Category: Discipleship

Posted on

Trees Walking Around: Refocusing Our Blurred Vision of Jesus

“I see people . . . walking around like trees (Mk. 8:24). The blind man’s commentary on his healing was revealing. Nowhere else in the gospel did Jesus come close to a failed moment when someone wanted healing than this blind man of Bethsaida. The act took two takes with the first attempt leaving his eyesight barely improved. Barely.

Much ink has been spilt on this miraculous story trying to explain Jesus’ apparent power failure. But Mark may be using this story (Mk. 8:22-26) as the front end of Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem with a second back end healing of a blind man as Jesus reaches Jericho (Mk. 10:46-52). In other words the two healing stories of blind men hold the journey to Jerusalem in place so that the first blind man can see but still lacks 20/20 vision. The second blind man is able to focus his sights clearly on Jesus. The blind man may very well be representative of the disciples as they grapple with their blurred vision of Jesus. If that is the case, our vision is often just as crippling.

As Mark records the journey to Jerusalem, three teachable moments surface where Jesus clarifies his mission, ministry and mandate. Each of these moments include a prediction of what will unfold when Jesus reaches Jerusalem, followed by the disciple failure to grasp his teaching, concluding with further instructions on discipleship.

The first teachable moment (Mk. 8:31-38) occurs immediately following Peter’s confession in Caesarea Philippi. For the first time in Mark’s gospel Jesus lays out what they will find in Jerusalem. Of course, Peter, refusing to believe that Jesus will suffer at the hands of the Jews, pulls him aside for a rebuke. Yes, Peter rebuked Jesus!? But Jesus will have none of his (so-called) wisdom. Instead, he presents a vision of discipleship that includes cross carrying and sacrificing one’s life.

The second teachable moment (Mk. 9:30-37) appears as they were passing through Galilee. Once again, Jesus wants the Twelve to enter Jerusalem eyes wide opened as he’ll be executed but will be raised three days later. Mark tells us they didn’t understand (v. 32). And in case we needed evidence of their misunderstanding, they began arguing over which disciple was the greatest one. While Jesus is sacrificing his life, the disciples are debating which of them is number one. Jesus refocuses their attention by exhorting them to seek the number two spot. Instead of pursuing their own self-interests, approach life as if you are the least of these. No power. No authority. No sway (Mk. 9:30-37).

The final teachable moment (Mk. 10:21-45) surfaces as they were nearing Jerusalem itself with Jesus leading the way. Here, he outlines the most detailed description of the events about to unfold. Betrayed. Condemned. Mocked. Flogged. Killed. Resurrected. But James and John pull Jesus aside for a personal request of sitting in the place of power and position at his coming kingdom. Not only did he rebuff their request, but he redirected their attention that leadership does not mean lordship. Leadership means servanthood. Jesus came not to be served, but to serve. Thus, we follow his leadership model.

When we latch onto following Jesus but fail to see what discipleship really is, then we’re like the blind man Jesus is trying to heal. We see, but it’s all a blur almost like trees walking around. We operate from a power position. We control people’s movements and actions. We use relationships for personal gain then cast them aside when they no longer aid our agenda. We fight for rights as long as we get something of value from it, and fight as long as it cost us nothing. We mock people we disagree with and demean others who won’t let us have our way. We claim to see Jesus clearer than anyone else, but if the truth be known, we’re no better than the blind man standing by the side of the road needing to be silenced by those hearing our voices.

In order to see Jesus with clarity in vision, discipleship must be defined on his terms not ours. Following him means we’re willing to bear the burden while carrying our cross. We stop seeking to be first as we desire to embrace humility in owning the joy of being number two. Finally, we begin using our position and power to serve the people around us. Once our eyes are checked under these criteria, we’ll begin to see Jesus with clarity. We’ll begin seeing each other with clarity.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e., only God is glorified!)

Posted on

FINAL Verdict

The final judgment theme is a strong motif in Scripture. The Hebrews writer says that everyone dies once, then faces the judgment (Heb. 9:27). Paul, while addressing the philosophers at the Areopagus, seems to echo the same sentiment (Act. 17:31). Jesus says that we’ll all stand at the judgment to defend the words we’ve spoken (Mt. 12:36). Once again, Paul appears to agree in that we’ll receive what is due us depending on what we’ve done in the body (2 Cor. 5:10). What appears to be true is that at the end of time a reckoning will take place and all humanity will be held in account for their words and actions. What that final judgment scene actually looks like is less defined. Even still, it doesn’t mean it’s an empty threat.

