Did California Get It Wrong?

I’m going to take a break again tonight based on a news story I saw earlier today. The story can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/opinion/27wed2.html?_r=2

The first statement is that the CA Supreme Court got it terribly wrong.

No. What was terribly wrong was that the case was even brought to the Supreme Court. While this isn’t a political blog, since this is more about morality, I am bringing this up, but some politics will be necessary. When the people have a free election and vote on something, it is not up to the courts to make a ruling on it. If it is not agreed, there can be another election another time. If the CA Supreme Court had ruled against the people, it would have been rendering all voting useless. We would no longer have a Republic.

Our writer next says that upholding Prop 8 was unfair to homosexual people. How? Homosexuals have the same rights as everyone else. They can marry anyone they want of the opposite sex. “Well we want to marry someone of the same sex.” Then you want different rights. I don’t have the right to marry someone of the same sex. Also, if marriage is a right, then I say bring forward my girl! I’ve been patient for a long time and I’m single!

No. Marriage is a privilege. It is a gift. 

Our writer next says that homosexuals can be targeted as a minority. Upon what basis? You could fill in any group this way. Accountants are a minority. Left-handed people are a minority. People who are bald are a minority. Is there any real basis for saying homosexuals are?

It’s because they have a different lifestyle? So do several other people. Why should a lifestyle that seeks a relationship of an erotic nature with the same sex be different?  With something like race or being male or female, that is inherent to the person. To make the case, someone would first have to show that homosexuality is inherent to the person. Sorry, but it hasn’t been done.

Even if a genetic link was shown, what would that prove? Would it prove that homosexual actions are moral? No more than showing a genetic link to alcoholism would show that alcoholism is moral. You have to look at the action itself. 

The writer also speaks of fundamental values enshrined in the California Constitution. Could our writer please go to the California Constitution and show where the founders of the state wished to include a fundamental value that homosexuals ought to be allowed to marry one another? I’m sure that’s what was on their mind when they wrote out their constitution after all.

The dissenting vote said  “discrimination against a minority group on the basis of a suspect classification strikes at the core of the promise of equality”. It’s quite the opposite. Attempting to change the social fabric of society based on a suspect classification is the problem. There is also no denial of equality. The debate is not about the nature of persons. It’s not being asked if people who are homosexual are fully human. (If it is, it shouldn’t be.) It’s asking if homosexual union is a legitimate lifestyle right alongside heterosexual marriage. Are those two equal? The answer is no in every sense of the word. 

The writer is confident that California is a temporary setback. California is not known for being a bastion of conservatism however and yet, it ruled in favor of a highly conservative value while all the way electing an incredibly liberal president. Our writer mentions Iowa as an example. If anyone wants to know the truth about Iowa however, I recommend this article from the Ruth Institute:

http://ruthinstitute.org/articles/howIowaHappened.html

Our writer sees it as a temporary setback as I said. I hope he’s wrong. It’s my hope a fire will be lit under America to uphold true marriage and morality. I do not believe our society can last if we lose this battle. I ask America to wake up and take a stand now. Your children are counting on you.

The Threat Escalates

Okay. We’re going to resume our study of going through the New Testament. Tonight, we’re going to pick up again in the gospel of John. For those who are just now joining us, we are looking to come to a deeper understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity and going through the New Testament to see what it says about who Jesus is and his relationship to the Father and the Spirit. Tonight, we’re going to be looking at John 12:1-11.

1Six days before the Passover, Jesus arrived at Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2Here a dinner was given in Jesus’ honor. Martha served, while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him. 3Then Mary took about a pint of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus’ feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume. 4But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, 5“Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages.6He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.

 7“Leave her alone,” Jesus replied. ” It was intended that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial. 8You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me.”

 9Meanwhile a large crowd of Jews found out that Jesus was there and came, not only because of him but also to see Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead. 10So the chief priests made plans to kill Lazarus as well, 11for on account of him many of the Jews were going over to Jesus and putting their faith in him.

