Monthly Archives: December 2013

More Than

Bible Study, , , ,

MORE THAN 

“After this He went down to Capernaum with His mother and brothers and His disciples. There they stayed for a few days.

“When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple courts He found people selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So He made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; He scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those who sold doves He said, ‘Get these out of here! Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!’

His disciples remembered that it is written: “Zeal for your house will consume me.” John 2:12-17 (NIV).

Really, Jesus! Was He just having “a bad hair day” or was there something more significant going on here?

The other gospels place this incident towards the end of His ministry; John puts it at the beginning. Did it happen twice — not likely? Was John  mistaken? or was there a reason why he deliberately altered the chronology? It seems that chronology was less important to him than purpose.

There is no doubt in John’s mind that it happened but, once again, he interpreted this incident as much more that ridding the temple of greedy opportunists. Just as Jesus turned water into wine, symbolising the new life that would come to those who believe in Him in the wake of His death and resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit, so He would purify His temple of greed and sickness and make it fit to be a dwelling place for the Father.

“The Jews responded to Him, ‘What sign do you show us to prove your authority to do this?’

“Jesus answered them, ‘Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.’ They replied, ‘It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?’ But the temple He had spoken of was His body. After He was raised from the dead, His disciples recalled what He had said. Then they believed the scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.” John 2:18-22 (NIV).

Jesus’ response to the Jews’ demand was not a fabrication of John. Some of the false witnesses at His trial before the Sanhedrin referred to His words as a possible reason to crucify Him! “We heard Him say, ‘I will destroy this temple made with human hands and in three days will build another, not made with hands.’ Yet even their testimony did not agree.” Mark 14:58, 59 (NIV). Of course they misquoted what He had actually said!

His retort was a veiled reference to what they, His interrogators, would do to Him but they would not succeed. He almost threw it out as a challenge. ‘You destroy this temple — me — but you won’t get it right. In three days I’ll be back, and my very death and resurrection will give me the authority to do in the hearts of people what I am doing in the temple right now.’

John was careful to let his readers know that, at the time, not even His disciples understood what was going on. It was only with hindsight, after the resurrection, that all of this made sense to them. In contrast to the Jewish leaders, who persistently repudiated Jesus and His claims in spite of all the evidence that pointed to the truth of what He was saying, His disciples believed in Him.

Time and again, as we travel through John’s record of this man’s extraordinary life, we are confronted with his challenge: ‘These people believed in Jesus. Will you?’ What Jesus did was much more than intervention to save the day. They were signs — pointers to His identity and His mission — to reveal the Father and to take us to the Father.

On the eve of His death, in the final tender moments with them before His arrest, He clarified for His mystified disciples what He was all about. ‘Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father,’ He told Philip, and ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me,’ He assured them.

Have you come to the Father yet?

Jesus Saved The Day

Bible Study, , , ,

JESUS SAVED THE DAY 

“On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus’ mother was there, and Jesus and His disciples had also been invited to the wedding. When the wine was gone, Jesus’ mother said to Him, ‘They have no more wine.’

“‘Woman, why do you involve me?’ Jesus replied. ‘My hour has not yet come.’ His mother said to the servants, ‘Do whatever He tells you.’

“Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons.

“Jesus said to the servants, ‘Fill the jars with water’; so they filled them to the brim. Then He told them, ‘Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet.’ They did so and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it came from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew.

“Then he called the bridegroom aside and said, ‘Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now.’

“What Jesus did here in Cana of Galilee was the first of the signs through which He revealed His glory; and His disciples believed in Him.” John 2:1-11 (NIV).

What a story — full of interesting imagery if one reads it from a Hebrew perspective!

Just as John began his gospel by taking his readers right back to Genesis 1 and linking the human Jesus with His eternal existence and creative work before He appeared on earth, so now he takes us back to Genesis 3 — the first wedding and its significance for revealing the glory of God.

Is there a subtle hint that the first marriage ran out of the heady wine of pure love and the powerful bond of unity because sin intruded and ruined God’s intention for marriage.   It was intended to reflect the ecstasy of the loving unity in the Godhead which is the essence of God’s glory…

Why did John begin his story with “On the third day”? Was this just a chronological detail or was this a subtle reference to the outcome of His resurrection “on the third day”– the promise of the “new wine” of the Holy Spirit who would be poured out on the church in the abundance which the 120 to180 gallons of miraculously-produced wine symbolized?

Was this chronologically the first of Jesus’ miracles; the first of the recorded miracles according to John; or the first in importance because it summed up in a graphic story the purpose for His coming — to provide in abundance the “new wine” of Holy Spirit, transforming life into a perpetual celebration?

If we try to stick rigidly to a literal time line, we can easily accuse John of inaccuracy. However, if we understand how John used his material to serve his greater purpose — to present Jesus as the Son of God in order to spur his readers to putting their trust in Him — the whole incident comes alive and begins to make sense.

John concluded this story with his interpretation of the episode so that his readers would be in no doubt about the meaning of the miracles he reported. He called it “the first of the signs.” This tells us, first of all, that there would be more to follow. It also points us to the reason why Jesus responded to His mother’s request. It was not just to bail the bridegroom out of an embarrassing situation.