Two passages, both found in Matthew’s gospel, offer a concrete look at the final judgment scene. Mind you, both scenes are scripted in allegory or parabolic language. How they look is not as important as to what unfolds.

The first scene appears at the end of the Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 7:21-23). Jesus had just warned about coming false prophets and that they’ll appear as wolves in sheep’s clothing (v. 15-20). How you know if they are false or true prophets is by noting the kind of fruit they bear (v. 16a). Jesus does not define what he means by fruit for he allows us to understand it as we grapple with his sermon (Mt. 5-7). Following the judgment scene, he concludes his sermon with the wise and foolish builders (v. 24-27). The wise person listens to the words of Jesus, specifically in the Sermon on the Mount, and puts them into practice, where the foolish person ignores Jesus’ words.

Between these two sections is the judgment scene. Jesus uses this final verdict moment to bridge the thought between the false prophets of verses 21-23 with the foolish builders in verses 24-27. So, just because one says, “Lord, Lord,” does not mean Jesus will embrace or acknowledge them or their confession. Only those doing God’s will, as laid out in the Sermon, will recieve  Jesus’ blessing. It’s safe to conjecture that Jesus intends for us to understand God’s will to be implementing the message of his sermon from Matthew 5-7 so that our righteousness is greater than the Pharisees and the teachers of the law (5:20). In a twist of irony, those under judgment claimed to prophesy in Jesus’s name, drive out demons and perform miracles (v. 22). Assuming they were telling the truth, the Spirit was alive and working through their ministries, powerfully. Yet, because they ignored the very teachings they were promoting, Jesus ignored them, calling them “evil doers” (v. 23).

The second judgment scene appears at the end of Jesus’ fifth and final sermon (Mt. 23-25) and just prior to the Passion Week. Here he’s clearly speaking in parabolic terms as he has told two end times-like stories (10 Virgins in 25:1-13 and the Talents in 25:14-30). The third end time-like story describes judgment day as dividing the people into two groups, like a shepherd divides the sheep from the goats (25:31-46). The sheep, those on his right and designated as “righteous” (v. 34, 37) were willing to feed Jesus when he was hungry, provide water when he was thirsty, opened their homes to him when he was homeless, clothed him when he was naked, nursed Jesus back to health when he was sick and visited Jesus when he was in prison (v. 35-36). The goats, those on his left and designated as “cursed” (v. 41) refused to act when they saw Jesus in need. In a sense of irony, neither group “recognized” Jesus as someone in need. But Jesus identifies with those in need so much that he says, “. . . whatever you did (or did not do) for the least of these . . . you did (or did not) do for me” (vs. 40, 45).

While Scripture is clear that a final verdict is a reality, certain aspect of the judgment day is still left unclear. Watching our words and defending our actions certainly play a role, and all of us need to be a little more considerate with our words and actions. However, the two scenes Jesus describes are telling. First, we’re called to live a faith greater than the games religious people play. Constantly stepping back into the Sermon on the Mount reorients our lives to the core gospel. Secondly, generously helping anyone in need is the same as if we’re helping Jesus. Our job is not to question the “worthiness” of the one in need, but our job is to treat them as if Jesus was in need. When we do, we’ll find ourselves in safe territory for the final verdict.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e., only God is glorified!)

Posted on

Unequally Yoked

The Law of Moses was explicit on the care of farm animals, particularly in regard to plowing one’s field. Never yoke an ox and a donkey together (Dt. 22:10). Because the ox is so much bigger and stronger than the donkey, the smaller and weaker animal (proportionally) was at risk to being dragged by the ox. Imagine two football linemen (i.e. Jared McCray and his friend, Joe Anderson) in a tug of war against two cross country runners (think Jonathan & Matthew Partlow). The runners aren’t weak, but we know the outcome of this tug of war. The same with yoking an ox with a donkey; the donkey doesn’t have a chance.

