BEING A CHRISTIAN

When I was young and single – youth group age, I guess – I often found myself engaged in a discussion around a dilemma felt by many then and, I suspect, many still today.  A youth camp, a conference, or perhaps a bible study series often led to the feeling that you didn’t want that special time to end.  It seemed that God was especially close; that real christian love for those around you flowed easily and abundantly; that growth toward spiritual maturity was in turbo mode; that you can do or withstand just about anything.

Inevitably, the time would come to an end and we all returned to ‘normal life’.  The cares of the world came crashing in; the demands of school, employment and family took over once again and made you somewhat testy; love was harder and in shorter supply; friends had their problems demanding your time and attention.  I’ll leave you to add your own sentences to the story.

Again inevitably, thought – and discussion – would turn to this dilemma.  Why does this happen?  What can we do about it?  What should we do about it?  What is ‘normal life’?  Still again inevitably, some would emerge on the side of the discussion that emphasised family and social responsibility as ordinary, and spiritual responsibility as extraordinary.  Others came down on the side of the discussion that suggested that our ‘spiritual worship’ responsibility (as in Romans 12:1-2) is what life is about and our other responsibilities have a lower priority.  We would remind ourselves of Jesus’ teaching to “seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness...”

Exhortations would start, reminding people of the ‘glory’ of those times and stirring people up not to ‘lose’ what we had.  Then reminders would come – sometimes quite harshly – that we had family, employment and social responsibilities that must not be neglected.
The dilemma and the tension it created would even bring on bouts of depression and sadness, disappointment and anger.  For me, these were not so much about losing what we had or missing the ‘glory’ of those times.  The depression and disappointment were more about the fact that being in the presence of God in fellowship with loved friends created a dilemma in the first place.  This was for me one of the great curiosities of life.  What was going on?  Did God have an interest in our dilemma?  You could use bible verses to back up whatever position you thought about.  The dilemma, the curiosity, and the search for answers have never left me.

###

Another thing I remember from those earlier years of my life is a curious saying.  As a young person, I was never very sure or confident about it, but I heard it periodically and it was said with considerable conviction.  You’re too heavenly minded to be of much earthly use.  Over the years, my uncertainty about it has only increased.

 

At the time, it seemed to convey the idea that one should not get overly excited or involved in cultivating a christian life – in being a christian; or, if you’re going to, join the clergy – become a minister, a pastor, a priest or a missionary.  It seemed to me that what we were learning is that there are two levels of being a christian: one for ‘ordinary’ folks and one for extraordinary folks.

 

 girlfriend I once had added to my puzzlement – and, I have to say, to my determination – when she described me as a fanatic.  That term has a different meaning now.  The idea of the religious fundamentalism we know of today hadn’t taken root.  Today, these fundamentalists are often called fanatics, but that wasn’t the meaning then.  To my girlfriend, I was one whose goal in life was to serve and love God and the other matters of life could fall in behind that.  I wasn’t really interested in the more common pursuits of my generation, so she called me a fanatic.

 

Now thirty years older, looking back yet still curious, I have come to the conclusion that the great divide among christians is indeed the divide between ordinary and extraordinary; between laity and clergy; between pew-sitter and preacher.  And this has raised a huge dilemma: are they all christians?  If so, doesn’t that mean there are grades of being a christian?  And the irony for me is that I have actually lived this dilemma.  I tried the pastor, minister, missionary thing and couldn’t do it; but still, by the definition of many, I was and am a ‘fanatic’ – too heavenly minded to be of much earthly use.

 

You know what I think?  I think the ‘too heavenly minded’ thing is not only stupid, it is an insult: an insult to many human beings and an insult to God.  I think the real problem is best understood by turning the saying inside out: too earthly minded to be of any heavenly use.  That’s the problem I see all around me.

 

We can all make time for the affairs and the cares of the world but the world is a fading vapour.  We tend to fit God into a compartment in our life and convince ourselves that is being a christian.  We are steadily bombarded with messages of an alleged need to “join the real world” as if this momentary puff of life is the real world and the unseen ‘eternal’ world that we humans fall out of and fall back into is unreal.  We advertise a ‘University for the real world’ selling degrees in business, marketing, information technology, law, etc., knowing full well that the so-called real world of today will be overtaken by a new real world tomorrow.

 

Perhaps the great apostle Paul was onto something when he wrote in the first century AD. He wrote to the Corinthians: “we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.”  And he affirms to the Colossians: “For by Him [Jesus] all things were created, in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible [or seen and unseen], whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him.”

For most of my adult life, it has been part of my world-view that the unseen or invisible things in our universe and frame of reference vastly outnumber the seen or visible things.  To my mind, all the forms of knowledge that I acquire and live with – intellectual, experiential and intuitive – confirm this vast differential.  So, for me, God is the big picture – infinity actually – and what I am constantly being told is the ‘real world’, is just a small compartment within that.  To me, the most earthly-useful people are those with a ‘heavenly’ (eternal or infinite) perspective and paradigm.

###

 Another thing I remember from my teen and young adult days is the testimonies.  Young people might not be out there ‘preaching the gospel’ but you sure can give your testimony.   A testimony is a story of your conversion to Christ – of becoming a christian.  We were told clearly that a testimony contained three parts: the first part was what your life was like ‘before’; the second part was how you were converted (preferably measured by a date in time); the third part was what your life is like ‘after’.  It seemed to me a bit like selling a roof restoration or a weight loss program, complete with before and after snaps.

