Tag: John

Posted on

Evidence that Jesus is God – Part 2

John 10

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.”

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. (John 10:22-39, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

Lately I’ve had a number of online conversations with some Jehovah’s Witnesses regarding the nature of Jesus. Most of the discussions have come about as a result of a Jehovah’s Witness responding to one of my many blog posts on the topic, including the following:

One recent discussion has centered around my blog post “Evidence that Jesus is God” which is based on Jesus’ interaction with the religious leaders in John 10:22-33.

I encourage you to read the entire post to get the full argument, but the summary of that post is as follows:

    1. Jesus claimed that he and the Father are one which I argued was a clear claim of divinity by Jesus.
    2. Jehovah’s Witnesses typically respond that Jesus was only claiming to be “one in purpose” with the Father – he was not claiming deity.
    3. But the context of the passage shows that the explanation offered by the Jehovah’s Witnesses is unlikely as the Jewish leaders picked up stones to kill him.
    4. When Jesus asks why they want to stone him, they respond, “for blasphemy – you being a mere man claim to be God.” It’s clear from the context that the Jewish religious leaders understood Jesus to be making a claim of deity. Why else would they accuse him of blasphemy?
    5. I point out that if Jesus was only “one in purpose” with the Father, if he was NOT claiming to be God, then why did Jesus not correct their misunderstanding as Paul and Barnabas did in Acts 14 when the locals mistook them for gods?
    6. I argued that the reason Jesus didn’t correct the religious leaders was because their understanding of the claim he was making was clearly correct.

In this recent online encounter, a committed Jehovah’s Witness responded to my post by quoting the fuller text of John 10:22-38, arguing that in the verses that followed (which I had not included in my original post) Jesus DID correct their misunderstanding by claiming to be a “little g” god instead of a “big G” God.

His argument is that Jesus explained to these Jewish leaders that he is God’s son in the same way that others in the Old Testament were called “gods.” This is conclusive proof, according to this Jehovah’s Witness, that Jesus has defined for us what he means when he calls himself the Son of God – he does NOT claim equality with the Father, but is simply claiming a status as a “little g” god, which has been attributed to many other “mere men” in the past.

What are we to make of this argument? Is he on to something that has been overlooked and ignored by the traditional church for the last 2000 years?

I think the answer is clearly NO, and I’ll explain why.

As you read through the gospels, it’s apparent that the Jewish religious leaders are opposed to Jesus. They don’t like him and in fact, they resort to seeking to kill him.

The deeper question is why don’t they like him? Why are they so opposed to him? Regardless of what you believe about Jesus’ nature, most agree that he was the greatest moral teacher to ever live. Jesus traveled around healing and helping people. Isn’t that a good thing? So why are these religious leaders so intent on killing him?

In Jesus’ encounters with the religious leaders there is one thing in common – he seeks to expose their hard-heartedness. He does this in various ways by unmasking their selfishness, their hypocrisy and their duplicitous nature.

Jesus’ harshest words are reserved for these very religious leaders, who not only opposed him but are often seen trying to entrap him into saying or doing something that could be used against him.

Though Jesus has healed the sick, raised the dead, exorcised the demon-possessed and performed numerous miracles, they still come to him demanding a sign. I wrote about their unreasonable demands and Jesus’ response in my blog post “When Someone DEMANDS Evidence!”

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

So what is Jesus doing in this passage? What’s he saying to these religious leaders?

Jesus is setting a logical trap for these religious leaders.

How exactly does he do this?

Let’s look at the full interaction.

Jesus is walking around minding his own business when he’s encountered by the religious leaders who once again ask,

“how long will you keep us in suspense? If you’re the Christ, tell us plainly.”

Jesus responds that he’s already told them plainly but they just don’t want to believe. He then appeals to the many miracles he had done in the Father’s name, evidence which he says speaks for itself.

The next two verses are important to the foundation Jesus is laying for the intellectual trap that he’s setting: Jesus says that the reason they don’t believe is because they are NOT his sheep. His sheep hear his voice and follow him, but they’re incapable of hearing his voice and following him because they are NOT his sheep.

Remember, he had a similar encounter with the religious leaders just two chapters earlier in John 8, where Jesus told them that their true father is the devil. I wrote about this critical exchange in my post “Who’s Your Daddy?”

Jesus is addressing the hardness of their heart. They see the miracles just like everyone else yet it has no effect. They come to Jesus and demand more evidence, more miracles, more proof. Jesus isn’t playing their game. He’s telling them that the miracles he has done speak for themselves and so he has no need to provide any more evidence.

In verse 28, Jesus continues speaking about his sheep, his true followers, saying that he gives them eternal life, they will never perish and that no one can snatch them out of his hand.

Who but God can grant eternal life and promise eternal protection for his followers?

Jesus is telling these religious leaders that he performs activities that are attributed only to God. This is an additional evidence for Jesus’ deity. Not only does Jesus make direct claims of deity, but he performs acts and possesses qualities that can only be attributed to God.

Jesus then says that the Father has given him the sheep and no one can snatch them out of the Father’s hand. So in two consecutive verses, Jesus has said that no one can snatch the followers out of his hand AND no one can snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

In the very next verse (John 10:30) Jesus says,

I and the Father are one.

This is not simply “oneness of purpose” as Jehovah’s Witnesses argue. This is oneness of essence and activity. Jesus is appealing to a special relational unity.

It’s clear from the response that the Jewish religious leaders understood what Jesus was saying as they picked up stones to stone him. When Jesus asks why they’re picking up stones, they reply that it’s not because of his works,

but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.

Now this is where we get into the response from my recent online conversation with a Jehovah’s Witness.

He argues that what follows in the text is Jesus’ explanation of his true nature, that he is just a man who is a servant of God and so when he calls himself the son of God, it’s just like Psalm 82:6 (which Jesus himself references) when other men were called “gods”.

Unfortunately, my online Jehovah’s Witness friend completely misunderstands and misinterprets what is happening in this exchange.

Remember, Jesus’ encounters with the religious leaders often showed him exposing the hardness of their heart – their greed, their selfishness, their hypocrisy, their lust for power, their stubborn unwillingness to believe. This encounter is no different. Jesus has now set the trap that will reveal their true intentions.

How so?

They’ve already said that they believe that Jesus is a mere man who is claiming to be God. This was their basis for charging him with blasphemy. So Jesus appeals to Psalm 82:6 and essentially says, “well if I’m just a man, what reason do you have to accuse me of blasphemy? Wouldn’t I be just like these other ‘mere men’ who were servants of God?”

For emphasis, Jesus adds “this is in your Law!”

The argument made by my online Jehovah’s Witness opponent is that Jesus has just admitted to being a “mere man” who is a servant of God. Therefore, he is a “little g” god. This fits perfectly with the doctrine of Jehovah’s Witnesses, which denies that Jesus is God but says that he’s “god-like”.

But Jesus has not stated that he’s a “little g” god. He has simply referenced a passage from Psalm 82:6 in order to set the trap.

Jesus continues with his response by saying that if the Scriptures, which cannot be broken, called these other people “gods” then

“what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?”

Instead of calling himself a “god”, Jesus has just established that he’s superior to the so-called “gods” of Psalm 82:6 by virtue of his unique and special relationship with the Father. Jesus then reasserts that he does what the Father does.

