Three Tests of Our Religion

Three Tests of Our Religion

The apostle James uses the word “religion” in a specific sense.  Rather than meaning religion in the sense of the body of beliefs we hold (as in “the Christian religion”), James uses religion to mean what we do about our beliefs (as in “he practices his religion”).

The verse most of us remember in this context is found in the first chapter of James’ epistle: “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world” (James 1:27).

But this verse, so often quoted in isolation (or marked in our Bibles that way) is actually only part of James’ teaching on this subject.  When we read James 1:27 in context we see that his thought actually begins in the verse before this one:  “Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless” (James 1:26).

Now, if we read these verses together – as we should – we find something interesting:  that James is giving us not two, but three distinct tests of our religion or personal religious practice.  First (in verse 26), he gives us the test of speech. James does not give us any specific examples here; he just tells us plainly that religion that is not worthless involves control of our speech – whether it be the restraint of negative or impure speech or the use of positive uplifting speech.

Next (in verse 27), James tells us that religious behavior that God accepts includes good deeds. Here, he does give a specific example – to look after orphans and widows in need.  But the principle is obviously a broad one of which this is just an example. The care for orphans and widows clearly represents our actions toward everyone in need – our willingness to act on our religious beliefs on their behalf.

Finally (in the second half of verse 27), James tells us that religion acceptable to God also includes keeping oneself from being “polluted by the world.”   Here again James does not give any specific example of what he has in mind, but we can gain insight into his meaning by comparing this verse with what the apostle says later in this same letter: “You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world means enmity against God? Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God” (James 4:4).

Here, James is also talking about the problematic ways in which the wrongful aspects of the world around us can influence us negatively.  Although this influence can affect our actions and words, interestingly it is our thoughts that James has in mind here. We see this from what James says directly before verse 4: “What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you?  You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want” (James 4:1-3).

So the setting of James 4:4 has to do with our thoughts and attitudes. That means that the three tests James gives us in James 1:26-27 are, respectively, tests of what we say, do, and think.   Thinking, saying and doing embrace most of what we are as individuals, of course, and James makes the point that our religion, if it is to be true, must involve all three –  the behavior of the mind, the tongue, and the hand: our thoughts, words and deeds. 

But the wording James uses is particularly important because he stresses that no matter how good our religion may be in one of those areas, it is meaningless if it is not matched in the others.  James tells us that it doesn’t matter what good deeds we do if our thoughts or words are not also right; it is of no importance if our thoughts and words are right, but our deeds do not follow through.  All three must be right. 

These combined tests of what constitutes true religion should give us all pause.  It is only as we analyze our own behavior in all three areas and ensure that, with God’s help, we are living out our religion in all of them* that we will pass the tests James gives us.
 
*See our article on the surprising order of importance the Bible gives to words, thoughts, and deeds here

A Balanced Prescription for Self-Worth

A Balanced Prescription for Self-Worth

 
Self-esteem is a “hot item” these days.  For several decades we have been told that a strong concept of self-worth is absolutely vital for mental health and wellbeing.  As a result, most Western educational systems now focus on the early development of self-esteem above many, if not most, other goals. 

Unfortunately, the unmodified stress on self-esteem from early childhood onward all too often leads to a false sense of accomplishment. As psychotherapist Jennifer Coon-Wallman has written, the purpose of many school programs is simply “to dole out huge heapings of praise, regardless of actual accomplishment.

Worse yet, in recent years it has become clear that an unbalanced sense of self-esteem invariably leads to the development of self-centeredness and to social problems that result from that flawed view of the world.  As a New York Times article pointed out as far back as 2002:  “Last year alone there were three withering studies of self-esteem released in the United States, all of which had the same central message: people with high self-esteem pose a greater threat to those around them than people with low self-esteem, and feeling bad about yourself is not the cause of our country’s biggest, most expensive social problems.”

It is not that a concept of self-worth is somehow bad, but that self-esteem by itself is not good.  We must be able to balance that concept in order to properly see ourselves in perspective, to properly relate with others, and for society to function properly. 

