By Water and Blood

By Water and Blood

by | Mar 25, 2018 | Difficult Scriptures

Picture

Scripture in Focus: ​
​
“This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement”  (1 John 5:6-8).

These words of the apostle John are some of the most argued over verses in the Bible. What exactly do they mean?   There have been many suggestions as to exactly what the water and blood are by which Christ came, but the most agreed upon are the following two explanations:

The Sacrifice of Jesus

The blood and  water that flowed from Jesus’ side when his body was pierced by a Roman soldier after his death on the cross (John 19:34).    Understood this way, the water and blood of which John spoke would symbolically represent the blood and water involved in some of the Old Testament sacrifices (Leviticus 14:52:  “He shall purify the house with the bird’s blood, the fresh water, the live bird, the cedar wood, the hyssop and the scarlet yarn.”  Hebrews 9:19:  “he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people.” etc.). 

However, although the blood and water that flowed from Christ’s side may have symbolically fulfilled the blood and water aspect of the physical sacrifices, how would this apply to what John says in 1 John 5:6-8?  We should note that the order John gives in those verses is water and blood – not blood and water as in all the sacrificial related scriptures. Second, if this were the meaning John had in mind, why would he write that  Jesus “came” by the water and blood? In what sense could he have “arrived” after his death? And why would John add “He did not come by water only, but by water and blood.”?

The Baptism and Death of Jesus

The other major interpretation of what John wrote argues that the “water and blood” refer to the water of Jesus’ baptism in the River Jordan and the blood of his sacrifice on the cross. In this sense, the Son of God  could certainly be said to have “come” through these two events as they framed Jesus’ ministry from beginning to end. Remember that at both points Christ was declared to be the Son of God – by the heavenly voice at his baptism (Matthew 3:17), and by the testimony of the centurion at his death (Matthew 27:54).  Also, as John states, the Spirit of God testified to Jesus being the Son of God (1 John 5:7-8) a fact that applies far more to his complete ministry than to an isolated point after his death.

This understanding fits the order of words that John used – the water then the blood – and there is a historical reason why it is likely correct.  The epistle of John was written partly to combat emerging heretical ideas that taught the Son of God descended upon and entered the man Jesus at his baptism and then left him at the time of his arrest, so that it was only the physical Jesus who died.  John argues against these early gnostic teachings in many verses of his first epistle and his statement that Jesus came by water and blood makes total sense in this regard.

​John seems to argue that the work of the Son of God spanned the whole of his life from baptism to death – which is why he would stress: “He did not come by water only, but by water and blood” (vs. 6b). John’s point is that, contrary to false teachings, it was the Son of God who was baptized and who was crucified. In saying this, John counters the gnostic stress on “knowledge” of this false Jesus – which is why the apostle (stressing both knowledge and idols) concludes:

“We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true by being in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. Dear children, keep yourselves from idols” (1 John 5:20-21).

When Our Upset Becomes Our Downfall

When Our Upset Becomes Our Downfall

by | Mar 18, 2018 | Overcoming

Picture

“Be not quick in your spirit to become angry, for anger lodges in the heart of fools” (Ecclesiastes 7:9 ESV).
 
The Scriptures have much to say about times we become upset or angry, but this verse in the Book of Ecclesiastes summarizes much of the Bible’s wisdom on the subject. It’s a verse most of us know well, but one we often fail to understand or appreciate as fully as we might. We tend to remember the admonition as simply one of not becoming angry quickly, and that’s certainly part of what it is telling us.

But we should also notice the second half of the statement – that anger “lodges” or resides in the heart of fools. We all become upset and angry at times, but this does not mean we are all “fools” –  the point Ecclesiastes is making is that we are only fools if we allow the anger to “lodge” or stay within our hearts. The verse is actually contrasting two things that are both wrong – quickness to become upset and slowness or failure to release the anger.
These are, in effect, the two sides of the “coin” of anger, but while we might give a lot of thought and effort to not becoming angry, we don’t always drop the emotion as quickly as we should.  Humanly, once someone upsets us over something and anger takes hold within us, we tend to begin to justify it –  and the longer we let it “reside” in us, the more difficult it becomes to shake the emotion out.