Jesus then tells these religious leaders essentially, “look, if you don’t believe what I say, at least believe the miracles that I’m doing. This should prove to you that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”

This last statement is another declaration of the special unity that Jesus has with the Father. This is more than just “oneness of purpose” as if Jesus has simply adopted allegiance to a corporate mission statement.

Jesus has consistently communicated a unity with the Father that the religious leaders interpreted as a claim of deity. This is clear throughout the gospels as Jesus encounters the religious leaders. And it’s the exact reason why they sought to kill him and eventually did kill him.

Verse 39 makes this clear as it says,

Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.

The point that was made in the initial post, “Evidence that Jesus is God” still stands. Jesus made a statement about himself that his opponents interpreted as a claim of deity. Jesus does not correct their misunderstanding. Yes, Jesus refers to Psalm 82:6, which references people as “gods” but he does so as a tactic to reveal to the religious leaders that their problem was not that Jesus wasn’t clear and it was not that he hadn’t provided enough evidence of who he was.

Their problem was that their will (heart) refused to believe what their minds knew to be true. This is hard-heartedness, which will cause us to defy logic and all rationality in our attempt to hold to a pre-suppositional belief.

The Jewish religious leaders are an illustration for humanity – we have been given all the evidence we need to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, God in the flesh, and yet if we refuse to believe, it’s because we don’t want to. That is the very definition of a hard heart.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

When is a time that you did not want to believe a truth that was clearly presented to you? What are examples in your own life where you’ve demonstrated a hardness of your heart?

If Jesus did admit to the religious leaders that he was not deity, but only a “god” in the sense demonstrated in Psalm 82:6, as Jehovah’s Witnesses contend, how do you explain the Jewish leaders’ continued desire to seize him and kill him for blasphemy?

What do you think Jesus means when he claims that he and the Father are one? 

What do you think Jesus means when he says “that the Father is in me, and I in the Father”?

What do you think is the benefit of engaging in this kind of discussion about the nature of Jesus? Do you think it really matters how we view him? Why or why not?

 

Photo by Tim Hüfner on Unsplash

Posted on

Does Revelation 3:14 Prove Jesus is a Created Being?

Revelation 3

14“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:

The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:

(Revelation 3:14, NASB)

The Daily DAVEotional

I’ve written a number of blog posts on Revelation 3:14-22, including this post on why Jesus would rebuke the “lukewarm” Christian but not the “cold” Christian, and this post, which explains why it’s legitimate to use Revelation 3:20 in gospel conversations with non-believers.

So why yet ANOTHER post on this passage, and why highlight only one verse?

Some background

Last week, I happened to post on X a tweet referencing my blog post from Proverbs 8 where I explain that Proverbs 8 is NOT a passage that demonstrates that Jesus is a created being, as Jehovah’s Witnesses will claim. In fact, Proverbs 8 is not about Jesus at all.

My tweet got some replies, including a Jehovah’s Witness from Nigeria who decided to take the opportunity to set me straight on my theology.

We had quite the online back and forth exchange, with many verses being offered up as evidence for our respective views.

If you weren’t aware, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that Jesus is God. They teach that he is the first created being of Jehovah and as such, he is not to be worshipped.

They are the modern day torch-bearers of the ancient heretical doctrine known as Arianism. I first wrote about the Jehovah’s Witnesses and their views on Jesus in my post “A Modern Day Version of an Ancient Heresy.”

In my online exchange with this Nigerian Jehovah’s Witness, he presented to me all the usual verses in an attempt to demonstrate that Jesus is not God, including Colossians 1:15, which I addressed in my blog post, “What Does it Mean that Jesus is the Firstborn”, and John 10:30, which I addressed in my blog post “Evidence that Jesus is God” .

One verse that this online JW evangelist offered as evidence that Jesus is not God but is a created being, was Revelation 3:14, the verse that is highlighted in this devotional.

Jehovah’s Witnesses routinely cite Revelation 3:14 as conclusive proof that Jesus is created. After all, the verse literally says that Jesus is the BEGINNING of creation.

What this means, according to the Jehovah’s Witness, is that Jesus is the first created thing of Jehovah’s creation. He is the “beginning” of creation.

However, as is often the case when dialoguing with Jehovah’s Witnesses, the verse does not mean what they THINK it means.

How can that be?

Well, the Greek word in Revelation 3:14 that is translated as “beginning” is the Greek word “arche” (pronounced by sounding out the letters “R” and “K”). It is where we get our English word “architect.”

This word has a number of possible meanings, one of which is “beginning”.

If you look up this word in a Greek lexicon, it says that the word means origin, source, beginning. It also can mean rule.

Biblical translators are in agreement that the meaning of this word is not that Jesus is the first to be created but that Jesus is the source of creation, the author of creation, the BEGINNER of creation or the ORIGIN of creation. Because Jesus is the author of creation, he is the RULER of creation.

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

So why does it say that Jesus is the BEGINNING of creation? Why not use one of these other words?

Actually, the NASB, which uses the word “BEGINNING” has a footnote provided by the translators in which they offer up the words “source” and “origin” as alternatives. In other words, the footnote demonstrates that the authors understood that the word “beginning” was meant to be understood in the sense that Jesus is the origin or source of creation.

When you click on the “asterisk”, the note is revealed:

Additionally, most translations do NOT use the word “beginning” in their translation.

The NLT translates Revelation 3:14 as:

“Write this letter to the angel of the church in Laodicea. This is the message from the one who is the Amen—the faithful and true witness, the ruler* [Or the source.] of God’s creation:

Note the translator’s “asterisk” that indicates that the word could mean “ruler” or “source”.

The NIV translates it this way:

14“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:

These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation.

The Holman Christian Standard Bible translates it as:

14“Write to the angel of the church in Laodicea:

“The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Originator [Or Ruler, or Source, or Beginning] of God’s creation says:

The brackets are inserted by the translators to indicate different words that would be equally acceptable as translations of the Greek word “arche”.

The NET Bible offers this translation:

“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write the following:

“This is the solemn pronouncement of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the originator54 of God’s creation:

Notice the number “54” just after the word “originator.” The NET Bible has extensive translation notes, which explain the decision process the translators used to arrive at their translation choices.

The summary of this note number 54 is that “beginning”, “ruler” or “originator” are all three linguistically possible. The editors explain that this term (Greek = arche) is well established in both the Septuagint (LXX) and intertestamental Jewish literature as meaning “ruler, authority.”

The truth is that  most translations do not use the word “beginning” for this verse and the translations that do use the word don’t use it to convey the meaning Jehovah’s Witnesses attribute to the verse.

In actuality, the word beginning is a fine word to use if you understand that Jesus literally is the first cause of creation. It is in that sense that he is the beginning. He is the source, the originator, the architect of creation. As such, he is ruler over creation.

One should also keep in mind that the author of Revelation is the apostle John, the same John who wrote the gospel of John and three shorter epistles near the end of the New Testament.

This same John identified Jesus as God in the opening verses of his gospel account, saying:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. (John 1:1, NASB)

To be fair, Jehovah’s Witnesses dispute the traditional Christian teaching of this verse, but I explain why their view is incorrect in my post “A Modern Day Version of an Ancient Heresy”.

This same John also wrote in his first epistle that

This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. (1 John 1:5, NASB)

But in John 1, the author says this about Jesus:

In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. (John 1:4-5)

John also said of Jesus that

All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. (John 1:3, NASB)

This does not sound like John believed that Jesus was created. Instead, John taught that Jesus created ALL things. If Jesus was the first created thing of Jehovah then John 1:3 would be a false statement as Jesus would be “something” that came into being.