Interestingly, we see this necessary balance in the Biblical story of the first humans.   The first chapter in the Bible’s first book, Genesis, tells us: “ … God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them” (Genesis 1:26), and this should give us all the fuel we may need for the development of a healthy self-concept.  If we believe what this verse plainly says, we can all rest assured that we are of great worth by virtue of our very nature and that we do not need some kind of fake praise to create an artificial and skewed self-esteem.

On the other hand, the very next chapter of Genesis tells us, with equal clarity: “… dust you are and to dust you will return” (Genesis 2:19).  If knowing that we are the work of the very Creator of the universe is ever a temptation to pride and inordinate self-esteem, this verse quickly puts things in perspective. Knowing that at our very best we are still merely dust that comes and goes like a transient vapor (Psalm 39:5) should prevent us from taking too high a view of ourselves.

In that sense, the story of the creation of humans as recorded in Genesis carries with it a built-in and balanced self-worth prescription that both elevates and restrains our concept of ourselves at the same time.  According to the Bible, both statements – that we are as gods (John 10:34) and that we are as nothing (Galatians 6:3) – are equally true.  Both statements are also equally necessary for individual and social well-being. 

Perhaps some of us need to focus more on one aspect of self-image than on the other, or perhaps we all need to focus on both aspects according to our current state of mind.   When we feel pretty pleased with ourselves or our achievements, it does not hurt to remember that we are still dust, but when we are afflicted by self-doubt and feelings of unworthiness it is always good to remember that we are children of God created for his purposes. 

Simplistic as it may sound, it’s a dual prescription that can prevent arrogance and pride on the one hand and discouragement and depression on the other.  It’s a balanced prescription for the attitude we all need if we are to gain and maintain the kind of self-identity God intends us to have. 

The Story of Ananias: Faith over Fear

The Story of Ananias: Faith over Fear

Acts 9 tells the story of the conversion of Saul, one of Christianity’s greatest early enemies, to Paul – one of the faith’s greatest servants.  The chapter not only tells us that Saul was “breathing out murderous threats” against the early disciples, but also that he was hunting them down and commiting them to prison. 

​As Saul neared Damascus, however, intending to find Christians in that city, Acts tells us that the resurrected Jesus appeared to him, commanded him to go into the city and to wait till he was told what he must do. The account says that for three days Saul was blind, and did not eat or drink, but prayed. Saul’s level of repentance was clearly as deep as humanly possible (Acts 9:1-9).

But that’s the story as we know it, from our perspective – in safe hindsight.  Now think about the story from the perspective of Ananias – a Christian living in Damascus who was well aware of the destruction Saul was wreaking on the faith:

“In Damascus there was a disciple named Ananias. The Lord called to him in a vision, ‘Ananias!’ ‘Yes, Lord,’ he answered. The Lord told him, ‘Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight’” (Acts 9:10-12). 

It’s difficult to imagine how that instruction really felt to Ananias, but we get a glimpse of his reaction in his reply:

“‘Lord,’ Ananias answered, ‘I have heard many reports about this man and all the harm he has done to your holy people in Jerusalem. And he has come here with authority from the chief priests to arrest all who call on your name.’ But the Lord said to Ananias, ‘Go! This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel’” (Acts 9:13-15).

I think we have to put this in modern terms to even begin to understand the situation. Suppose you were a Jew living in hiding in World War II Europe, and God told you to go meet one of the highest ranking officers of the SS or the Gestapo.  Imagine you lived in Soviet Russia, or today in North Korea, where Christians are routinely executed, and were told to go help the head of the secret police responsible for eliminating Christians.  But look at Ananias’ response:

“Then Ananias went to the house and entered it. Placing his hands on Saul, he said, ‘Brother Saul, the Lord – Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here – has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.’ Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul’s eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized” (Acts 9:17-18).

We read over those last few words telling us that Saul “got up and … was baptized,” but imagine Ananias’ feelings waiting to see exactly what Saul would do once his sight was restored. Was this just a trap?  What would Saul do next?  The obedience and faith that Ananias demonstrated in going to Saul and helping to restore his sight were incredible, to say the least. It was an act of faith and bravery equivalent to helping a lion out of a trap. And notice one more detail about the way in which Ananias did this.  It may seem like a small detail until you think it through, but the extent of Ananias’ faith was such that the man not only obeyed God’s instruction, but also fully accepted his enemy by addressing him with the words “Brother Saul.”  The level of Ananias’ faith is seen again toward the end of Acts 9 which records that after his conversion Saul returned to Jerusalem, and that:

“When he came to Jerusalem, he tried to join the disciples, but they were all afraid of him, not believing that he really was a disciple” (vs. 26).  Ananias not only accepted God’s word in faith while it was still unclear what Saul’s intentions were, but also he accepted Saul as a brother.