Despite our best efforts, the truth is we cannot simply “bury” our feelings of anger or resentment. We can try, but feelings that are “buried alive” never really die.   Left within us, they take hold and begin to poison our attitudes and relationships.  Remaining upset at others usually ends up hurting them in some way, and always ends up hurting us.  The Bible contains many examples of this –  beginning with Cain who was upset with his brother (Genesis 4:5, 8) through Saul who was upset with David (1 Samuel 19:9) to Nabal (whose name, not coincidentally, means “fool”) who seems to have become upset with many people and his  wife in particular (1 Samuel 25:2-38).  In all these cases and many others, we see a pattern of individuals becoming upset in a way that led to their permanent downfall.

So it is not surprising that the Scriptures contain many commands and admonitions urging us not to allow ourselves to continue to be upset with someone.  It’s a command made in the Old Testament and reiterated in the New. The Book of Leviticus ties the command directly to the principle of love: “Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself…”(Leviticus 19:18). We cannot love someone if we allow ourselves to remain upset with them. From a biblical perspective, remaining upset is sin.  That is why the apostle Paul wrote “In your anger do not sin” before stressing “Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry” (Ephesians 4:26). People sometimes joke that not allowing the sun to go down on our anger allows individuals living at the North Pole a full six months to remain angry, but Paul’s point is clear, and it would be foolish to ignore it.
 
The Bible acknowledges that we may become angry – sometimes for very legitimate reasons –  but it continually stresses that we should never hold on to that anger, and that if we do, it inevitably leads to a spirit of unforgiveness that hurts us as much as others. That is also why we find the principle in Ecclesiastes 7:9 with which we began this post repeatedly echoed elsewhere in the Bible – as in the Book of Proverbs where we read: “Good sense makes one slow to anger, and it is his glory to overlook an offense” (Proverbs 19:11 ESV). Here, we see the two necessary sides of our response to anger –  we must be slow to anger, but also quick to drop it.  Failing to follow the second of these biblical principles is as dangerous as ignoring the first. If we do not want our upset to become our downfall, we must always put anger away quickly. 

* For more on anger management, see our post “When Your Fuse Burns Down” here.   

Does God Expect You to Be Perfect?

Does God Expect You to Be Perfect?

by | Mar 11, 2018 | Growth

Picture


“Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48).

One of the greatest misconceptions about God, even among many Christians, is that God expects us to be perfect – as he is – and is continually unhappy with us when we are not.  Jesus’ words “Be perfect…” from the Sermon on the Mount are so well-known that it is sometimes hard to see past what they are commonly thought to say to what they really mean.

To get a proper perspective on what God does expect of us, we must first look at Jesus’ words in context. In Matthew, Jesus clearly tells us to be perfect as God is perfect, but if we read the same account in the Gospel of Luke his words are recorded as “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful” (Luke 6:36).   Why the difference?  Both Gospels show in context that Jesus was talking about love (see Matthew 5:43-47 and Luke 6:27-35). Matthew’s Gospel stresses that our love should be perfect and Luke’s Gospel stresses that our love should be merciful – doubtless Jesus talked about both aspects of love. 
 
But when we look closely at the expression “Be perfect,” we see the situation even more clearly. The Greek word translated “perfect” in Matthew is a form of teleios which does mean “perfect,” but in the sense of being mature or complete.  Notice 1 Corinthians 14:20, for example, where we find: “Brothers and sisters, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be adults”– and the word “adults” is the word teleios.  In Hebrews 5:14 we find the same word translated mature: “… solid food is for the mature…”

In the context of love we find in Matthew 5:48 that Christ urged his followers to be mature and complete in their love – like God who is himself Love.  Only a few verses before saying “be perfect” Jesus had said: “But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven” (Matthew 5:44-45), once again showing we should be like God in our love.