A primary rule of Bible study is that Scripture interprets Scripture. In other words, if there is a verse that is confusing, we interpret it in light of other passages that are clear.

In Revelation 3:14, how are we to understand the word “beginning”? That is the debate between Jehovah’s Witnesses and traditional Christianity.

It’s clear that the translators all understood the word “beginning” in the sense that Jesus is the “beginner” or “first cause” of creation. This understanding is supported by all of the other words that could be used as a translation for the Greek word “arche”, including source, origin and ruler.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses explanation for the word “beginner” violates all of the other possible meanings while the traditional Christian understanding of the word “beginning” is in alignment with the other possible word choices.

In addition, the Jehovah’s Witness explanation of this verse contradicts other passages that clearly promote the same traditional Christian view.

In the final analysis, Revelation 3:14 doesn’t teach that Jesus is the first created being of Jehovah. On the contrary, it provides yet another substantial proof that Jesus is divine!

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

Reflection

Given the fact that arche can mean “source”, “ruler” and “origin”, what logical explanation could explain how “beginning” means anything other than “first cause”? In other words, how do you explain the fact that the Jehovah’s Witness explanation of the Greek word “arche” does not match any of the other accepted definitions for the word?

Do you find the argument posed in this post against the Jehovah’s Witness’ interpretation of Revelation 3:14 convincing? Why or why not?

Some people argue that debating the nature of Jesus is fruitless and unnecessary. The argument is that as long as we believe that Jesus saves us, that’s all that matters. Everything else is just theological nit-picking. Do you agree with this sentiment? Why do you think it’s important to have a firm understanding of the nature of Jesus?

What has been your experience with Jehovah’s Witnesses? What verses or arguments have they made that you were not able to adequately respond to or refute?

 

Photo by Greg Rakozy on Unsplash

Posted on

Did Jesus Die on the Cross or Merely Faint?

John 19

28Jesus knew that everything was now finished, and to fulfill the Scriptures he said, “I am thirsty.” 29A jar of sour wine was sitting there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put it on a hyssop branch, and held it up to his lips. 30When Jesus had tasted it, he said, “It is finished!” Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

31The Jewish leaders didn’t want the victims hanging there the next day, which was the Sabbath (and a very special Sabbath at that, because it was the Passover), so they asked Pilate to hasten their deaths by ordering that their legs be broken. Then their bodies could be taken down. 32So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the two men crucified with Jesus. 33But when they came to Jesus, they saw that he was dead already, so they didn’t break his legs. 34One of the soldiers, however, pierced his side with a spear, and blood and water flowed out. 35This report is from an eyewitness giving an accurate account; it is presented so that you also can believe. 36These things happened in fulfillment of the Scriptures that say, “Not one of his bones will be broken,” 37and “They will look on him whom they pierced.” (John 19:28-37, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

Christianity stands or falls on one event – the resurrection.

Over the years, critics of Christianity have promoted a number of theories to argue that the resurrection never actually happened. If Jesus didn’t actually rise from the dead, Christianity is nothing more than another moral code.

One of the more novel theories to explain away a supernatural resurrection is the Swoon theory, which suggests that Jesus never actually died on the cross but merely fainted. Later, after he was buried, the cool air of the tomb revived him. He emerged from the tomb alive and people mistakenly believed that he had resurrected.

There are numerous problems with this theory.

First of all, if Jesus did indeed faint and then was revived, how is it that he had the strength to move a 2-ton boulder that covered the tomb entrance and then overcome the armed battalion that guarded the tomb?

Jesus was brutally whipped and scourged before he was even nailed to the cross. He was so weak from the lashes and the beating at the hands of the Roman soldiers that he wasn’t even able to carry his own cross to the crucifixion site.

He then hung on a cross for hours, which undoubtedly weakened him further. Even if he did not die, he was in critical condition. Yet this theory wants us to believe that a person in his condition was able to unravel himself from 75 pounds of grave clothes, then move a 2-ton boulder out of the way, fend off a contingency of elitely trained and armed Roman guards so that he could later appear to his followers and declare himself to be the resurrected Messiah. This would take more faith than believing in an actual resurrection.

Secondly, as C.S. Lewis has argued, if Jesus merely fainted and then emerged alive, declaring himself to be the resurrected Messiah, he would more aptly be compared to the devil than to God. Why is that?

In this scenario, Jesus would have foisted the greatest scam on people in the history of the world. Jesus, knowing he wasn’t God, would’ve had to have deceptively convinced people to give their lives for something that was a bold-faced lie.

As Lewis argued in Mere Christianity, this line of reasoning does not align with what we know about Jesus the man, namely that he was the greatest moral teacher the world has ever known.

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

Yet the Swoon theory forces us to believe that Jesus was not really a moral teacher as much as he was the best snake oil salesman who ever lived. He was so good, in fact, that most people still don’t realize they’ve been scammed.

Those are the philosophical reasons to reject the Swoon theory. However, there is evidence from this passage in John 19 that refutes the very basis of the Swoon theory.

The Swoon theory rests on the premise that Jesus didn’t actually die. Yet this passage provides convincing proof that Jesus indeed DID die.

How so?

Verse 31 tells us that the Jewish leaders didn’t want the crucified victims to be hanging on the cross during the Sabbath which was quickly approaching. The legs of crucifixion victims were often broken in order to hasten death. Essentially, the victims would no longer be able to push themselves up on the cross to inhale and they would suffocate rather quickly after their legs were broken. The text says that the soldiers broke the legs of the other two men who were crucified with Jesus. However, with Jesus, the soldiers saw that he was already dead, so there was no need to break his legs.

This is strong evidence that Jesus was already dead, contrary to those who might claim that he had only fainted or passed out.

There is another, even more convincing piece of evidence from this passage that demonstrates that Jesus was definitely dead when he came off that cross.

After the soldiers decided NOT to break Jesus’ legs, the text says that one of the soldiers took a spear and pierced Jesus’ side. There is no explanation as to why he decided to do that. What is interesting though is the description of what happened next. It says that “blood and water flowed out.”

The description of “blood and water” is significant. The author would not have had a medical understanding at that time that this was evidence of death. Blood and water would not have separated if Jesus were still alive but the fact that it WAS visibly separated PROVES that Jesus was dead.

Since this medical understanding was unknown in Jesus’ time, one cannot claim that the author deceptively described it this way in order to promote a false risen savior narrative.

One may still be unconvinced that Jesus resurrected, but one thing is certain, Jesus DID die. The idea that he fainted but then somehow emerged and declared himself to be the resurrected Messiah takes more faith than believing in the resurrection.

What this reveals is that for many, facts and rational explanations are not necessary in order to reject Jesus. All that’s necessary is a hardened heart.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

Do you think the Swoon theory is an adequate explanation for Jesus’ death on the cross? Why or why not?

If Jesus did only faint on the cross instead of actually dying, how do you explain a) the soldiers not breaking his legs, b) the description of water and blood flowing from the pierced side, c) Jesus’ ability to move the stone that covered the entrance and d) his ability to fend off the armed soldiers who guarded the tomb?

