence while the church was heavily Jewish and that they became standard, recognized creeds and hymns well before their incorporation into Paul's letters. Most scholars date them from 33 to 48. Some, like Hengel, date many of them in the first decade after Jesus' death.
Second, the content of these creeds and hymns centers on the death, resurrection, and deity of Christ. They consistently present a portrait of a miraculous and divine Jesus who rose from the dead. Third, they served as hymns of worship in the liturgy of the early assemblies and as didactic expressions for teaching the Christology of the church.”[1]
One of the earliest creeds found in the New Testament is found in 1 Corinthians 15 where Paul lays basic teaching on the resurrection. In Lee Strobel’s book, The Case for Christ, he interviews Gary Habermas and Habermas enumerates reasons for the acceptance of 1 Corinthians 15: 3-7 as an early Christian creed.[2] The reasons he gives are the following: Paul uses a technical rabbinic terms in ‘received’ and ‘delivered’ to start off the creed, it demonstrates parallelisms throughout, it uses the Aramaic name Cephas showing that it may have originally been written in Aramaic, it uses older terms such as ‘The Twelve’, ‘The Third Day’, and ‘he was raised’, and it uses words that would have been used in a Mishnaic narrative. This creedal formula found in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 would have been developed in a very short time after the resurrection of Christ.
The very fact that creedal formulas and early hymns are found in our New Testament give us an insight into the early church and their worship practices. The church obviously found it very important to specifically give parameters to the faith using these confessions of faith. These confessions would have found their home in the worship of the early church. Many passages found in the New Testament give us insight into the confessional nature of a community. Passages such as 1 John 1: 1-4, and John 21: 24 show us a picture into a group that has a common normative faith that upholds the apostolic preaching.
The question to that I come to in this study would be a practical one. Why did the Church form Creeds in its very early stages, and what practical application would this have to our current fractured state of Christianity?
I believe that the earliest creeds and confessions were set up to give boundaries to the Christian Church. These boundaries were to give freedom and not enslave the Christian. It would give the Christian freedom to explore and experience their new life in Christ Jesus. As G.K. Chesterton laid out in his classic work, Orthodoxy, the real adventure is found in the orthodox faith. Heresy would have been easy in the early days of the Church but orthodoxy would have been courageous and tough to defend. The creeds acted as an authoritative apostolic voice that held the ship in the way of orthodoxy and provided a safe haven for believers to grow and mature.
When reading the Apostle’s Creed and the Nicene Creed I realized that I agreed with all of the statements found in these creeds and realized how important they were in the history of Christianity. Realization of the ancient background of these creeds also helped me in my appreciation for the creeds. The Roman Symbol used as a baptismal creed by the third century bears much resemblance to both the Apostle’s and Nicene creeds. It shows that early on the Christians were using these creeds to effectively teach the faith to new converts and fight against false teachings in the Church. I am not advocating or ever will advocate using traditions or teachings that contradict Scripture but I am proposing that the Restoration plea against creeds may be over the top. It is easy to sit back almost 2000 years later and pass judgement on a church that was battling heresy at every turn and the very existence of the faith ‘that was once and for all delivered to the saints’ may be in danger. I think the creeds acted in a way to unify the faithful and give a concise and clear statement on what was the crux of the faith. The creeds helped act as glue to show what was the correct interpretation on the Trinity and nature of Jesus Christ. Sometimes we put way to much faith in the perspicuity of Scripture when in fact many newcomers to the faith are overwhelmed when they are not given short concise statements of what Christianity is all about. There is power in hearing a church state their beliefs in a public assembly as one body. I have been present at assemblies where the entire congregations recited the Nicene Creed and did so in a way that let me know that they believed what they were saying. The Creeds in a public assembly declare to the newcomer or visitor what the faith is all about.

[1] J.P. Moreland, Scaling the Secular City, p 148-151
[2] Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ, p 309

"lex orandi, lex credenti"

"The Law of Prayer is the Law of Belief" This phrase was a common idea used in the early church to signify the importance of the form and content of worship in the formative influence of Christian belief. One can witness the importance of this principal in the very fact that the canon was shaped by the question of, "What texts are allowed to be read in the Christian assembly?" It was in the assembly that the creeds were used as a unifying confessional of a diverse community. One would be able to attend a Christian assembly and leave saturated with confessions of faith, scripture readings (O.T, Psalmody, and a reading from the apostolic writings), baptismal formulas, prayers, and Eucharistic liturgies. The faith of these communities was shaped by their liturgy. With this in mind I come to the crux of this post and that is Christian unity. How does one take this principal of 'lex orandi, lex credendi' and apply it to the idea of Christian unity? This principal lays out the foundation for one being caught up in the narrative story of God's actions in human history in the worship. I believe that it is no coincidence that Paul uses the rites of baptism and the Lord's table as a means to Christian unity.