Everything Jesus said and did was intended to put His Father’s glory on display. Since He insisted that He and the Father were one, that meant that whatever He was, the Father was. Both His compassion and His power are reflected in His action, God stepping in to save the day and to bring in the hope of a better day for all who believe in Him.

His disciples did! Do you?

The Way To The Father

Bible Study, , , , ,

THE WAY TO THE FATHER

“The next day Jesus decided to leave for Galilee. Finding Philip, He said to him, ‘Follow me.’ Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from the town of Bethsaida. Philip found Nathanael and told him, ‘We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote — Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.’

“‘Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?’ Nathanael asked. ‘Come and see,’ said Philip.” John 1:43-46 (NIV)

John gives us some interesting little exchanges between these would-be disciples and Jesus. The other gospel writers focus mainly on Peter and John, the ones who were always getting into scrapes or had the most to say. Andrew and Philip were the evangelists among them. Their first encounter with Jesus was enough to put them on the right track.

Andrew had already done his little bit by introducing his brother Peter to Jesus. What if he had kept his discovery to himself and left Peter out? Meeting this unique Man was something he couldn’t keep secret.

Philip was so convinced that he had come face-to-face with the one who fulfilled Old Testament prophecy that he unashamedly declared his faith to Nathanael. He brushed Nathanael’s skepticism aside by inviting him to come and see for himself. It was no use getting into a theological argument about it. An encounter with Jesus would be enough to convince Nathanael that He was the Messiah they were expecting.

“When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, He said of him, ‘Here is truly an Israelite, in whom there is no deceit,’ ‘How do you know me?’ Nathanael asked. Jesus answered, ‘I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you.’ Then Nathanael declared, ‘Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.’

Nathanael was blown away when he overheard Jesus’ comment about him. ‘Now this is a really good guy! He’s a true Israelite, not a fraud like some of them.’ How did Jesus know that? He’d never met Nathanael, let alone spent enough time with him to watch and listen to him so that He could sum up his character.

‘How do you know me?’ Nathanael demanded. ‘I know you, Nathanael. I knew you long before you came here today.’ Is this a subtle hint that Jesus was referring to His pre-incarnate existence with the Father when He knew Nathanael from before the foundation of the world? Where was Jesus when He saw him under the fig tree? Was He actually observing him? What prompted Him to discern in Nathanael a wholesome sincerity that pleased Him?

Nathanael’s conclusion was the only one he could come to. This man must be more than a man. There was no other explanation. His spontaneous outburst, ‘You are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel!’ may have been accurate, but he was yet to see and hear much more — marvellous truths and miracles that would flesh out the conviction that would bind him to Jesus and send him out to tell the world that Jesus is the Son of God.

“Jesus said, ‘You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You will see greater things than that.’ Then He added, ‘Very truly I tell you, you will see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.'” John 1: 47-51 (NIV)

The purpose of John’s gospel was to convince his readers that Jesus is the Son of God. “These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life through His name,’ “John 20:31 (NIV). Andrew and Peter, Philip and Nathanael found that out by meeting Jesus and spending time with Him.

The witness of brother and friend was not enough to convince them. When they spent time with Jesus over the next few years, they would see for themselves that it was He who would open the way between the unseen realm of the spirit and the earthly realm in which they lived and functioned. He was the link and the key to restoration of fellowship with the Father and personal access to the heavenly realm which sin had denied them.

There is no one other than Jesus who can take us to the Father.

 

 

Lion Or Lamb?

Bible Study, , ,

LION OR LAMB? 

“The next day John was there again with two of his disciples. When he saw Jesus passing by, he said, ‘Look, the Lamb of God!’

“When the two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus. Turning around, Jesus saw them following and asked, ‘What do you want?’ They said, ‘Rabbi (which means “Teacher”), ‘where are you staying?’ ‘Come,’ He replied, ‘and you will see.’ So they went and saw where He was staying, and they spent that day with Him. It was about four in the afternoon.” John 1:35-39 (NIV).

Jesus rated John the Baptist the greatest of all the prophets. Why? He was not like Isaiah, for instance, who was a member of the royal family and whose long ministry lasted through the reigns of four kings. Isaiah was the prince of prophets in the Old Testament era. He had insights into the nature and ministry of the Messiah like no other prophet. After all, didn’t he write the most profound and sublime chapter in the Old Testament — Isaiah 53? But John was greater.

Why was John such a great man? His ministry lasted no more than six months before he was incarcerated and then beheaded. I believe his greatness lay in the way he fulfilled his assignment. What was his assignment? He was to prepare the way for and introduce the Messiah to Israel. It was not so much what he did but the way he did it that marked him out as a truly great man.

In response to the constant squabbling of His disciples over who would be the greatest, Jesus taught them what true greatness was all about. They thought that greatness was about being the most important and the most visible person in the pecking order. James and John even asked for positions at His elbows in His kingdom! Imagine that!

Jesus was quick to point out that it was they, not He, who determined their greatness. If they were were prepared to stoop down to the level of the lowliest in society, a little child, and lift him up, they would be truly great. Humility and the behaviour it produces, is the way to greatness.