Do you agree with C.S. Lewis, that Jesus could not be considered a good moral teacher if he in fact KNEW that he hadn’t died and had not resurrected but yet convinced people that he DID resurrect? How does Lewis’s argument bolster the case for a supernatural resurrection?

Why do you think someone would believe this alternate explanation which requires a number of logical leaps instead of just believing what the text claims, which is that Jesus was resurrected?

 

Photo by Nik Shuliahin 💛💙 on Unsplash

Posted on

Did Jesus Teach that You Need to be Baptized to be Saved?

John 3

1Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.”

3In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.

4“How can a man be born when he is old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born!”

5Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ 8The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”

9“How can this be?” Nicodemus asked.

10“You are Israel’s teacher,” said Jesus, “and do you not understand these things? 11I tell you the truth, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. 12I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? 13No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man. 14Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.

16“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God.” (John 3:1-21, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

A few weeks ago, I had an online encounter with a Mormon who, in his quest to explain the legitimacy and necessity of the Mormon church, made the claim that the Bible teaches that baptism is necessary for salvation.

One of the passages he referenced to back up his claim was this passage from John 3, where Jesus has a conversation with Nicodemus, a Pharisee who came to Jesus secretly at night.

I previously wrote on this same passage (John 3:1-8) in my blog post “The Born-Again Redundancy” but that post, while it expounded some on the conversation Jesus had with Nicodemus, never addressed the issue of baptism.

There’s a good reason why my previous post did not talk about the issue of baptism and that’s because neither the word nor the concept is found anywhere in the passage.

But since this passage was offered up as a proof text for the view that baptism by immersion with water (what I’ll from here on out refer to as “water baptism” or “baptismal regeneration”) is essential for salvation, it seems necessary and appropriate to comment on what Jesus is actually teaching in this passage.

If the words “baptism” and “baptize” are nowhere to be found within this passage, why would someone use this passage as “evidence” that Jesus taught baptism was necessary for salvation?

In short, I believe this passage is used as evidence by those who hold to the necessity of baptism for salvation simply because Jesus mentions water.

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

As I conversed with this Mormon acquaintance online, he noted that Jesus himself said that in order to enter the Kingdom of God, one must be born of water and the Spirit. He argued that when Jesus mentioned being “born of water” he was referencing the ordinance of baptism.

This conclusion is actually a perfect example of the theological error known as eisegesis, which means “to read into the text.”

What exactly does that mean?

When we read and study the Bible, our goal should be to understand what the author meant when he wrote what he wrote. We do our best to place ourselves in the context of the person living at the time the text was written and seek to understand what it would have meant to a person living within that culture at that specific time. This is known as exegesis, or “drawing out of the text.”

When we understand what the author’s original intent was, we can then understand how the original hearer of the text would have understood what they were reading and hearing. That is the original message we want to capture, understand and apply to our own situation.

But eisegesis functions in the exact opposite way. Instead of seeking to understand what the text meant to the original audience, the person imports their preferred meaning into the text and then declares that to be the teaching.

So in our case, it looks like this:

Jesus had a conversation with Nicodemus about how one enters the kingdom of God and Jesus said that a person must be born of water and the Spirit.

Even though Jesus says nothing about baptism and it’s unclear at first glance what it means to be born of water and what it means to be born of the Spirit, the person who holds to baptismal regeneration has already concluded that the passage is talking about baptism.

Since the conclusion is already determined, reasons justifying that conclusion are then produced. In this case, the passage has the term water in it and baptism requires water so it is argued that this passage must be speaking about baptism.

This line of reasoning utterly fails.

Not only does Jesus not say baptism is necessary for salvation, he doesn’t even mention baptism in this interchange.

So then what is Jesus saying?

I explain this more fully in my blog post “The Born-Again Redundancy” but Jesus is explaining to Nicodemus that just as a person is born physically which leads to physical life, so a person must be born spiritually in order to experience spiritual life, or life in the kingdom of God.

Jesus himself explains what is meant by the phrase “being born of water and the Spirit” when he says just a few verses later that “flesh gives birth to flesh but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.”

It’s clear that being born of water refers to physical birth while being born of the Spirit refers to a spiritual birth. According to Jesus, both are necessary for salvation. In reality, everyone who has ever existed has already experienced physical birth just by being born.

So then, what is necessary to enter the kingdom of God is to experience a spiritual birth. This is the entire point Jesus is making to Nicodemus – to enter the kingdom of God, you must experience a spiritual birth.

The natural question then is “how does one experience a spiritual birth?”

Notice that as Jesus continues his discourse with Nicodemus, he does not mention baptism as a condition for salvation (spiritual birth). In fact, baptism is not mentioned anywhere in the passage.

What Jesus DOES mention as necessary for salvation, multiple times in fact, is BELIEF.

Specifically, in verse 15, Jesus says “that everyone who believes in him [Jesus] may have eternal life.”

Again, in verse 16, one of the most famously quoted verses in the entire Bible, Jesus says “that whoever believes in him [Jesus] shall not perish but have eternal life.”

So what is the verdict?

Concerning the charge that Jesus taught that baptism was/is necessary for salvation, the charge is false. Jesus did not teach that in this passage. Instead, he taught that a spiritual birth is necessary in order to know God and experience life in his kingdom. Jesus, as well as the other New Testament authors, taught that this spiritual birth comes as a result of BELIEF in the person and the work of Jesus on the cross.

To examine this issue further, see the following related posts:

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What are some examples you have seen of eisegesis – when a person imports their doctrine or theological preference upon a text that doesn’t appear to be teaching that doctrine or idea at all?

If you believe that Jesus, in this passage, is talking about the importance of baptism to Nicodemus, what reasons do you have to support that interpretation?

Jesus told Nicodemus that in order to see the kingdom of God, a person must be “born again”. What do you think it means to be “born again?” How do you understand that phrase?

It’s clear that Nicodemus falsely understood Jesus’ term “born again” to be referring to a 2nd physical birth. Jesus corrects him and explains that he’s talking about a spiritual reality that must take place. Based on this passage, what does Jesus teach about how a person experiences this spiritual birth?

Have you personally experienced a spiritual birth? If not, what keeps you from taking that step?

If you want to learn more about experiencing a “spiritual birth” and experiencing eternal life and life in the kingdom of God, read my blog post “Four Points to Understand How to Experience Eternal Life.”

 

Photo by Daniel & Hannah Snipes: https://www.pexels.com/photo/outdoor-baptism-ceremony-in-south-carolina-30477080/

Posted on

What Does it Mean to Bear Fruit that Lasts?

John 15

16You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit]—fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. 17This is my command: Love each other. (John 15:16-17, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

Lately I’ve been giving a lot of thought to what makes a ministry effective – what it means to bear fruit.

Within our own ministry with Cru and certainly within the church where we’re involved, there’s a lot of ministry activity. Meetings, events, campaigns and lots of talk of growth and numbers. Statistics. Charts.

It’s all good stuff. I’m not complaining. I know that for every number, there’s a person whose life has been impacted. It’s good and appropriate to celebrate success and all that the Lord has done.

However, I sometimes wonder if Jesus’ own ministry might be considered an abject failure when evaluated by modern church growth strategies and metrics.

After all, though Jesus preached to the masses, he had a relatively small following of just over 100 men (and some women too), with only 12 men in his inner circle.

One of those 12 men betrayed Jesus, leading to His arrest and crucifixion, while the rest of His disciples ALL deserted Him when He was in His darkest hour.