The anointing of Jesus involves a gracious act done by the donator. A year’s worth of wages was nothing to sneeze at back then. (And it still isn’t today!) This was a most valuable perfume and it was all used on Christ. Judas was indignant. (He also had an ulterior motive as he often helped himself to what was donated to Christ.)

Jesus tells them that Mary has done a wonderful thing. The poor will always be there. Christ will not always be there. Let us be sure we don’t see the poor always being with us as a good thing. It is a reminder that there will always be evil and the church will always need to be there until the return of Christ. There will never cease to be a need for ministry.

The most interesting aspect in John’s account however is that Lazarus is there. In John 9, we saw the Jews expelled someone from the synagogue because of belief in Jesus. Now they’re escalating the threat. Not only do they want Jesus dead, they want to get rid of Lazarus. He’s a living testimony to what Jesus has done.

When we realize this, it should remind us of the kind of message Jesus was speaking. Jesus was not weak and meek. Jesus was an iconoclast. He was going after the greatest sacred cows that the Jews had and all the while making them worry about the Roman threat that was all around them. 

If Jesus had just gone around  teaching that we ought to love our neighbors and basic morality, then chances are we would not have heard much about him. There is no shortage of moral teachers after all. Who in a society that claimed to follow the Law of God would want to put to death someone teaching that?

Jesus was teaching much more and what was worse than that was that he was someone who seemed to be credible to many. He wasn’t some crackpot that everyone would dismiss. This guy was teaching this stuff and he was getting a following. He was teaching the strangest message the world had ever heard, that God had come among them and his kingdom was beginning and Jesus was the focus of all of it.

Is it any wonder they saw him as a threat?

And what’s sad is that they took him more seriously than we do. One should look at Jesus and either fall down at his feet and call him Lord or sentence him to the lowest level of Hell. As C.S. Lewis would say, he did not leave you any other options.

What’s your choice?

Thank You For Your Service

We’re going to continue our brief break again from the Trinity topic to remember what today is here in America, Memorial Day. Our society today has a huge disconnect with the past. I remember growing up and thinking in many ways that the life I lived was the way people around me always remembered life. Today’s children growing up will find it hard to realize that there was a time when you couldn’t find answers immediately on the internet and where you actually had to go home and pick up your phone if you wanted to call someone rather than reach in your pocket. In fact, many kids are pressuring their parents to get them cell phones where they just endlessly text each other.

Not that I’m against technology. I’m all for it. I just think too many times we can take it for granted and not realize that it is something that is meant to serve us and not to dominate us. I am quite pleased with my IPhone for example and like having a Wii nearby. I try to realize however that the age of technology was not always here. There was a time when life was much harder.

But throughout each time, there have been people who have stood for a greater cause. Our danger today is not so much the technology we have but that the technology will make us focus only on us today and not realize who all went before us so we could enjoy the benefits we have. The benefit I have of sitting down in the evening and watching an episode of Smallville, for instance, is not something that popped up out of nowhere. It’s something someone died for.

Today, we honor those who went before us. We honor the soldiers who died and often went into battle knowing that they would die. We think of the soldiers who climbed walls on D-Day knowing that they were fodder for machine guns only in the hopes that those coming behind them would be able to wear them down. They went knowing they would never see their wives and children again, and yet they kept going.

War today knows no season. We remember those who aren’t there when Christmas and Thanksgiving roll around. We remember those who aren’t there to see their children being born. We remember those who are over there now in that they may never come back and they are well aware of this. Yes. I know that this is Memorial Day and not Veterans’ Day, but one must be of the latter before being of the former.

We Christians should be especially mindful. Freedom is not cheap. We have freedom from sin through Christ, but there are places that do not have the freedom of worship like we do. There is a persecuted church all around the world. I can go into my bedroom and reach for a number of books I have. I have several versions of the Bible for study around here. Many a Christian around the world would love nothing more than to have a copy of the Bible.