Jesus’ statement in the Sermon on the Mount does not mean that God expects us to always be perfect. In fact, the New Testament shows repeatedly that God knows we cannot be perfect in every way (1 John 1:8-10). That is why God accepts Christ’s perfect life in place of ours, just as he accepts Christ’s death on our behalf (Romans 5:10).  But that does not mean that we need not strive in our own lives toward the goal of perfection (John 14:23-24) – as long as we realize that our efforts will never gain our salvation.  Our motivation for trying to be as perfect as possible must be our love of God.

This fact brings us full circle.  When we realize that God knows we cannot be perfect in this life, but that he does encourage us to grow up in him – to become more like him as we live each day –  we see God in better perspective. We see that the God of love has made a way for us to be perfect in his sight through Christ’s life in our stead.  But the God of love also offers to give us his love to enable us to continually grow to be more like him.
 
God does desire to see perfection in us, but he looks beyond us for that perfection.  God does not expect continued perfection in our own daily lives – just continued progress. The statement that we must “be perfect” is not a command to do the impossible, it is an encouragement to become mature in fulfilling God’s law of love (Romans 13:10, Galatians 5:14).

The Prophet Nathan: True Service through Tough Love

The Prophet Nathan: True Service through Tough Love

by | Mar 4, 2018 | History & the Bible, Service

The prophet Nathan served during the reigns of both King David and his son Solomon.  Although Nathan was usually “behind the scenes” during the reigns of these kings, it is probable that no other single person was more influential during that pivotal era of biblical history.

 

Nathan is mentioned many times throughout the Books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles – mainly during the darkest and most troubled times of King David’s reign. We first meet him in 2 Samuel 7:2 when David told the prophet about his desire to build a temple for God. At first Nathan encouraged the king, but later that night God spoke to Nathan, telling him in detail why he would not accept a temple built by David, stressing that David had shed much blood (1 Chronicles 28:3).
 
It was not a flattering message to have to relay, but we see something of Nathan’s character in that he did not attempt to smooth over the reason for God’s refusal of David (or to cover the fact that he himself had been wrong to originally encourage the king) – we are specifically told that “Nathan reported to David all the words of this entire revelation” (2 Samuel 7:17, emphasis added).

Later, Nathan had to confront David with the king’s sins of adultery with Bathsheba and of having her husband Uriah killed (2 Samuel 12:1-15).  Considering the fact that David had already killed to hide this situation, we see Nathan’s tremendous strength of character and faith in boldly accusing the king.  Nathan not only accused David as God had commanded him to do, but also predicted that David’s first child by Bathsheba would die, and that the king would suffer great anguish as a result of the actions of his own family members.

Close to the end of David’s life, Nathan related to David the news of his son Adonijah’s plan to seize the throne.  In this way the prophet skillfully enabled the hasty coronation of David’s chosen heir – Solomon. 
 
Nathan was not simply a bringer of bad news, however. He also encouraged the king and informed David that his throne would be established forever (1 Chronicles 17:1-15).  He was clearly a trusted advisor throughout his service to the king and a man of important accomplishments.  There appears to have been a book written either by Nathan himself or about his service as a prophet (1 Chronicles 29:29), and Nathan apparently wrote a history of King Solomon along with two other writers (2 Chronicles 9:29).

But Nathan’s major accomplishment was undoubtedly the faithful service he repeatedly gave in expressing tough love for David and confronting the king with his errors. Nathan’s character and faithfulness in conveying the word of God, no matter how negative the message sometimes may have seemed, obviously gained him the respect of Israel’s greatest king. True to his name (Nathan means “Gift from God”), the prophet surely was a gift to David in helping him to correct his course when he went astray (for example, Psalm 51) – something the king must surely have appreciated over time.
​
In fact, it is doubtless a sign of David’s deep respect and love for Nathan that the king named his third son after the prophet (1 Chronicles 3:5).  And it is through that Nathan – not Solomon or any of David’s other powerful sons – that Jesus Christ was descended (Luke 3:31).
​
The prophet Nathan served in a “behind the scenes” career, but one which had a tremendous effect for good.  He is an example to all of us of the value of service that includes, when it is needed, truth spoken in love for those we strive to serve.