Paul states in Galatians 3: 26-29 "For ye are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ. There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female; for ye all are one [man] in Christ Jesus. And if ye are Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, heirs according to promise." Similarly Paul reiterates in 1 Corinthians 12: 13 "For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all made to drink of one Spirit." Paul lays out in these passages the very fact that our unity is tied up in our baptism. This confession of unity is tied to our beginnings in the Church and should remind us where we came from. No badge of ethnic Judaism (such as circumcision) mattered anymore. We forget how explosive this passage would have been to a church that was rocked by ethnic, racial, and gender differences. People that were once considered unclean or unfit for fellowship were now considered fellow children of God and heirs to the promise made to Abraham. I think the irony is found in the fact that Paul uses a baptismal formula to make this point about unity.

Next, Paul states in I Corinthians 10 :16-17 "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ? seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one body: for we are all partake of the one bread."
It should be no surprise that Paul once again uses a rite of the Church to make a point about Christian unity. In the very act of the Eucharist Paul makes the point that we should be reminded of our oneness in Christ. On each first day of the week Christians gather all over the world and commune with Christ at His table and in this fact we are mystically united one with another. In the non-canonical Didache (a document from the late 1st century that gives practical instructions on things such as baptism and the Eucharist) the writer of this document states the following concerning the Lord's Supper: And concerning the broken bread:

We thank Thee, our Father, for the life and knowledge which You madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let Thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Thy kingdom; for Thine is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever..

The writer of this ancient document saw how the broken bread of the Eucharist is a symbol of our Christian unity in much the same way that the apostle Paul stated in I Corinthians.

I believe that the first step toward unity among all Christians is for all of us to reflect on what makes us simply Christian. We must also realize that God will not leave us where He found us but will continue to work in our lives and make us more and more into His image as we grow. What can we learn from these passages concerning baptism and the Eucharist? Can we find room for each other at the Lord's Table? Can we remember the pledge we all made to Christ in our baptism and remember our common origin and now, thank God, our common destination? Would the principalities and powers of this present age take Christians more serious if they saw the Body of Christ unified and ready to allow God to work through us as His conduit in the world? Maybe we should all consider the phrase 'lex orandi, lex credenti' as we strive to become part of God's narrative of salvation for this world.

It is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness

I have always been puzzled when I read the story of Jesus receiving the baptism of John the Baptist. I would read in the Gospels that John's baptism was connected to the forgiveness of sins and Matthew tells us that people would confess their sins at baptism. Why would Jesus come to John the Baptist to submit to a baptism for the forgiveness of sins when Christ had no sin to receive forgiveness for? In reading the exchange between Jesus and John the Baptist we get clues to the answer. In Matthew 3:13-15 we read:
"Then Jesus arrived from Galilee at the Jordan coming to John, to be baptized by him. But John tried to prevent Him, saying, "I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?" But Jesus answering said to him, "Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness." Then he permitted Him."
In this passage we observe the same shock in John the Baptist that we have in the thought of Jesus receiving baptism.
I believe the answer is found in the phrase, 'to fulfill all righteousness' and especially the answer is found in the future cross and resurrection of Jesus.
First of all, the term righteousness can be understood as submitting to the will of God or by observing God's will. Many Jews in the 1st century would have understood righteousness as allowing themselves to take on the yoke of the Torah. We see Christ perfectly subject Himself to God's yoke His entire ministry, and we see the toughness of that yoke in the Garden of Gethsemane. At that time Christ answers God's call to finish the work of redemption by going to the cross. I believe that we should read Jesus' baptism with the cross in mind. We can see that Jesus is going into baptism with a mind to connect Himself with man's condition. He would actively take the sin of man to the cross as a propitiation for us. At His baptism he 'identifies' with man and his malady by 'fulfilling all righteousness'. It is the righteousness of God that sent Christ to save mankind, and it is the eternal plan that had Jesus redeem us by the cross.
Finally, I believe that this view of Jesus' baptism changes our outlook of our own baptism. Because Jesus 'identified' with man in His baptism we now crucify our old man and allow ourselves to buried with Christ in baptism. We are identified with Christ in the most extreme way possible. We have become crucified with Christ or what Paul calls 'obeying the gospel' in 2 Thessalonians.
We see the connection with baptism and our identifying with Christ in Paul when he draws the analogy of the children of Israel and Moses in 1 Corinthians 10:1-2 when he states,
"For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea"
Paul uses similar language of Christian baptism in Galatians 3:27when he states, "All of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ."

Christ in His baptism took another step on his steadfast mission of going to the cross and part of that mission was to identify with man's pitiful condition. When we submit to His baptism we should always remember the solemnity of identifying with our crucified Savior. When we come out of that watery grave let us remember the Risen Christ that conquered death and has opened up life to us. Let us keep the words of Paul fresh on our minds when we renew our baptismal vows daily when he states in Galatians 2:20 that, "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me"