I’m not sure Jesus’ ministry looked “fruitful” to the modern evangelical church.

However, in John 15:16, Jesus said to his disciples,

“You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit – fruit that will last.”

It seems that “fruit” is evaluated not by its immediate result, but its lasting impact.

A few months back, I took a trip to Northern California to visit friends and ministry partners, many of whom are former students from our many years of campus ministry.

One of my first meet-ups was with Eric and Lane, two friends and former students from our early years at San Jose State.

Lane (left) and Eric (center) were a part of small groups I led way back in my early years with Cru at San Jose State University.

Eric was one of the first students I ever met when I arrived at San Jose State University as a new Campus Crusdae for Christ staff member. He wasn’t a believer but soon placed his faith in Christ and, like Lane, has been on a trajectory of growth for the last 37 years. Both of these men are exhibiting enduring faith, walking with Christ even in the midst of unbelievably challenging life circumstances.

Mike got involved with Cru at UC Davis when we were just starting out and maybe had 5 students.He was a gifted leader and an amazing guitar player who had a heart for worship.

Mike was one of the first few students to get involved with Cru when we started the ministry at UC Davis nearly 30 years ago

Mike had a crazy vision to put a worship band together when we had only 15 students. It didn’t make sense to me at the time, but we went with it and that act of faith was highly “instrumental” (do you see what I did there?) in our ability to attract students and expose them to our vision.

That launched us on a growth trajectory that helped us grow our ministry from those original 5 students to over 300 in a decade. The fruit from those years is still having an impact today.

Now, almost 30 years later, Mike is still walking with Christ and leading worship at his church while exhibiting enduring faith.

At the close of my trip, I met with Sean, another one of those early students at UC Davis when we were just starting out.

Sean was one of our first students involved with Cru at UC Davis when we started the ministry there. After graduating, he spent 20+ years as a missionary in the Middle East before returning recently to the states with his family.

Sean was one of the first students from our ministry to heed the call to missionary service, spending 20+ years as a missionary to the Middle East before recently being called to return home with his family.

Sean, like these other men, is an example of the lasting fruit that Jesus referenced in John 15:16.

In a culture where so many are deconstructing their faith, leaving the church, or inventing a “new and enlightened” path wrapped in a thin Christian veneer, enduring faith is a faith that keeps going year after year, trial after trial, faithfully serving, trusting, staying true to the gospel and impacting others in small and often unnoticed ways.

This is fruit that lasts!

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

The post takes the position that “fruit that lasts” is enduring faith. Do you agree with this assessment? Why or why not? If you disagree, how would you define or describe “fruit that lasts”?

What are some examples in your own life of “fruit that lasts”?

If Jesus has appointed us to bear fruit that lasts, which is likened to faith that endures trials, struggles and the demands of life over time, what practical implications does that have for the way we do ministry and the way we evaluate fruitfulness?

What do you think the church (people) should do or could do in order to ensure that we are bearing fruit that lasts? In other words, if we’re called to bear fruit that lasts, how do you think we (the church) do that? 

 

Photo by jose alfonso sierra on Unsplash

Posted on

Can Christians Pray Directly to Jesus or Only God the Father?

Acts 7

51“You stubborn people! You are heathen at heart and deaf to the truth. Must you forever resist the Holy Spirit? But your ancestors did, and so do you! 52Name one prophet your ancestors didn’t persecute! They even killed the ones who predicted the coming of the Righteous One—the Messiah whom you betrayed and murdered. 53You deliberately disobeyed God’s law, though you received it from the hands of angels. ”

54The Jewish leaders were infuriated by Stephen’s accusation, and they shook their fists in rage. 55But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed steadily upward into heaven and saw the glory of God, and he saw Jesus standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand. 56And he told them, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!”

57Then they put their hands over their ears, and drowning out his voice with their shouts, they rushed at him. 58They dragged him out of the city and began to stone him. The official witnesses took off their coats and laid them at the feet of a young man named Saul.

59And as they stoned him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60And he fell to his knees, shouting, “Lord, don’t charge them with this sin!” And with that, he died. (Acts 7:51-60, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

Last week on X (formerly Twitter), I saw an exchange that made me think. A pastor with a very large following was calling out a well-known politician who claims to be a Christian for the way he prayed.

Attached to the post was a screenshot of the text of the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew 6, along with the following admonition:

Someone should tell (name of politician) that Christians don’t pray to Jesus. We pray to God the Father in the name of Jesus.

My first thought was disappointment at the realization that we now appear to have an online Prayer Police force that is monitoring our actions over the internet.

My second thought was, “Wait, I pray to Jesus all the time. Have I been doing it wrong all these years? Have I been participating in a doctrinally dubious practice?”

It’s a valid question. How exactly are we to pray? Is there a right and wrong format? What are God’s expectations of us as we seek to engage with Him in the practice of prayer?

I’ve been a Christian for a looooong time and I’ve honestly never thought that a person could NOT pray directly to Jesus. After all, when I first heard the gospel as a young boy, I was told that Jesus was standing at the door of my heart and he was knocking (Revelation 3:20). If I was listening to his voice and if I opened the door, he would come into my life! In short, if I responded to Jesus, IN PRAYER, and invited him in, I would become a Christian and receive the gift of eternal life.

I’ve heard many prayers over the years where Jesus was addressed directly and I’ve never, even once, seen or heard someone be corrected for directing their prayers to Jesus, if this is indeed a wrong practice.

I suppose that’s why this post on X, from a pastor with a large following, and a PhD no less, seemed to be coming out of left field.

Disregarding the tone and posture of the tweet, which came off as more sanctimonious rebuke than loving correction, I found myself asking the question, “is he correct?”

The disciples had asked Jesus to teach them to pray. Jesus responded by telling them:

9“Pray, then, in this way:

‘Our Father who is in heaven,

Hallowed be Your name.

10‘Your kingdom come.

Your will be done,

On earth as it is in heaven.

11‘Give us this day our daily bread.

12‘And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.

13‘And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. [For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.]’ (Matthew 6:9-13, NASB)

I decided to survey the prayers in the New Testament that I was aware of, mostly from the book of Acts.

What I found is that most of the prayers ARE directed to God the Father and NOT Jesus, EXCEPT this one example that we find from Stephen in our passage today.

We first meet Stephen in Acts 6 when he is selected, along with six other men, for the special task of meeting a critical need in the early church. These seven men were the first deacons of the church. The text says that Stephen was a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit. He was not a man of marginal commitment or questionable devotion. He walked with God.

By the end of chapter 6, Stephen is no longer serving as an administrator in the church’s food distribution program, but instead, he is having a major impact as an evangelistic preacher. Stephen’s influence had increased significantly and he was now a major leader in the early church movement.

One day, Stephen gets into a debate with some Jews and the text says that:

None of them was able to stand against the wisdom and Spirit by which Stephen spoke. (Acts 6:10, NLT)

They couldn’t defeat his arguments so they found some people to lie about him and he was arrested by the religious rulers and brought before the high council. The Council leaders ask Stephen to respond to the charges that had been brought against him. His response is recorded in Acts 7, which is a lengthy discourse on the history of the Jewish people, including their long-standing pattern of rebelling against God and resisting God’s appointed messengers (His prophets).

For brevity, I haven’t included the full text of that response (Acts 7 in its entirety), but it’s worth the read. For our purposes, I’ve included the relevant part at the end of Acts 7 where Stephen shifts his response from explaining the history of the nation of Israel to his indictment on its leaders for their pride and rebellion.