Are You Confusing Trust with Forgiveness?

Are You Confusing Trust with Forgiveness?

by | Feb 25, 2018 | Forgiveness

Picture

​Everyone understands that trust and forgiveness are different things, yet it is easy to confuse them in actual life. Sometimes people feel that trust is part of forgiveness and that they must trust those they forgive.

In other situations people feel that although they should forgive, they do not ever need to trust the person again.

Both of these extremes can be wrong.  We always have to forgive, but we do not have to trust those who hurt us and show no sign they are sorry.  On the other hand, once we have forgiven we should strive to allow trust to be rebuilt whenever possible.  The difference lies in the fact that forgiving someone who has wronged us is our responsibility; reestablishing trust is most often the responsibility of the person who wronged us.

In real life, people get hurt repeatedly –  that fact was the basis for Peter’s question to Jesus: “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?” (Matthew 18:21). The problem is a very real one because humanly, repeated wrongs done against us can make forgiveness progressively harder. That is why Peter suggested we only forgive up to seven times –  a “manageable” number of wrongdoings.   Jesus’ answer, of course, was that we must not put a limit on the number of times we forgive someone (Matthew 18:22).  But his answer has no application to staying in a situation where we would continue to get hurt if that is avoidable.  Nor does it mean that we should trust the wrongdoer if it would be unwise or dangerous to do so. Remember again the Scripture’s counsel: “The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it.”  This clear wisdom is expounded twice in the Bible (Proverbs 22:3; 27:12) for a reason. 
 
Not understanding these basic truths prevents many people from restoring relations after forgiving those who have hurt them and causes many others to suffer unnecessarily when they do. In his book The Purpose Driven Life, Rick Warren says: “Many people are reluctant to show mercy because they don’t understand the difference between trust and forgiveness. Forgiveness is letting go of the past. Trust has to do with future behavior.”  Warren is surely correct in this, for while forgiving must be immediate on our part, trust must be rebuilt over time and depends on the behavior of the one forgiven. As Warren puts it, trust requires a track record: “If someone hurts you repeatedly, you are commanded by God to forgive them instantly, but you are not expected to trust them immediately…” Our forgiveness of others must always be unconditional, but our trust of others can and often should be conditional – it has to be earned.
 
Forgiveness doesn’t mean we have to see change in the other person in order to forgive them – that would be an entirely wrong approach. We must forgive whether an individual changes or not. But we need not trust them if they have not changed. Trust develops slowly – and it must be remade over time.  Think of the example of Jesus asking Peter three times, “do you love me?” (John 21:15-17) after Peter’s betrayal. Peter had failed Jesus three times, of course (John 18:15-27), and perhaps there is a lesson in Christ’s repeated questions that we should see recurrent or ongoing evidence of change before we fully trust again. 

A simple analogy is that being hurt by another is like receiving a cut to our body.  Forgiving the person acts like the stitches that close our wound, but spiritual and emotional healing, just like physical healing, still require time. Even when we fully understand the difference between granting forgiveness and trust, we must always remember that allowing time for trust to be repaired does not mean allowing ourselves a period of time to brood, feel sorry for ourselves, or to allow resentment or anger to continue to develop. That would be like allowing an infection to take hold in the cut that should be healing. Granting ourselves time to trust again should always be based on our complete and unhindered forgiveness of the other person –  that is the only way we will, in fact, heal. 
  
We should always be open to allowing trust to be rebuilt whenever this is possible. Forgiveness is a possession we all have that we are able to give to others. But trust is not a possession, it is a process that we allow to develop once our forgiving makes trust possible again.

* Exerpted from our new free e-book How to Forgive. You can download a copy here.