Paul picks up on the imagery of the unequal yoking in 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1. The principle is straight forward as the apostle links two opposing positions that people mistakenly believe can be yoked: the righteous and the wicked, those in the light and those in darkness, Christ and Satan, believers and unbelievers, and finally the temple of God and the temple of idols (v. 14-16). None of these hold anything in common and all are so diametrically opposed to each other that everyone knows the outcome. It won’t end well.

The center of the passage is verse 17, “Come out from them, and be separate.” The call to come out, from Isaiah 52, is wrapped in hope as God exhorts Israel to make a clean break from Babylon in returning to Jerusalem. Paul picks up on the exhortation for the church to make a clean break from paganism, because if they don’t, the outcome won’t end well.

What Paul says is one thing. How to apply the apostle’s words is another argument completely. Traditionally, this passage has been used, and solely used, to preach against unequally yoked marriages. What happens when a believer marries an unbeliever? It’s a good question as we’ve seen the struggle, and marriage is hard enough without adding one of faith and one without. The problem is, even though these verses can be applied to dating or engaged couples, that this passage says nothing about marriage. The words “courting” or “marriage” or even a reference to Genesis 2 never surfaces in the text.

Another option is that Paul is speaking in generalities, which certainly could include couples. Maybe he has in mind business partners. Assuming that the believer has moral integrity, will the unbeliever cut corners and short change customers giving the believer a bad name? Can someone who is dedicated to a risen Savior make business decisions with a person committed to idolatry? Beyond the business partnership, what about the local guilds? Pagan temple banquet halls were rented for both weddings and guild meetings. Being a member of the guild meant eating meals dedicated to an idol.

But the context of 2 Corinthians says nothing about couples, marriages or business ventures. Paul’s second letter to Corinth was an attempt for them to reconcile with him; the apostle was offering an olive branch to the church. The background to the letter was a group of outsiders infiltrating the church in a hostile takeover of Paul’s ministry and church leadership. They exploited a weakness in the relationship between the church and Paul, creating a chasm where a rift had been present. In derogatory terms, Paul calls this group “super apostles” (2 Cor. 11:5). They prided themselves on their “giftedness” and communication skills (10:1-2,10). They bragged about visions and prophetic experience (12:1-10). They built themselves up while tearing down Paul. They even accused Paul, not only of stealing from the church (11:8-12), but being a weak leader for the church. Paul said they were false apostles, deceptive men masquerading as angels of light (11:13-14).

Paul’s plea to avoid being unequally yoked is far more concerning than simply marriage, though its application to marriage is anything but simple. Uniting two people whose faith and world-view compete instead of complement gives anyone cause to pause. When a person of faith steps into covenant with a non-believer, someone will have to compromise. Unequally yoked relationships bring danger. But the immediate context is when two peoples of faith are unequally yoked. In this instance, one is loyal to the gospel of weakness Paul preaches and the other is loyal to a gospel of strength preached by those who have infiltrated Corinth. If the church in Corinth was going to reconcile with Paul, they had to break the yoke with these false teachers.

Just because someone name drops Jesus, or says a prayer to God, does not mean a wise partnership will be realized between two Christians. If one is going to embrace the gospel preached by Paul, a gospel where strength is expressed through weakness (12:8b) and the other rejects such a gospel, then we already know the outcome. It won’t end well.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e., only God is glorified!)

Posted on

A Plank, A Rock & A Baby Ewe Lamb

The peril of a life lived as a critic means that one sees only the flaws in everyone else, but refuses to acknowledge the same flaws in themselves. The danger is the damage created by the individual who has no self-awareness for his/her own sin, but freely attacks or exposes other’s sin. Ironically, how many times has the critic been found committing the same sin as those he/she attacks? As the finger points, three more tend to point back at the accuser.

The climax to the Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 5-7) is a warning to the listeners where danger lurks when judgmental attitudes prevail. The imagery given is the person criticizing someone with a speck in his/her eye while ignoring the plank in their own eye. The humorous scene of someone claiming to help another with their “sawdust of a problem” does more damage to that person because he/her is constantly being smacked in the head by a 2×4.