Ananias is one of the many individuals who, although not mentioned by name in the great “Faith Hall of Fame” found in Hebrews 11, can nevertheless be included in the “all these” mentioned in verse 39 – the many others who are  worthy of inclusion in that honor roll of faith.

Watchful and Thankful

Watchful and Thankful

The apostle Paul begins and ends his letter to the Colossians on the subject of prayer.  He begins his epistle speaking about how he prayed for the Colossian believers (Colossians 1:3, 9) and ends, directly before the personal greetings that appear at the close of his letter, with a final counsel to his readers on how they themselves should pray: “Devote yourselves to prayer, being watchful and thankful” (Colossians 4: 2).

Military Expressions

To see Paul’s full meaning in this exhortation it helps to understand that here, as in several other places in his letter to the Colossians, he uses military expressions.  In the second chapter of the epistle, for example, Paul says that he is delighted to see “how disciplined you are and how firm your faith in Christ is” (Colossians 2:5).  Here, the word translated “disciplined” is a military term meaning literally to stand “shoulder to shoulder” as in a battle grouping, and the word “firm” means having a solid, immovable front, like a tight battle formation.

In the same way, when Paul writes that we should be “watchful and thankful” in prayer, he returns to this underlying military motif.  The idea of being “watchful” connotes the alertness and vigilance of a sentry on duty, a soldier standing guard at his post, or a watchman on a city’s walls or guarding a city gate.  

There is a lesson for us in Paul’s use of this term.  It brings to mind words of Isaiah from the Old Testament: “I have posted watchmen on your walls, Jerusalem; they will never be silent day or night. You who call on the Lord, give yourselves no rest, and give him no rest …” (Isaiah 62:6-7).

We do not know if Paul had these words in mind when he instructed the Colossians to devote themselves to being “watchful” in prayer, but the intent of both writers is identical.  Isaiah and Paul both make it clear that our prayer is to be continually active and that we should be constantly alert to our own needs and the needs of others.  This is the opposite of unfocused, ritual, or occasional prayer – it is specific, situational, and constant. Isaiah makes this last aspect particularly clear in telling us that we should give ourselves no rest (just like a guard on duty) and even that we should give God no rest!  Paul makes the same point in Colossians 4:2 less poetically, but just as clearly, in stressing that we should “devote” ourselves – a word meaning “to continue without stopping” – to this kind of watchful prayer. 

The Two Halves of Prayer

The apostle then proceeds to say that we should show that we are thankful. For Paul the activities of being watchful and thankful cannot be separated – they are two parts of the same activity of prayer just as inhaling and exhaling are two parts of breathing.   We already saw that Paul continually thanked God for the Colossians in his own prayers (Colossians 1:3) and now he shows that they too should give thanks.  The implication is that we should be no less alert to the things for which we should give thanks – whether they are blessings we or others have received. Nevertheless, Pauls’ stress in this verse is primarily on our own needs and thanks, as he adds, in the very next verse, “And pray for us, too … (Colossians 4:3).

Colossians 4:2 also indicates that our thanksgiving should be constant.  Just as Paul wrote that he and those with him “always thank God … when we pray for you” (Colossians 1:3), so now he implies the same continuity of giving thanks that we saw in his command to “devote” ourselves to asking for our needs.

Although our prayer should be set within praise and other aspects of interaction with God (see our free e-book on prayer), Paul shows in Colossians 4:2 that the two central aspects of prayer are in fact simply asking and thanking.  The two cannot be separated and they form, together, the core of our relationship with God himself.  Asking and thanking are not only the two aspects of prayer that Paul shows we must do, but also – and equally important –  the two things we must do continually.
 
* You can download our free e-book on prayer here.