Life is a precious thing and we take it for granted. We have a cavalier attitude towards it and do we really sit back and think about it? To be honest, I haven’t done so enough today. It’s so easy to get caught up in the hustle and bustle of the day that you just forget that. We can look at today as a holiday we get off from work. I was on vacation this weekend, which I arranged before realizing it was Memorial Day and before knowing I had that day off, and I’m sure many see today as just a weekend with one more day in it.

Those who went before us died for a whole lot more than our enjoying an extended weekend.

Before you go to bed tonight, be sure to take some time to remember those who have gone before, and if you know someone in the service today, thank them.

Interpretation of Scripture

I plan to write on Memorial Day tomorrow, so tonight, I’m going to do a side-topic based on a comment left by someone who read an old blog of mine. It is going to be on the way of handling Scripture and this has been on my mind a lot after being in discussions with friends on Genesis 1-3.

I’m going to state clearly that I affirm inerrancy. I don’t believe the Bible contradicts itself. However, I do believe some interpretations are wrong. I had also listened to a program on the John Ankerberg show debating the age of the Earth and I had liked how Walter Kaiser said the Bible tells us. It says “In the beginning God.” When asked how old the Earth is, he said we go to the book of nature then and find out.

I liked that, and I realize I have many friends who are YEC. If you can read Genesis that way and interpret it that way and interpret nature accordingly, go for it. Right now, I also agree with the poster that the Bible is not meant to be  scientific textbook. I believe it’s true in all propositions it supports, but I don’t think it’s to be read as a modern 21st century American would.

As I thought about this, I considered that one of the great problems we have is that we forget the Bible is a piece of literature. My roommate is a good reminder of this. He studied English in college and he knows how writers write. I know when he reads literature, he sees some things that I don’t because of his training with that. He talks about the style. I’m more interested in the content. I don’t wish to imply he has no interest in content. He does. He just sees some things that I don’t.

When we read the first three chapters of Genesis, I think we’re forgetting that the Israelites probably weren’t wondering how long it took God. They were more interested in that God did it and Moses expresed that the way he did for a reason. Now it could be he meant the days to be 24 hours. I don’t think so, but it could be. It could be he meant the days to be long periods of time. It could be that it’s meant to be chronological, but it could be that it’s written more in the style of the framework hypothesis where poetry is going on.

I’m open to many views. My stance is that I believe based on the testimony of Christ that the text is reliable and true and I should seek the best way to interpret it. Am I reading it with a mindset that is scientific or with one that is more like the Israelite would? Truth be told, I have a hard time appreciating literature. When I read something, it is difficult to focus on what I am reading and really pay attention as my mind is bouncing in a thousand different places.

Now some might think I’m talking about allegorizing everything. No. I’m talking about reading the text in accordance with its genre. I tend to be very conservative in how I interpret the text. I wish to do it as much justice as possible and my concern with the first few chapters is we spend so much time debating how long it took when I really don’t think that was God’s intention in giving us the text. Make sure this is the first thing you get out of creation. “GOD DID IT!”

Maybe to end much of the conflict, what we need to do is return to an appreciation of literature. It’ll be difficult, and I need to also, but I think it’ll help us greatly.

Review of Star Trek

To begin with, let me give a word of caution. I am not a big Star Trek fan. I’ve only seen two episodes in my life. However, we’d heard so much about this movie that myself, my roommate, and another friend all decided that we should go see this one. I can definitely say that it was worth it. This is a movie I never had to look at my watch once. If you haven’t seen the movie and plan to, you might want to read this blog later. Also, if I misspell any references to Star Trek characters, the fault is all mine and I ask Trek fans to please have mercy. I in no way mean to denigrate the series.

So the story begins with a starship flying through space approaching a lightning storm, an odd occurrence, and out of that storm comes a mammoth-sized ship that their ship seems like a speck to. After a battle, the captain orders everyone to leave, including his wife who is about to give birth to their new son. One of the last things the husband says before he dies in giving a colission course with the enemy ship is to name him James.