You can see that the Council leaders and its members don’t take too kindly to Stephen’s accusation and the result is that they dragged Stephen out of the city and stoned him.

What is interesting about this text is that Stephen, as he is being stoned, looks up toward heaven and he prays!

What does he pray?

“Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” (Acts 7:59)

Stephen, a man who the text says was filled with the Spirit, prayed to Jesus, not the Father.

To me, this provided indisputable proof that it must be ok to direct our prayers to Jesus and not God the Father only.

So I responded to the pastor’s post on X by saying that praying to Jesus must be ok because we have an example in the New Testament with Stephen praying directly to Jesus.

The pastor replied to my response, doubling down by saying:

That was descriptive, not prescriptive.

What does that mean?

He’s actually correct. What that means is that the book of Acts is historical narrative, not didactic teaching. That means that Luke (the author of Acts) was simply recording things that happened. Just because he recorded an event does not mean that what is recorded is supposed to be the normal pattern for all believers.

But Jesus’ words in Matthew 6 are direct teaching. He is instructing us in what to do and how to do it.

So what this pastor was saying in his reply is that just because Stephen is recorded as praying to Jesus doesn’t mean we are supposed to, especially since Jesus’ prayer instruction shows the prayer addressing “our Father”.

So yes, it’s true. Jesus’ teaching is prescriptive, explaining to his disciples how we should pray. And the example of Stephen is descriptive. It’s part of a larger narrative that just describes an event. It’s not part of a passage that is teaching us how to pray.

Does that mean that the pastor’s assertion that we are only to pray to God the Father is correct? Is that the end of the discussion?

Not exactly.

While Jesus teaches the Lord’s prayer in Matthew 6 (and Luke 11), his teaching is not an exhaustive discourse on the subject of prayer. In other words, even though Jesus gives some teaching on prayer in these passages, what he says is not ALL there is to know and learn about prayer.

To make a determination of whether it’s ok to pray to Jesus directly, consider the following:

    • Jesus tells his disciples to pray “in this way”, and then he shares the Lord’s prayer. Does this mean that ALL prayers must repeat these words exactly? If so, why do we never see this exact prayer repeated in the New Testament?
    • Jesus gives his disciples a model, or example of how to pray, which includes addressing “our Father”. Does this mean that a person can never pray to Jesus? What about the Holy Spirit? Can you call on the Holy Spirit?
    • If we are not allowed to pray to Jesus, how are we supposed to respond to Him if he is at the door of our heart knocking? How exactly do we invite Him in?
    • If Jesus promises to come in and dine with us and have fellowship with us, how exactly do we have fellowship with someone we are not supposed to talk (pray) to directly?
    • It’s clear that Jesus is our High priest. The role of a priest is a mediator. Jesus is the mediator between us and holy God. It’s because of Jesus and his atoning sacrifice on the cross that we are able to boldly approach the throne of grace and enter the presence of God the Father. Are we really supposed to believe that Jesus is the mediator between man and God but we are not allowed to talk to him directly?

The whole premise seems a bit absurd. Based on all of the relevant data, it seems clear that while Jesus does instruct his followers to pray to God the Father, there is never a prohibition for believers to address Jesus directly.

It seems clear that because Jesus is our mediator and he is the one knocking at the door of our heart, wanting to come into our lives, that we CAN address him directly.

Furthermore, we have a documented case where a godly, Spirit-filled leader of the early church  (Stephen) addresses Jesus directly. There is no indication, anywhere in scripture, that this is somehow wrong.

One last item is worth mentioning. In the final words of the New Testament, John, in the book of Revelation, pens these words:

Amen! Come, Lord Jesus! (Revelation 22:20, NLT)

If the apostle John finds that it’s ok to pray to Jesus, inviting him to “come”, then I’d say that it’s ok for any of us to address our prayers to Jesus as well.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What would your response have been to this pastor who posted on X? How would you have either affirmed his position or argued against it?

What has been your pattern in prayer? Do you think it’s ok to pray directly to Jesus or should Christians pray ONLY to God the Father? What is the reasoning for your answer?

How have you used the Lord’s Prayer in your walk with Christ? Do you believe that Jesus taught that the Lord’s prayer was THE way to pray – that it is the ONLY pattern for praying? 

What do you think it means that Jesus is our high priest? What is the role of a priest? How do we interact with a priest or mediator?

 

Photo by Brian Lundquist on Unsplash

Posted on

What Does it Mean to Have Eternal Life?

John 17

1After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed:

“Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you.  2For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. 3Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. (John 17:1-3, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

An overwhelming number of people in the U.S. believe in an afterlife. According to a major Pew research study in 2023-24 and released in 2025, 70% of Americans believe there is, or there probably is an afterlife.

If there really is an afterlife, what does it look like and, more importantly, how do we experience it?

Christianity teaches that after people die physically, they experience either eternal life or eternal death.

But what exactly is eternal life?

I’ve asked hundreds, if not thousands of people that exact question over the course of my years in ministry and the most common answer I received is that eternal life is “living forever after you die”.

Now that’s obvious isn’t it? The word “eternal” means “forever” and “life” is the opposite of “death” so it kind of seems obvious that “eternal life” must be “living forever” because that’s exactly what the words mean.

Many people are surprised to learn, however, that Jesus actually defined eternal life and his definition doesn’t exactly line up with our traditional understanding of the term.

Most people think of eternal life as something you receive AFTER you die, like going to heaven.

But Jesus defined eternal life as something you can have NOW and then it continues on into eternity.

In John 17:3, Jesus defined eternal life as knowing God – having a relationship with Him. Hence, eternal life is beginning a relationship with Jesus now, on earth, so that when you die, you will live with Him for eternity.

This distinction might seem insignificant but it’s actually quite important.

If eternal life is just going to heaven when I die, then it’s not necessarily something I need to worry about until later in life.

But if eternal life is a relationship with God – something I can experience NOW, then waiting to receive eternal life will result in me missing out on a relationship with God.

Jesus didn’t go to the cross and die for us just so we could go to heaven after we die. Jesus died on the cross to give us LIFE….NOW!

Jesus wants us to know Him and that’s something we can begin to experience now in this life. Knowing Jesus simply means responding to the invitation of forgiveness that He offers through His death on the cross for us.

When we respond to Jesus’ invitation, Jesus comes into our lives and we become adopted sons and daughters in His family.

At that moment, our real life begins. This relationship with Jesus is permanent and never-ending.

Do you want to experience eternal life? You don’t have to wait until you die to experience it. You can experience eternal life right now, simply by entering into a relationship with Jesus, which simply requires that you put your trust in Him.

For more information on what it means to begin a relationship with Jesus, read the short article “FOUR POINTS TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO EXPERIENCE ETERNAL LIFE”.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

Before reading this short post, what was your understanding of “eternal life”? How did you define it?

Most people think of eternal life as going to heaven after you die. But Jesus defined eternal life as knowing God and having a relationship with Jesus? How does this difference impact you? In what ways does this change or impact your desire to have eternal life?

On a scale of 0-100 (0 being no desire and 100 being the highest level of desire possible), how would you rate your desire to know God? What factors caused you to choose the number that you did?

On that same scale of 0-100, what do you think is God’s desire for you to know Him?