Was Jesus Really a Carpenter?

Was Jesus Really a Carpenter?

Picture

Although most of the world thinks that before beginning his ministry Jesus Christ was “the Carpenter of Nazareth,” biblical scholars know that it is not at all certain that Jesus was a carpenter. In fact, there are a number of reasons why he probably did not follow that profession, and why he most probably was a skilled worker of a different type.

Before looking at the evidence for the profession Jesus most probably followed, consider the reason that most people presume he was a carpenter.   There is one verse – and one only – in the whole New Testament that directly links Jesus to carpentry.

The Gospel of Mark tells us that when he spoke in their synagogue the people of Jesus’ home-town of Nazareth angrily exclaimed: “Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us? …” (Mark 6:3). The Gospel of Matthew records the statement a little differently: “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?” (Matthew 13:55). This is not a direct statement that Jesus was a carpenter, although if his father was one it would be likely in that culture that Jesus would have followed the family profession.

But this is presuming that the Greek word used in these verses actually means “carpenter.”  In actuality, the word used by both Matthew and Mark was tekton which can mean someone who works with wood but can also signify what we today would call a contractor or house builder.  There is nothing in the immediate context of the two texts that can help us decide which meaning of tekton better fits the profession of Jesus, and we must look at the broader evidence of the New Testament in order to make an educated decision on this.

First, we should consider the fact that it is odd if Jesus made his living for thirty years as a carpenter making furniture or other items out of wood, that there is not a single example in his recorded teaching that uses an analogy or example from the carpenter’s trade.  On the other hand, it is interesting that all the Gospels record Jesus’ continual use of building in his teaching: his  comment on the stone wall that fell down (Luke 13:4), his story of the rich man who built a barn (Luke 12:16-21), the vineyard owner who built a wall (Matthew 21:33), the individual wanting to build a tower (Luke 14:28-30), the individual who built his house on rock as opposed to sand (Matthew 7:24-27), etc.  In fact, the Gospels contain more examples of Jesus using stories based on building than any other single activity.  So when we find one of the disciples commenting to Jesus on the impressive nature of the stones of the temple (Mark 3:1), it is in a way that would be very natural if he were a builder and interested in such aspects of building.

Archaeology also can contribute to our understanding of the possibility Jesus’ trade was actually that of a builder rather than a carpenter.  Good wood was scarce in Judea and was usually imported from Lebanon and too expensive for use by local populations in areas such as Nazareth.  On other hand, good building stone was readily available and even poorer homes were usually built of stone.

As it happens, Nazareth was only three miles from the town of Sepphoris, which was the focus of an intensive building program instituted during the reign of King Herod Antipas (c. 4 BC- AD 39) throughout Jesus’ lifetime.  Herod chose the site as the capital of his government and, as a result of his building projects, this lakeside town became the largest city in the region and was described as “the jewel of all Galilee” by the Jewish historian Josephus.  Importantly, its development doubtless required the involvement of every available tekton in the surrounding area.   So it is extremely likely that both Joseph and Jesus could have worked on this project which needed so many skilled builders.  Sepphoris was a reasonable “commute” from Nazareth and the road between them actually passed by a large rock quarry where most of the stone needed for building the town was obtained.

If Jesus was, in fact, a builder rather than a carpenter, then many of the things said about him in the New Testament may take on an additional layer of significance. When Jesus told the Jews regarding himself that “… The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone…’” (Luke 20:17–18 quoting Psalm 118:22), we may see an analogy that would have especially appealed to Jesus.  It was this thought that came to mind when the apostle Peter spoke of Jesus before the religious leaders of Jerusalem: “This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone…” (Acts 4:11).  In Peters’ first epistle he also writes: “you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:5). Although we might expect Peter to say that believers were being built into a spiritual temple, the word oikos that he uses primarily means a regular dwelling house.

None of this proves that Jesus was a builder rather than a carpenter.  But when we compare the relative lack of carpentry work to the great demand for builders during his lifetime in the very area in which he lived,  the lack of carpentry analogies compared to the many building references in the teaching of Jesus, and perhaps even the  later New Testament spiritual references to Jesus in the context of building, it seems quite likely that Jesus was not a carpenter, but a builder.