So later on, we see James Tyberius Kirk who lives a hedonistic lifestyle, but is stellar in his knowledge. After a bar fight, he is told that he should join the starfleet because he should realize he was meant for something more.

This need for adventure, this is a Christian idea. Other adventurers of the past adventured for some goal or sought to have the adventure come to an end. The Christian is the one who goes on an adventure purely for the sake of the adventure. We can think to the medieval writer Petrarch who would have us say that we ought to climb the mountain because the mountain is there.

Through a series of mishaps, Kirk winds up on the enterprise and realizes that they are about to engage the same ship that was responsible for the death of his father years ago, that of the Romulans with their emperor Nero. (And they do refer to an empire one time in the movie.) Kirk is there to see the planet Vulcan destroyed where Spock is from.

Spock deserves to be spoken of. He is half-human, a race that most of us have some understanding of, but half-Vulcan. The Vulcans are a race that tend to be unemotional and extremely logical. Spock is offered a chance to join the high council of science on Vulcan and is congratulated on his acceptance despite the downside he faced. When he asks what that is, they tell him his human mother. With that, Spock says he declines to join.

Spock reminds us of an important aspect of being human. There are times some of us might want to not be emotional and live purely by logic. Seeing the Vulcans, we realize that might not be the best for us. We do realize emotions can take control of us, as the Vulcans do, but the way to respond is not to eliminate emotions but to learn to control them instead. In fact, numerous times in the film, it’s hard to not see emotion even in the Vulcan race.

Kirk and Spock have their exchanges, but in the end they work together. Of course, I’m leaving a lot out, but I don’t want to spoil a lot of it and if I went into more detail, I would. Kirk is more interested in doing the right thing despite regulations. He’s interested in not just logical right but moral right also. Moral theory, of course, will be something discussed in future blogs. 

I definitely recommend seeing this one. If you’re not a Trekkie, worry not. You can follow along just fine, although I’m sure my fans who are Star Trek enthusiasts would have noticed a thousand things that I did not. 

Also, there will not be a new blog tomorrow night. I will be taking a short vacation and Lord willing, I will be back Sunday night. Enjoy this one for two nights then or go back and look through the archives. They’re always there!

The Jews Respond to Lazarus

Hello everyone. We’re continuing our study of the doctrine of the Trinity and the self-understanding of Jesus. We’ve been going through the New Testament trying to find information on the doctrine, which is kind of like trying to find seashells on the beach. Yesterday, we read about the resurrection of Lazarus. Today, we’re going to see what the Jewish leaders said in response to this miracle of Jesus. We start at verse 45 of chapter 11 and continue to the end:

45Therefore many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary, and had seen what Jesus did, put their faith in him. 46But some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. 47Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.

   “What are we accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many miraculous signs. 48If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.”

 49Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! 50You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”

 51He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one. 53So from that day on they plotted to take his life.

 54Therefore Jesus no longer moved about publicly among the Jews. Instead he withdrew to a region near the desert, to a village called Ephraim, where he stayed with his disciples.

 55When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, many went up from the country to Jerusalem for their ceremonial cleansing before the Passover. 56They kept looking for Jesus, and as they stood in the temple area they asked one another, “What do you think? Isn’t he coming to the Feast at all?” 57But the chief priests and Pharisees had given orders that if anyone found out where Jesus was, he should report it so that they might arrest him.

It’s interesting that there is no denial that this miracle has been done, but despite raising someone from the dead, the Jews STILL don’t believe that Jesus is the Messiah. (Kind of makes you wonder about all these people who thought the Jews would be gullible ancients who’d believe anything.)

What’s the concern? The concern is that Jesus will get a following and that this will turn into a revolution and the Romans will come and take away their nation. The tragedy about this is that the Romans came and took away their nation anyway.

Caiaphas says it is better that one perish than the whole nation. John tells us that he had prophesied earlier that year that Jesus would perish to bring all the children of God back. He prophesied that, but he did not understand it. He thought that the crucifixion of Jesus would unite the Jews in stading against Rome. God instead used the sacrifice of Christ to unite all the children of God, not just Jews, together in him. This is what we see in the book of Ephesians.