When they dragged the woman before the crowds, they weren’t looking for justice. They were looking to trap and trick Jesus. They were creating a show with her and Jesus on center-stage; they might as well have been selling popcorn, peanuts and programs. But Jesus refused to play their games. His writing in the sand was likely a distraction to take the attention off the woman (if she was “caught in the very act of adultery,” where’s the guy?). With Jesus wedged between upholding the law while providing mercy for an exploited woman, he looked at her accusers in the eye. He proposed, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her” (Jn. 8:7). With the younger men ready to launch their rocks, the older ones dropped theirs to the ground and left, leading the young with them. If you’re going to be quick to accuse, then your own life needs to be guilt free.

In the wake of David’s sin with Bathsheba, he was graced by a visit from his prophet and friend, Nathan (David has a son named Nathan and it may say something about his fondness for the prophet). Nathan shared with the king an injustice. A wealthy man, with a flock of sheep, confiscated the only sheep owned by a penniless man. The ewe lamb was like a house pet to the poor man. The wealthy man had a friend traveling through and refused to sacrifice one his own flock or herd, so he stole from the poor man. Outraged, David visibly saw in this scene made him blind to his own sin. Nathan’s words were direct while cutting to the heart, “You’re the man!” (2 Sam. 12:7a).

Clearly, the critical and judgmental life is hardly encouraged in Scripture. Just as clear is how easily we endorse the critical and judgmental life as a means of defending truth, the gospel or Scripture. In other words, we need to fix their attitude, perspective and doctrine because ours is just fine if not perfect. Let the finger pointing begin as we do so in the name of Truth, the Gospel and Scripture. Let the three fingers pointing back at us be our indictment.

If there were a way to soften the critic within us and to stop the finger pointing, then at least two steps must be taken. First, take a good look in the mirror. Work on yourself before working on others. The bible is intended to reveal the heart of the one reading it (Jas.1:22-25). And while the image of the sword prevails in Hebrews 4:12, the link to the sword is its “sharpness” not its weaponry. So yes, the Word penetrates to your own soul and spirit. If God’s Word is going to convict and confront, it must convict and confront the person reading it, or holding it, before applying it to others and should never be weaponized.

Secondly, when the time comes to address something in a person’s life, and that time will come, humility and compassion must be the tip of the spear. Paul tells the Galatians that when someone is caught in a sin, restoration is a gentle process (Gal. 6:1). It’s not about hurting the person with your plank or by the stone in your hand, but through weakness, compassion and understanding. No wonder Paul clarifies that the restoration process is led by someone spiritual.

The danger of a life lived as a critic is that it ultimately pits me against them. I’m the good and they’re the bad. And when that happens, we’re not only blinded to God’s will but we widen the gulf between each other, a gulf that was bridged by a lamb’s sacrifice.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e., only God is glorified!)

Posted on

Extreme Measures: The Cost of Discipleship

“If your right hand causes you to sin, cut if off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell” (Mt. 5:30).

I do not believe I’ve ever seen someone walking around without a hand who claimed they cut it off to save their soul. Most who read these verses in Matthew 5 lean more toward hyperbole interpretation and less to a literal one. In other words, Jesus isn’t really telling us to cut off our hands, because if he were, we’d have a bunch of people running around missing their hands. So if Jesus is not literally telling us to cut off our hands when we sin, what is he trying to tell us?

The Sermon on the Mount is Matthew 5-7, and many believe that these chapters comprise the essence or core of discipleship. I tend to agree with that assessment. I’ve also seen how moments in these chapters resurface later in Matthew’s gospel. In other words, these chapters are both key to Matthew’s gospel and to the Christian faith.

Matthew 5:30 is part of five illustrations where Jesus exposes the unrighteous behavior of the Pharisees’ so-called “righteousness” (5:20). The Pharisees may not have broken the 6th Commandment, but the hatred filling their hearts could have led to murder (5:21-26). They may not have physically broken the 7th Commandment, but they wanted to (5:27-32). They created acceptable rules and reasons for breaking one’s promise (5:33-37). They advocated personal revenge (5:38-42). And they justified hating their enemies (5:38-48). Jesus wasn’t attacking the Law, but he was attacking the way they bent the Law to excuse their sinful behavior.

So as Jesus addresses adultery (5:27-32), he is combatting a twisted view of Scripture that rationalizes lust as long as one never physically commits adultery. Nowhere in the Old Testament was God’s intent to create a venue for sin. That in and of itself stands against his own nature. Moses never told Israel that it was ok with God for you to be driven by lustful desires as long as you never act on them. For those who actually believed and/or taught such a premise, they neither knew nor understood God.