How did John the Baptist measure up to Jesus’ criterion?

When the Pharisees interrogated him, he was quick to point out that he was no more than a voice. He could have claimed to be Elijah come back from the dead, a great prophet who had ministered during a time of apostasy in Israel and who had done amazing miracles – stopping the rain, bringing on the rain and even raising a dead child on one occasion. Jesus identified John as the fulfilment of God’s promise to send Elijah ahead of the Messiah but John made no such claim for himself.

John had the heart of a servant. His fiery preaching was not to humiliate but to call people back to God. When they responded, he spent time encouraging and teaching them about God’s kingdom.

He never lost an opportunity to point people to Jesus as the Lamb of God. Whenever he saw Jesus, he declared, ‘There is God’s Lamb!’ John, unlike Jesus’ own diisciples, had grasped the real mission of the Messiah.

The disciples were anticipating a stand-off with the Romans, their humiliating defeat and an era of glorious freedom for Israel under their new ruler, Jesus. The miracles He did confirmed their notion that He would restore Israel to her former glory under their great king, David, when everyone lived in safety and in plenty under his merciful and benevolent rule.

John, on the other hand, kept insisting that Jesus was God’s Lamb, not God’s Lion, at least not yet.  He was not in any way resentful when some of his disciples left him to follow Jesus. That was his purpose, to point people to Jesus and to introduce Him to the world as God’s sacrifice for sin.

John was faithful to his calling. He had no other purpose in life but to ensure that everyone he encountered knew who Jesus was. He was consumed with the passion to prepare the way so that, when Jesus arrived on the scene, people would recognise and follow Him.

This story speaks for itself, doesn’t it?

What’s In A Name?

Bible Study, , , , ,

WHAT’S IN A NAME? 

“Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, was one of the two who heard what John had said and who had followed Jesus. The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother Simon and tell him, ‘We have found the Messiah’ (that is, the Christ). And he brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, ‘You are Simon, son of John. You will be called Cephas,’ (which, translated, is Peter).” John 1:40-42 (NIV)

Why did John go into so much detail in relating this little incident? Didn’t Jesus call these two brothers from fishing in the lake to follow Him? I cannot answer these questions because the Bible does not connect the dots. However, we get some interesting insights into the character of these two brothers.

Simon and Andrew were two very different characters. Andrew seems to have been the more serious one, a disciple of John and keen to find out about the Messiah John was introducing. Together with an unnamed disciple of John, he sought Jesus out and spent the day with Him. Convinced that He was the Messiah, he hurried off to fetch his brother and bring Him to meet Jesus.

Andrew was more contemplative and less vocal than Simon Peter. He was very much part of the Twelve but stayed in the background while Peter was the spokesman and always in the forefront of the action. Perhaps, after this introduction to Jesus, the brothers went back to their nets until Jesus was ready to call them

Jesus’ response to Simon needs some comment. Why did He change his name?  In Hebrew thought, a name was a prophetic utterance of character. Babies were often named according to the circumstances of their birth, or as an expression of their prophetic destiny. John the Baptist was not named after his father, Zachariah, but called John which means “grace”. He would be ushering in, through Jesus, a new era of grace.

 

The name Simon means “to hear” or “reputation”. Jesus saw him, not as merely a hearer but as a rock – Petros in Greek, Cephas in Aramaic — one who would become steadfast and dependable. Isn’t this typical of the way God sees people, not as they are but as they would become through His grace?

There were important implications for Peter in this way of viewing and treating him. Jesus had to endure some questionable ideas and behaviour from this volatile and outspoken disciple. He often spoke first and thought afterwards. He said the first thing that came into his head. He had inflated ideas about himself and then crumbled when the test came.

Jesus knew Simon. He knew his character. He knew the way he was thinking and the way he would respond but He also knew what he would become. On the strength of that, He renamed him Peter. On a few occasions, when Simon really exasperated Him, He would revert to his old name but, more often than not He called him Peter. Every time Jesus said “Simon”, He was rebuking him and reminding him of who he was — just a hearer. And that’s what he often proved to be. Simon suffered from “selective hearing” just like the rest of the disciples did!

But it was not Jesus’ intention to tie him to his past. There was no value in reminding Peter who he was. In changing his name, Jesus was declaring His intention to change his character, and every time He called him Peter, He was drawing him towards his future.

There are valuable lessons for us in the example of Jesus. First of all, we learn that God is more interested in what we will be than in what we are. He has called us His sons and daughters. Our role in life is to learn to become what we are — holy and beloved children of God. True faith is taking possession of what we already own. We are heirs of all that God has promised. It is our job to inherit His promises with faith and patience (Hebrews 6:12).

The second lesson is equally important. Just as Jesus saw Peter as a rock, so we must view people according to their potential rather than their actual. Instead of criticising them for what we don’t like about them, call them “Peter”. See them as holy and beloved. That attitude will pull them towards their future instead of anchoring them to their past.

Release them from the past by cancelling their debt just as God has done, and they will be set free to become what God already sees them to be.

Will you do that? That’s what Jesus did.