As a result of this, Jesus cannot be out in public. The decision has been made. The die is cast. The Jews seek to take the life of Jesus and the next time they meet, something is going to happen.

The Raising of Lazarus

We’re going through the New Testament now and trying to come to a deeper understanding of the Trinity and how Jesus saw himself. Right now, we’re in the gospel of John. Today’s text would be quite long to put up so I’m simply going to suggest that my readers just read it themselves. We’re not going to be doing anything really expository. I just want to go through the story as a whole. Go to John 11 then and read about the resurrection of Lazarus.

The story begins with Mary and Martha sending word to Jesus that their brother Lazarus is sick. We’re told that these are three people that Jesus loves. This is something to note because when you look through Scripture, you will rarely find it said that Christ specifically loves someone.

Christ sticks around for awhile even though Lazarus is sick and then after awhile, tells the disciples that they are going there to wake him up since he has fallen asleep. The disciples don’t understand until Jesus is just blunt and he tells them that Lazarus is dead.

So off they go. Lazarus has been dead for four days. This is another point to bring out. In Jewish thought, it was believed that the soul stayed with the body for three days and then went away. Christ is hear showing that he can bring back the soul to the body by what he will do here.

Martha is the first one to see Jesus and when she sees him she says “If you had been here, my brother would not have died.” Jesus tells her her brother will live again, to which Martha points to the last day. Jesus says that he is the resurrection and the life and he asks Martha if she believes this.

At this, she affirms his identity. He is the Christ. He is the Son of God. He is the one who was to come into the world. All of this is tied together. This is a full statement on who Jesus is and it captures his identity very well.

At this, here comes the next sister Mary with the same statement of Martha. “If you had been here, my brother would not have died.” Jesus asks her to show him the tomb and at this, we get the shortest verse in the Bible.

Jesus wept.

We dare not deny the humanity of Christ. I am making it a point that we show that he fully possesses the nature of God in these blogs, but let us not for a moment think that he is not human. If we have a Jesus who is fully God and not human, we do not have the Jesus of the Bible and we are heretics.

When Jesus gets to the tomb, he asks that the stone be rolled away. At this, I love the beauty of the KJV. Martha says “Lord, by this time he stinketh.” 

The stone is rolled away and Jesus prays to the Father for all who are there so they will know the Father sent him and then shouts “Lazarus! Come out!” The people look and lo and behold, the dead man stands up and comes out.

It has even been said that Jesus specifically said “Lazarus” lest every dead body rise up.

Jesus showed who he was then in this, the grandest miracle in the gospel before his own resurrection. Jesus is the resurrection and the life. In him, all will rise and Lazarus is an example of the coming kingdom. Death will have no hold. Now Lazarus did die again of course, but the final resurrection will have no one dying agan.

In him was life, as John said at the start. In this chapter, he proved it.

Qal Wahomer

Last time we left, our study of the Trinity was in the gospel of John and we were in the tenth chapter. If you’re just now reading this, I definitely recommend reading yesterday’s blog to understand what is going on in this chapter. To give a brief summary, last time, Jesus said “I and the Father are one” which we saw as a statement of him affirming his deity. Today, we’re going to see the response to that by the Jews in verses 31-39 of the same chapter.

31Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, 32but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

 33“We are not stoning you for any of these,” replied the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

 34Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are gods’? 35If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?37Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. 38But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.” 39Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.

To begin with, they pick up the stones to stone Jesus. Jesus points to his miracles and asks for which one of them they are stoning him. They answer they stone him not because of the miracles but because he, a man, claims to be God. 

Let’s be sure on this. The Jews did understand what Jesus was saying very well. The problem was not that they did not understand what he said. The problem was that they understood what he said and did not believe it. 