Some two thousand years have passed since Jesus gave these instructions, and we find ourselves almost a world away from his original audience. If we compare modern American society to ancient Palestine, the moral decline is shocking. Redefining modesty, marketing products with sex, lewd images at our fingertips and an entire industry driven by pornography produces millions of dollars a year. No wonder lust is a losing battle. That said, compared to some ancient Gecko-Roman cities, America’s battle with the explicit sexual images might still be seen as tame. Either way, it’s still a temptation to battle.

Jesus’ teaching on lust includes two strong messages often glossed over. First, lust has eternal consequences. The call to gouge out an eye or to cut off a hand is clearly hyperbole, though the damage lust does to the mind and heart cannot be understated. Studies are confirming that the dehumanization of women through pornography deteriorates the relationship between the husband and wife. By continuingly going into such a dark place creates a foothold for darker thoughts to prevail. So Jesus says to take extreme measures to ensure your heart remains pure, because more is at stake than a moment of pleasure: your very soul is at stake.

Secondly, take responsibility for your thoughts. Jesus clearly puts the burden of purity, not on the women, but on the men, “. . . anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in her heart” (Mt. 5:28). While modesty, as well as the messaging sent through dress, is an important discussion to have, the focus of this text is on the man. We have the power to look away and to stop the fantasy before it even starts.

I don’t believe I’ve ever seen an eye gouged out or a hand cut off as a preventive measure of stopping lust from taking hold. I did hear about Billy Graham ripping the cable cord from his hotel room to prevent him from succumbing to temptation. He confessed that he’d rather pay for the remodel job on the room than to discredit his ministry and vow to his wife. Maybe that’s the extreme measures Jesus had in mind.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e., only God is glorified!)

Posted on

Casting a Long Shadow: Discipleship’s Call to Carry A Cross

As I sat listening to the speaker address a room full of teenagers, I was mesmerized by his message. On the table before him were placed multiple types of crosses. A rugged six foot cross made from tree branches. A dainty necklace pendant. A table-top cross suitable for an executive desk. A bookmark with John 3:16 written on it. A decorative wall hanging with the name, Jesus, as the cross beam.

Referencing Luke 9:23, the speaker called the young people to pick up their cross and follow Jesus. One by one individuals from the audience came to the speaker, accepting the invitation with a desiring passion to pick up their cross. But when the speaker showed them which cross they had to bear – the one with their own name on it – none were willing to carry that cross. The petite girl wanted to wear the necklace, not carry the six foot cross; it was too heavy. The burly young man was hoping to muscle the big cross, but his name was attached to the book mark; he didn’t like reading. So one by one the individuals responded to the call, but they each wanted to pick their own cross. Each wanted to follow Jesus on their own terms.

And isn’t that where we live? We want to follow Jesus, as long as we set the conditions. We’re willing to give, but unwilling to sacrifice. We talk about forgiveness while harboring ill will toward individuals. We discuss submission scenarios while demanding our own way. We demand attendance to the assembly takes priority until it’s no longer prioritized in our lives; everything else in life takes precedent. We cry out for mercy, but demand justice when looking at others. We say we embrace humility while our pride stands in our way. We’ve convinced ourselves that we can gain the whole world and have Jesus at the same time. We’ll take up a cross as long as we get to choose which cross, when to carry it and where we’ll take it. When we do that, it’s not the cross we’re carrying, it’s just a shadow of the cross.

So the speaker continued his message, and refused to randomly hand out crosses that belonged to someone else. Fleshing out the Lukan context, he told us how Christ had to suffer and face a horrible death at the hands of the Jewish leadership. He then added the irony of those saving their lives will actually lose it, but those who lose their lives for Jesus will save it (Lk. 9:25). Jesus had to pick up his cross and he’s asking us to pick up ours. The speaker ended by reminding the audience that we don’t set the terms for discipleship, Jesus does.

I sat there enthralled by the message. Captivated. As a sixth grader I was still too young for the youth group. My presence at the assembly came because my home congregation was hosting the event and my mom was helping with the food. I sat on the floor next to mom as if I was sitting on the edge of a chair, soaking in every word being spoke. Some 40 years have passed but that moment is as clear in my mind as if it happened 40 days ago.