What would keep you from putting your faith in Jesus and beginning a relationship with Him?

 

Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

Posted on

Developing the Habit of Daily Bible Reading

It’s the beginning of the New Year so naturally, many people are thinking about New Year’s resolutions.

Typical resolutions for people include: losing weight, paying down debt,  finishing a degree or improving a job situation.

In the spiritual realm, a very common New Year’s resolution is to read through the Bible in a year.

Over the years, I’ve made this resolution countless times and mostly failed, though I was able to read through the entire Bible once or twice.

As Christians, reading through the Bible in its entirety is a noble goal. Many do it because it seems like an enormous accomplishment, like running a marathon once or hiking Yosemite’s half-dome summit.

But for the Christian, the goal really shouldn’t be to say that we’ve read through the Bible, as if it’s some bucket list item that we can boast about.

The goal is to gain a greater understanding of God’s word so that it impacts us and transforms us at a heart level.

With that in mind, I think a better resolution is to develop consistency in reading God’s Word. The goal is to develop a habit of taking in God’s word; to see it as essential and necessary for your spiritual life as food is daily for your physical life.

To develop a habit, a daily reading program is a must.

If this is all new to you, a few tips might be helpful.

Don’t worry about reading the Bible through chronologically. You can do that if you want but the Bible is not a novel. It’s a collection of books. So it’s not necessary to read through in order.

Shoot for being consistent instead of racing to finish. The goal is not to “finish” per se, because even if and when you do read through the entire Bible, you will still want to keep reading. It is NOT like a novel that you put back on the shelf once you’ve read the final page.

Allot an appropriate amount of time to help you be consistent. Many people start off with 45 minutes to an hour but cannot sustain that and then quickly give up. It’s like a person who’s out of shape and starts running for fitness. They immediately run 5 miles and kill themselves. Start off with a manageable routine that you can repeat consistently.

Recognize that there is a difference between reading and studying the Bible. You want to develop a habit of “reading” consistently, preferably every day. Reading doesn’t mean you have to understand everything you read. You can create longer study periods at other times in order to dive deeper into various sections of God’s word.

Recognize that the Bible is a collection of different types of literature. Some of it is historical narrative, some of it is poetic prayers and wisdom and some of it is direct teaching and instruction. Based on your personality, you will likely find some parts of the Bible easy and enjoyable to read while other sections (the types you don’t normally gravitate toward) you will find more laborious. Start with the types of literature that you would more easily gravitate toward, and then mix in the types that aren’t as easy. Starting off with books that are interesting will help you create momentum which will enable you to begin developing consistency.

Consider following a Daily Devotional program on the YouVersion Bible app. This is a popular app that is free and available for Smartphones in both iOS and Android versions. Not only does this app give you digital access to many different Bible translations, but there are literally thousands of different devotional programs that you can select to follow. The app will enable you follow each day’s content (a mixture of Bible reading often with some brief commentary) until you finish the program. When you finish, you can find another topic or series that interests you.

You may be saying to yourself, “this is all helpful, but I still don’t have any idea where to start.”

That’s a common issue. Here are some ideas to help you know where to begin:

Read through one of the gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). These books are narratives that each tell the story of the life of Jesus from the perspective of that author. There are similarities and differences between each account as each author reported on those parts of the life of Jesus that were important for the purpose they were writing. Pick one gospel and reach through it. You can read one chapter a day and it will take you 5-10 minutes, maybe even less. Reading through one of the gospel accounts will help you get familiar with the life and teachings of Jesus, who is the Bible’s central character.

Read through the book of Genesis, the first book of the Bible. Genesis is foundational for helping you to understand the context for the whole theme of the Bible. In it, you learn about creation, the Fall of man and then the story of the formation of the nation of Israel, God’s chosen people through whom the promised Messiah would come. Again, read one chapter a day. That should take no more than 5-10 minutes and will take you 50 days as there are 50 chapters.

If you like poetry, read through the Psalms. The Psalms are independent poems and praises that were written by different people to express their thoughts and emotions to God regarding the things they were experiencing. You can read one per day. Some are very short and there’s a few (like Psalm 119) that are extra long. If a Psalm is more than 30 or 40 verses, you might consider breaking it up into multiple days.

Read through the book of Proverbs. This book is what is called Wisdom literature. It’s a collection of sayings that are designed to give instruction and impart wisdom. There are 31 chapters in this book. One strategy is to read whatever Proverb corresponds to the day of the month. Hence, in a month that has 31 days, you will read through the entire book.

Read through the book of Acts, one chapter at a time. The book of Acts is another narrative book that tells the story of the foundation and growth of the early church, just after Jesus’ death, resurrection and ascension. It is filled with stories that demonstrate God’s design for His message of redemption to be taken to the ends of the earth.

Read through some of Paul’s letters. Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians are good starting places. These letters are not narrative but are instructions that Paul is sharing with various New Testament churches. Reading these letters will help you to begin to learn important doctrinal truths about God and your relationship with Him.

Building a habit of daily Bible reading is one of the best practices you can develop if you want to grow and mature as a Christian. God’s Word is our source of life; it’s an instruction manual that teaches us what is right and what is wrong and directs us in how we are to live our lives in connection with God. (For more thoughts on the benefits of reading God’s Word, read my post “Training in Righteousness – Part 2”)

One last suggestion that you may find helpful. Consider signing up for my blog posts where you will get alerted each time a new post is made. Many of my posts are part of what I call the Daily DAVEotional. It’s not exactly daily, but each post has a passage from my own daily reading, along with my commentary on what it means. I end each post with some reflection questions to help you process and apply what you’ve read. Each post will take between 5 and 10 minutes to read, depending on how fast you read and how long you take to reflect on the questions at the end.

Wherever you’re at in your knowledge and understanding of God’s Word, I hope this is a year that you are able to begin to build a habit of daily Bible reading. This one habit practiced over time, can be instrumental in your own spiritual growth and transformation in the months and years to come!

How about you? What has been your experience with New Years’ resolutions and reading through the Bible?

What have you found helpful in your own life for developing consistency in daily Bible reading?

Share your thoughts and comments below!

 

Photo by Joel Muniz on Unsplash

Posted on

Judgment Seat or Mercy Seat?

1 John 2

1My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 2and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

(1 John 2:1-2, NASB)

The Daily DAVEotional

In the first chapter of John’s first epistle, he shared a number of important principles regarding sin and experiencing fellowship with God. I wrote about that in my blog post, “Walking in the Light Simplified”.

Immediately following that passage, John says that our aim as believers should be to avoid sinning. But we also know that in our fallen humanity, we will inevitably still sin. In the first chapter, he outlined the importance of confessing our sin in order to maintain fellowship with God.

In this section, John stresses the fact that when we do sin (and we WILL sin) we have an Advocate in the person of Jesus Christ.

The picture here is of a defense attorney who pleads our case before the judge, the Father.

Jesus is uniquely qualified to be our advocate because He alone is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world.

What exactly does that mean?

If you’re unfamiliar with the word “propitiation”, it may be because the NIV and NLT, two of the most popular translations used today, don’t include this word in their translation of this passage. Instead, these versions translate the passage to say that Jesus is “the atoning sacrifice for our sins.”

It’s certainly true that Jesus is the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the world, but there’s an element of truth that John is communicating that is missed as a result of omitting the word “propitiation” from the translation.