Jesus gives an interesting argument in reply and I  recommend going back and reading it. What did he mean by that? “You are gods?” This is an argument that the Mormons will often use and even if the Mormons did not, this is still a confusing passage to some and we should study it not just to answer the cults but for our own edification. Keep in mind that that is also important when studying the Trinity as we are. If you think the purpose of this is only to beat up Jehovah’s Witnesses, you’ve missed the boat. This is to help us in our education and our knowledge of the holy.

Jesus quoted Psalm 82. Let’s look at that Psalm.

1 God presides in the great assembly; 
       he gives judgment among the “gods”:

 2 “How long will you defend the unjust 
       and show partiality to the wicked? 
       Selah

 3 Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless; 
       maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed.

 4 Rescue the weak and needy; 
       deliver them from the hand of the wicked.

 5 “They know nothing, they understand nothing. 
       They walk about in darkness; 
       all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

 6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”; 
       you are all sons of the Most High.’

 7 But you will die like mere men; 
       you will fall like every other ruler.”

 8 Rise up, O God, judge the earth, 
       for all the nations are your inheritance.

I take this to be a reference to Israel as the statement pointed to commands they were to follow and they were in the assembly of YHWH. However, they were not fulfilling the role they were supposed to be doing. Therefore, while they are gods in their position of judging, they will die like mere men. It’s a mocking Psalm. To our Mormon friend, keep in mind it does not say “You will become gods.” It says “You are gods.” It’s present tense.

Jesus then says that the law cannot be broken, a strong teaching on the inerrancy of the OT, and since that is the case, then if these wicked and evil men have the right to be called gods, then surely he, the righteous one, has the right to be called the Son of God. (Note that being the Son of God is seen as being equal to God.)

Jesus is using an argument that the Jews would call “qal wahomer.” We call it “A fortiori.” It’s the lesser to greater argument.It starts with a lesser point and uses that support a greater point. Let’s look at some other examples. The first from John 7.

21Jesus said to them, “I did one miracle, and you are all astonished. 22Yet, because Moses gave you circumcision (though actually it did not come from Moses, but from the patriarchs), you circumcise a child on the Sabbath. 23Now if a child can be circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses may not be broken, why are you angry with me for healing the whole man on the Sabbath?

And from Matthew 7:

9“Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Luke 12:24:

Consider the ravens: They do not sow or reap, they have no storeroom or barn; yet God feeds them. And how much more valuable you are than birds!

The argument is in fact an argument for the deity of Christ. The Jews understood that. That is why they picked up stones to stone him yet again.

Let us hope that the opponents of Jesus do not take him more seriously than we do.

I And The Father Are One

I first wish to thank Kelp for his comment. It is something that I as a teacher delight in hearing. One skill to work on in communicating is to say the point well so that it can be understood and as in few words as possible. I try to make my blog posts lengthy enough to be substantial, but short enough to be enjoyed and really thought about.

Tonight, we’re continuing going through the New Testament to come to a deeper understanding of who Christ is and the doctrine of the Trinity. We’re going to be in John 10 looking at verses 22-30.

22Then came the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon’s Colonnade. 24The Jews gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.”

 25Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father’s name speak for me, 26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep.27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30I and the Father are one.”

Let’s note also that earlier in this chapter, Jesus has said that he is the good shepherd. If a Jew knew of anyone who was the good shepherd, they would have thought of Psalm 23 and known that YHWH is truly the shepherd of his people. Let’s look at what is said here.

The question is about who Jesus is again. That’s something else to consider when looking at Jesus. There is no question of who other religious leaders were generally. It is their teachings that are brought into question. For Jesus, it was he himself who was brought into question. The debate has always been not over what he really taught, although that is debated, but who he really thought he was.

When we get to this passage, he starts by describing the works that he is doing. He states that he gives those who believe life everlasting and no one can snatch them out of his hand. He then says that the Father who gives them is greater than all and no one can snatch them out of his hand. Notice the work is done by both and the same applies to both.

He then gets to the conclusion. “I and the Father are one.”