As the high school students rejected the cross, I remember thinking to myself, “I’ll carry it. I’ll carry the cross of Jesus! I don’t care what the cross looked like or felt like, I’m willing to carry any cross for Jesus.” That’s what was running through my mind, but something else was telling me that the message was preplanned. Those volunteering had rehearsed their roles to help drive home the speaker’s message. So I just sat there in my innocence, watching the events unfold before me. Secretly, I wanted to come forward to get my cross.

Sure enough, the same individuals relented and repented. One by one they came back to the speaker. Humbly and with contrition, they were willing to pick up the very cross that had their name on it. With broken pride, they claimed the cross Jesus wanted them to bear. They were now following Jesus, not on their terms, but on his terms.

While the messages ended with resolution, as it should, we live with the tension. Are we following Jesus on our terms or his? Maybe that’s why Luke adds the word “daily” (Lk. 9:23) to the charge to pick up your cross. For every day, and even every moment, we decided if our following Jesus is genuine or coming with conditions. One is substance. The other simply casts a long shadow on our discipleship.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e., only God is glorified!)

Posted on

T.H.I.N.K. Jesus

Social Media has devolved into an environment where people feel free to share whatever is on their mind without running their words through a filter. Instead of a safe playground to interact with friends, social media has become dangerous and toxic. Not all the time, mind you. But a good portion of the time. Anger. Frustration. Hatred. Divisiveness. Slander. Shaming. All of which fuel the woke/called-out culture. Like the meme says, “I’m just as surprised as you are by what comes out of my mouth.”

To counter, someone created the T.H.I.N.K. paradigm to help provide a filter, not only for social media but for all our words. The T.H.I.N.K. acronym asks five questions based on the letters for think.

Is It True? The erosion/corrosion of truth in our society is well documented and I won’t use space to rehash that now. However, even with good source material to fact check information, we seem to be more concerned with our own agenda and not seeking truth.

Is It Helpful? It’s one thing to post ideas and concepts for consideration. But a very thin line is present to post for simply to stir things up. Like lighting a fire cracker just to watch everyone’s reactions, some post to watch Social Media explode. Instead of helping move the story forward, it becomes a show in and of itself.

Is It Inspiring? If what is posted does not help people, then it’s safe to say that it won’t inspire either. When our emotions overtake us, and when we’re driven by negative feelings, what we say or post will not inspire anyone. When posting to stir the pot or for combative purposes, then driving a wedge between others is the only inspiration, and it’s not very inspiring.

Is It Necessary? The fact that one may need to hit the pause button before posting or speaking may be a big clue to stop forward progress. Since experience tells us that we will not move the ideological needle, then it’s like a futile experience.

Is It Kind? Maybe the biggest question to ask hits at the kindness meter. Since too much social media is filled with anything but kindness, maybe we need to make sure otherwise. Let’s find new ways to encourage one another online.

The five questions that help shape or shift our paradigm only work so far as we’re willing to stop to ask the questions, then honestly answer them. Sounds complicated, especially since rules may offer a guide to holy behavior, but they’ll never transform people’s lives. Something more needs to happen.

Paul exhorts the Philippians to have the mind or attitude of Christ (2:5). While contextually, he’s talking about humility and unity, the broader principle is for his followers to think and act like Jesus. Beyond a simple or mimic WWJD formula, Jesus calls us to be him to the public. So when we speak or post on social media the message beyond the post is the redeeming work of Jesus in our lives. We don’t add to the toxicity of social media, we try to allow Jesus to redeem it. Cheerful. Supportive. Respectful. Harmonious. Complimentary. Honor. Silence. For Jesus himself once posted, “You are the light of the world” (Mt. 5:16). It’s time to let it shine.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e., only God is glorified!)

Posted on

A Mountain Worth Dying On: When Choice Becomes Yours

Harry Truman. No, not the 33rd President of the United States Harry Truman, but the Harry Truman who owned a lodge on Spirit Lake at the base of Mt. St. Helens. Oh him. Yea, he became something of a local icon and celebrity during the months running up to the eruption of the mountain on May 18, 1980.