The word “propitiation” means to appease wrath. The idea is that God is so just and holy, that sin is an infinite offense against God’s character. God’s righteous anger demands that sin be punished.

When it says that Jesus is the propitiation for sin, what it means is that Jesus, through His death on the cross, satisfied the payment that was required for sin. Hence, God’s wrath is appeased or satisfied.

Jesus is more than an atoning sacrifice for sins. He is the propitiation for sin. His death not only atones for sin, but it turns away God’s wrath so that no more punishment is required.

The Greek word for propitiation is “hilasterion” which is the same word for the Old Testament Hebrew word “mercy seat”.

The mercy seat was the cover of the Ark of the Covenant and was the place where the yearly blood sacrifice was made by the high priest. This sacrifice occurred only once a year in the Holy of Holies. On either side of the lid (or mercy seat) were two cherubim (angelic beings). They were facing each other and looked down at the lid.

Inside the ark were placed three significant artifacts: manna, representing the Jewish people’s rejection of God’s provision; Aaron’s rod, which represented man’s rejection of God’s leadership; and the broken pieces of the Ten Commandments, representing man’s rejection of God’s holiness.

When the cherub of Righteousness looked down on the symbols in the ark, it saw all the evidences of man’s rejection of God. When the cherub of Justice looked down, it saw that man was no longer like God’s righteousness and pronounced the death penalty on man. But on the Day of Atonement, the cherub of Justice looked down at the blood sacrifice covering on the lid and said, “I’m satisfied because the death penalty has been paid.” Similarly, Righteousness looked down and was no longer offended because the evidence of man’s sin was covered up and could not be seen.

Jesus’ death on the cross transforms the judgment seat, representing the judgment and punishment we deserve, into a mercy seat, representing the fact that His shed blood through His death on the cross, provides a covering for our sin. Atonement is made, once and for all, and therefore, there is no longer any punishment reserved for those who have placed their trust in Jesus.

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

Reflection

What difference does it make to know that Jesus’ death and shed blood has appeased God’s wrath towards your sin?

What is your view and understanding of the holiness of God? Does it seem appropriate to you that God, in His infinite justice, must punish sin? Why or why not?

Is the lid of the ark of the covenant a judgment seat or a mercy seat for you? What is keeping you from putting your full trust in Jesus to cover your sins so that you experience God’s mercy instead of justice?

 

Photo of Ark of Covenant provided from the following website under Creative Commons License 4.0

https://skfb.ly/6TpDB

Posted on

What is Required to Bear Fruit as a Christian?

John 15

1“I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. 2He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful. 3You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you. 4Remain in me, and I will remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.

5“I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. 6If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. 7If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you. 8This is to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples. (John 15:1-8, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

Have you ever wondered what the Christian life is all about? For many people, living as a Christian has been reduced to a series of religious activities, such as attending church, being in a bible study and serving in various ministry capacities.

While these activities aren’t bad, Jesus is clear that the goal of the Christian life is to “bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples.”

So how exactly does one “bear fruit”? HINT – it doesn’t happen because of our religious activities.

In John 15, Jesus gives a picture of fruitfulness by describing the relationship between a vine and its branches.

Being in a more agrarian society, Jesus’ audience likely would have understood the analogy in greater depth than we might, given that most of us probably didn’t grow up on a farm and may never have had much experience with vines or vineyards.

Nevertheless, it’s not a complicated concept to understand. Similar to a tree trunk, which gets its nourishment from a well-developed root system and then delivers it to the branches, a vine is the source of nourishment for the branches that are connected to it.

The key to bearing fruit for a branch is staying connected to the vine. If a branch is disconnected from the vine somehow, it will not produce fruit. Jesus emphasizes this point with the phrase “remain in me”, which he repeats six times in these eight verses.

What does Jesus mean when He says to “remain in me”?

The greek word used here is the word “meno”, the primary meaning of which is to stay in a given place, state or relation. Other words that help define the word “meno” are abide, continue, dwell, endure, be present, remain, and stand.

To remain in Jesus means we are to stay relationally present with Him. That word “dwell” evokes an image of Jesus being present with me in my living room, in my car when I’m driving, at my work place, when I’m out and about, when I’m hanging out with the guys or when I’m alone with no one around me to see what I’m doing. In short, I’m aware of Jesus’ presence in my life wherever I’m at and whatever I’m doing.

You don’t have to be a viticulturalist to know that the natural outcome of a branch that is connected to a vine is fruit. If there is no fruit, you know there is a problem somewhere. The same is true in our spiritual lives. If there is no fruit in your spiritual life, there is a problem.

So what are the problems that might result in a lack of fruit?

Verse 2 says that He “cuts off” branches that don’t produce fruit, while He “prunes” some branches that do bear fruit so that they will be more fruitful.

The Greek word that is translated as “cuts off” in the NIV, and “takes away” in the NASB is the Greek word “airo” which literally means “to lift up”.

In a vineyard, some branches would end up on the ground and would not have access to sunlight. These branches would grow but they wouldn’t produce grapes. Jesus is saying that branches that were lying on the ground would be “lifted up” so that they would have access to sunlight and thus would be able to bear fruit.

It’s easy to think we’re connected to Jesus because our lives are filled with religious activities, but remaining with Jesus means that I understand that He is the only source of spiritual life. He is the true vine.

As part of our fallen nature, we all try to fill the needs and cravings in our life in inauthentic ways, whether it’s work, hobbies, money, entertainment, sex or whatever. None of these avenues can truly satisfy us. Only Jesus can provide TRUE spiritual life and nourishment that satisfies and fulfills.

So if you’re not bearing fruit, perhaps it’s because you’re not depending on Jesus alone as your true source of spiritual nourishment and fulfillment. Jesus wants to lift you up out of the dirt and bring you into the light of His word and His truth so that you can begin to bear fruit.

Another possible reason we may be experiencing a lack of fruit is that we need to be “pruned”. Jesus says that He (God the Father) prunes every branch that does bear fruit so that it will bear more fruit.

The word that is translated “prune” is the greek word “kathairo” which means “to cleanse, to prune.” Vinedressers would routinely clean and wash the branches on the vine to rid them of pests that might destroy the leaves and interrupt the fruit-bearing process.

If you’re lacking fruit in your life, perhaps you need Jesus to cleanse you. In other words, maybe there is a sin issue that is keeping you from being fully dependent on Jesus and as a result, is negatively impacting your ability to bear fruit in your life.

Are you starting to get the picture? Jesus wants us to bear fruit, just as a branch connected to a vine would produce fruit.

But we are unable to produce fruit on our own. Only Jesus can produce fruit. We bear fruit if we simply stay connected to Him in a dependent relationship.

If we are lacking fruit, it is likely because we are depending on something apart from Jesus to provide fulfillment in our lives.

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

Reflection

What are some of the inauthentic ways you seek to fulfill the needs and cravings in your life?

Describe a time when you realized that you were not producing fruit? What was happening in your life? What caused you to realize that you were not fruitful?

What are some practical ways you can seek to remain in Jesus? How do you demonstrate your dependence on Him?

What do you think spiritual fruit is? How do you define it? What does it look like in your life to produce “fruit”?

What are the religious activities you are regularly involved in? In what ways are these activities helping you grow in your dependence on Jesus? How can you avoid falling into the trap of thinking that these religious activities alone will produce “fruit” in your life?

 

 

Photo by Zachary Brown on Unsplash