The word here is neuter and it refers to one thing and not one person. Tertullian also saw something in saying that Jesus used the word “are” instead of “am” indicating two different persons, thus indicating that this verse does not really back modalism.

For our purposes, we see Jesus aligning himself with God in a unique fashion. We know later that this was seen as blasphemy. It cannot be saying that being one in will was blasphemy. The Jews would certainly want to align themselves with the will of God. It was rightly understood that Jesus was claiming to share in the nature of the Father in a totally unique way, so unique that the two can be called one in nature.

What was the response?

We shall find out tomorrow.

From Healed To Disciple

Tonight, we’re going to resume our Trinitarian study of Scripture. For those who are just joining us, we are going through the Bible looking for clues to the concept of the Trinity and the self-understanding of Christ. John 9 will be our chapter to discuss tonight. Normally, I would put up the text, but we’re going to be focusing on the whole theme of the passage rather than individual verses by and large. I leave it to the reader to read John 9 on their own then.

The story is familiar enough to those of us who have spent much time in the Christian tradition. Jesus and his apostles come upon a man who is blind and has been blind from birth and the apostles want to know who is responsible that this man is born blind. Was it him or his parents? After all, if bad stuff happened to someone, it must be because of sin somewhere. (You’d really think the message of Job would have been learned by now but seeing as we still haven’t learned it today, it must be a really hard one. No wonder God gave us a whole book on that one topic.)

Jesus says it was neither him or his parents. His suffering was so that the glory of God could be revealed through him. This should be a comfort to all of us who suffer that are Christians and last time I checked, that’s every Christian alive at this point. We do suffer and some suffering could be used for further glory. It could be we are suffering just so God can do an amazing work in our lives.

Jesus heals the man by telling him to go and wash. Now he could certainly have healed him any number of ways. There’s an old joke that Jesus healed one man by touching, one by spitting, and one by having him go wash. If that had happened today, you’d have three denominations of the touchites, the spittites, and the washites. Why did Jesus use washing this time? Probably because of what we learn later, that it was a Sabbath that this happened.

This gets the man in trouble when he is identified later by the Jewish leaders. After all, he washed on a Sabbath which would mean that he violated the Sabbath. The man tells them that it was Jesus who had healed him.  Just in case this is a phony healing, they call in his parents to see if it truly is the man. (Keep in mind that according to our skeptics today, the ancients were gullible people who believed every miracle report. Apparently not.) His parents say that he is their son and he was born blind, but if you want to know how he sees, ask him. He’s a big boy. He can speak for himself. They said this because the Jews had threatened to expel anyone from the synagogue who claimed to believe in Jesus. In such a society, the shame one would have for that would be terrible.

The debate that follows between the blind man and the leaders is quite hysterical as this blind man who would no doubt have never even read the Scriptures for himself is humiliating the Jewish leaders in debate with the simple point that he was once blind and now he sees and since God doesn’t hear the prayers of sinful men like that, then God is working through Jesus. The blind man’s view of Jesus keeps moving up as they discuss. He first says he is a prophet and then asks if the leaders want to become his disciples also. Thus, he considered himself a disciple of this Jesus.

At that, he is thrown out of the synagogue where Jesus meets him. Jesus asks him if he believes in the Son of Man. The blind man wants to know who that is and Jesus says that it is the one speaking to him. The man says then that he believes and worships Jesus.

A number of points to bring out. First, Jesus is worshipped. The progression has moved beyond the disciple of a great teacher to a far higher view of this teacher. Second, persecution has begun. This man has been thrown out of the synagogue. In chapter 7, we saw the attempt to arrest Jesus. In chapter 8, we saw stoning him. Now, it is moving to his followers.

Finally, the Pharisees ask if they are blind, and this is probably a conversation that happened later on and this story is used to help explain the point. Jesus tells them that if they were blind, they would not have guilt. The problem is not their ignorance. The problem is they claim knowledge. Since they ought to know better, their guilt remains. The ones who were seen as seeing the clearest were condemned by Christ.

Tomorrow, we shall continue.