A veteran of World War I, a prospector and bootlegger by trade, Truman built and ran the Mt. St. Helens Lodge for fifty-two years. He was eighty-four years old when the volcano began showing signs of an eruption. When the US government evacuated all residences from the region, Truman refused to comply with the orders. He believed the threat was exaggerated as the mountain was a full mile from his lodge. More so, at his age, where would he go and what would he do? Truman tied his fate to the mountain.

A mountain worth dying on. Harry Truman was not the first to dig his heels into the ground and tie his fate to a mountain. He certainly won’t be the last.

Following the Roman invasion of Jerusalem, when Herod’s Temple was razed, nearly a thousand Jewish Zealots fled to the southern region of the Dead Sea. Escaping the terror, they sought refuge in one of Herod’s fortified palaces on top of a mountain. Slaughtering a garrison, they secured the fortress, Masada. However, three years later the Romans laid a three month siege to the fortress. They built a four hundred foot ramp to reach the gates, and once breached they found the Jewish dissidents had committed suicide. For these Jewish Zealots, given the choice of death, torture and captivity, Masada was a mountain worth dying on.  

Mountains, beyond the awe-inspiring view, are easily fortified and defended. An advancing army could be spotted miles away. When that army approached the holdout, they had an “uphill battle,” giving the advantage to those holding the mountain. From the spiritual viewpoint, mountains make us feel closer to God. Sacred places are often found on mountains, and religious encounters are referred to as “mountain top experiences.” Both military and spiritual aspect, it’s easy to see people finding a mountain worth dying on.

Mountains play an important role through the biblical narrative. Noah’s ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat (Gen. 8:4). Abraham is asked to sacrifice Isaac on Mt. Moriah (Gen. 22:2). Moses is called by God on Mt. Horeb (Ex. 3:1). Israel camps and receives the Law at Mt. Sinai (Ex. 19:1-20:21). Moses’s death is on Mt. Nebo overlooking the Promised Land (Deut. 32:48-52). David captures the Jebusite fortress on Mt. Zion to claim as his capital city (2 Sam. 5:6-7). Elijah staged the battle between YHWH and Baal on Mt. Carmel (1 King. 18:16-46), then fled to Mt. Horeb when he feared for his life (1 King. 19:1-9).

But as important as mountains are throughout the biblical story, not all are created equal. Not all mountains are worth dying on. If we created a mountain out of a molehill, it’s probably not a hill to fight, claim or give your life to. In Harry Truman’s case, I’m not sure it was a mountain worth dying on. The same might be said of the Zealots of Masada. Might. But that’s the point, right? Not all mountains are equal.

When Jesus called people to follow him, he was bold up front. He said, “Count the cost” (Lk. 14:28), in order to determine whether following him is cherished over the long haul. Jesus was headed up to a small mountain “knoll” that looked like a man’s bald head. There he would be crucified, executed for our sins. It was a mountain worth dying on, and he calls us to that mountain. But it’s our choice as to whether that knoll is a mountain worth dying on.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e. only God is glorified!)

Posted on

Jesus Calls Us

Jesus calls us to love,
Not to hate, resent, detest or to show hostility;
But to seek the best in the people we encounter.
We follow Jesus when we are devoted to each other.

Jesus calls us to sacrifice,
Not to hoard, grab, stockpile or to embrace selfishness;
But to let go of the very things we prize the most.
We follow Jesus when we are generous to each other.

Jesus calls us to forgive,
Not to hold grudges, to feed spite, to resent, or to seek retaliation;
But to bury the hatchet and letting it go.
We follow Jesus when we cancel the (spiritual) debt.

Jesus calls us to compassion,
Not to be calloused, coldhearted, uncaring or heartless;
But to feel the plight of those who endure the sting of living.
We follow Jesus when we suffer with others.

Jesus calls us to speak,
Not to shout, scream, bellow or yell in demeaning ways;
But to talk in calmness as a non-anxious person.
We follow Jesus when we refuse to keep silent.

Jesus calls us to truth,
Not to lie, fudge, manipulate, or distort reality;
But to line our words and life to the Plumb-line.
We follow Jesus when we embrace integrity.

Jesus calls us to faith,
Not to anxiety, fear, worry, and dread;
But to reach out to Jesus as he reaches out to us.
We follow Jesus when it’s so sweet to trust in him.

Jesus calls us to listen to him,
Not to society, to those voices who drown him out;
But to filter the white noise to hear him clearly.
We follow Jesus when it’s his voice we hear with precision.

Jesus calls us to hope,
Not to despair, despondency, dejection or to lose heart;
But to courageous expectation even in the midst of loss.
We follow Jesus when we anticipate God’s presence.

Jesus calls us to follow him,
Not to dictate the direction or to complain about the trail;
But to walk by faith and not by sight.
We follow Jesus when we stay on the path with him.

Jesus calls us to unity,
Not to divide and split, or pursue dissonance and partitions;
But to passionately seek what we hold in koinonia (i.e. common).|
We follow Jesus when we forgo partisan for oneness.

Jesus calls us to die,
Not to fight, demand, insist and require our own rights;
But willingly relinquish our privileges and claim to life.
We follow Jesus when we pick up our cross to shadow him. 

Jesus calls us,
Not in anger, disappointment, frustration or with regret;
But in soft, gentle and loving tones.
We follow Jesus when we answer his call.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e. only God is glorified!)

Posted on

Revsiting WWJD

The fad took over the late 90’s and still had legs into early 2000’s with its footprint still present today. Let’s be honest, it was kind of cool to walk into Walmart and see then name, Jesus, plastered everywhere (even if profiting off of Jesus’ name raises spiritual questions?). People were wearing t-shirts and bracelets, drinking from mugs with Jesus’ name on it, or his first initial. Two movies starring John Schneider and a hit song by Big Tent Revival sealed the legacy with the call letters, WWJD, all beginning its legacy in 1895.

Charles Sheldon was the author who wrote a book entitled, In His Steps. The fictional story takes place in the small community of Raymond whose world is turned upside down with a homeless man passing through their town. He had asked for help, but no one responded. Even Henry Maxwell, the minister for 1st Church of Raymond, dismissed his plea for help. Then on Sunday morning the man sat in church, and while telling his gripping story of homelessness he collapsed and passed away.

Henry Maxwell took the event personally. Driven back to Scripture, he landed in 1 Peter 2:21,

“To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you,
leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.”

Maxwell took that verse to exhort those willing to participate in an experiment. He challenged them to ask a simple question before making any decision, ‘What Would Jesus Do?” (WWJD) in your place, then follow through at best you can. The rest of the story explores how a handful of devoted followers answered the question and the impact it had on their lives and in their community.

Sheldon should be commended for posing the question and encouraging Christ’s disciples to follow him wholeheartedly. Certainly, simply asking WWJD is far better than never contemplating what it means to follow Jesus. But Sheldon’s premise is flawed for at least three reasons.

First, yes, Jesus lived a human life, but never in our shoes, thus making it difficult to determine how to answer so many questions. He never married. He never bought a car. He never went to college or even trade school. He never dealt with the fast food industry. He never had to vote for a politician. He never grew old. So when we ask the question, WWJD, we have to deal with guiding principles like love, forgiveness, compassion, serving and self-sacrifice to inform our decisions. The simple WWJD question ignores the deeper significance of actual discipleship.

Secondly, Sheldon interpreted much of the WWJD through the lenses of the Social Gospel. The Social Gospel addressed social issues of the day like poverty, alcohol, child labor, justice and race relations. Such issues needed and still need addressing as the church should never remain silent in such matters. But the movement was flawed, at least in part because it was rooted in the optimistic hope of the turn of the twentieth century: man wasn’t that bad and God wasn’t that mad (I borrowed that definition). Ultimately, the Social Gospel tried transforming society without transforming lives and it all unraveled when WWI broke out. Man really was that bad, and God must have been that mad.

Finally, Sheldon ignored much of the context of 1 Peter 2. How do you live in a society where you belong to a greater Master and are citizens of a greater Kingdom? What do you do when the government stands against you (2:13-17), your spouse is an unbeliever (3:1-7) and your master is mean spirited (2:18-25)?

Peter calls his readers to look at Jesus who refused to retaliate but absorbed the insults because he trusted God. And without a fad or self-martyr complex, that’s how you follow Jesus in his steps. That is Peter’s understanding of WWJD. In faith we live above board. When attacked, we never retaliate and never threaten. We trust God that his justice will prevail, even if it means we follow Jesus to the cross. And I believe such discipleship is far greater than a market scheme to wear a t-shirt.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e. only God is glorified!)