My problem – and the reason I wasn’t asked to give my testimony very often – was that my before and after snaps seemed to be the wrong way round.  I was the nice, good, well-behaved kid, but my ‘after’ snaps put me at odds with many people because I was such a different person.  I wasn’t a bad boy who became a good boy – the testimony people wanted to hear.  Neither was I a good boy who became a bad boy – that testimony doesn’t count.  I simply didn’t fit the mould – still don’t!

It works for me if I describe it as God taking something bland and turning it into a surprise.  He took white rice and made a gourmet meal.  How did He do that?  He put Himself into me.  He changed, He subtracted, He added and He augmented – and He turned me into … well, ME.

In the language of the computer age, He performed a ‘warm’ system re-boot: Ctrl+Alt+Del.

His transformation of my life was by means of the Holy Spirit doing at least three things.  The grace of God brought my life under the control [Ctrl] of God: the will of the Father; the power of the Spirit; and the persistence and patience of the Son.  And in order to finish what He began, the Holy Spirit set about the work of bringing necessary alternative [Alt] ideas and responses into my life and deleting [Del] from my life what is unhelpful, destructive and repulsive.

And He did it all by love.  He did it to me when I was a boy, but as a man I can describe it much better.  I describe his love for me as showing me honour, respect and trust, though I didn’t understand it that way when I was eleven.  Love so amazing so divine / Demands my soul, my life, my all.  So wrote Isaac Watts.  So is my life.

My testimony is that I am not a fluke – a hiccup in human history.  In the words of prophet Isaiah, “before I was born the Lord called me; from my birth he made mention of me … He formed me in the womb to be His servant … and I am honoured in the eyes of the Lord.”  He took what, to some, was a weak and sick child and “…made me into a polished arrow and concealed me in His quiver.”

Therefore, to me, being a christian is not about being a good boy – about changed behaviour; it’s about being a servant, about being His polished arrow, about giving my soul, my life, my all to honour, respect and trust Him; it’s about changed character.  That’s how He loved me, and that love won my heart and changed my life – whether you like it or not!  I’m not always happy about my new life because there are some things that are contrary to the preferences of my old nature.  But love wins – and love covers a multitude of errors.

###

These days, one of my favourite sayings is, “christian is a noun, not an adjective.”  I hear people talk about being christian, not ‘a christian’, as if it is a matter of religious preference.  Me?  I don’t use the term ‘christian’ much these days – unless I’m writing something like this, of course.  For one, the term has about as many definitions as there are people on the planet.  But, more importantly, the term has all but lost the meaning given to it by the first true christians.

You might even be asking why I don’t start the word with a capital ‘C’ when I write it.  When we can agree on its original and true meaning, I will be happy to use the capital C.  Christian can mean everything I have written here; it can also mean none of it.  It can mean purely and simply the system that stands alongside of Muslim, Hindu, Jew, etc. as a choice.  It can mean a set of ideas, dogmas and rules or the absence of these.  Or it can mean the revolutionary, kingdom truth of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ of God.

The only way a person can be christian is to be ‘a christian’ – a changed person; and the only way to be a christian is for the Christ (from whom the word is derived) to be master and commander, lover and beloved of that changed person.  One of the original Christians, Apostle Paul, uses the expression ‘Christ in you’ and that is one of the best definitions we can use.  And if Christ is in you, He has won your heart and you are being changed into His character – uniquely, irrevocably.

Some say a christian is a person who has said a particular prayer or type of prayer.  Some say a christian is a person who attends ‘christian’ meetings in ‘christian’ buildings.  Some say a christian is a person who follows the rules and principles of the bible, particularly the old testament.  Some say a christian is a person who tries to emulate the teachings of Jesus.  Some say a christian is a person who lives in a country whose system of government and laws follows the traditions of a supposed ‘Judeo-christian’ ethic.

According to the bible, the first Christians were the ‘fanatics’ of Jesus’ day who were changed in their character by the love of Jesus the Christ.  No religion; no tradition; cultural revolutionaries; outside the system; setting people free.  By contrast, today’s christians are largely not fanatics; they are changed in behaviour (rather than character) by peer pressure; they have religion and tradition; they are cultural conservatives living in the system and trying to tie people into various parts of that system; all the while trying to ‘keep the rabble in line’ and not upset the boat.

By contrast, the model of the Christ was: “step out of the boat”! [See next blog post.]

Generalisation?  Of course.  But nonetheless true in large dollops.  And apart from anything else, it proves the point that christian can mean whatever we want it to mean for whatever purpose we propose.  Christian is repeatedly used as an adjective without any attempt to define or even describe what is intended: christian nation; christian values; christian school etc.

Jesus didn’t live and die and rise again to make naughty people civil and well behaved – even though that could be the logical conclusion from looking at what passes as christian.  He lived, died and rose again to set people free – absolutely free – from our hostilities, our guilt and all forms of bondage, including religion.  Whether that freedom is opposed or supported by the world system, it is what being a Christian is all about.

The love that sets us free (as it was for me years ago) is the source of the love that we give back to Him and is the same love that sets our families, friends and neighbours free.  “For freedom Christ has set us free.  Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.” (Apostle Paul writing to Galatians in the first century)

###

Like ‘christian’, ‘religion’ is another misunderstood and misused word.  It has come to mean many many things but, in the process, lost its root meaning.  Literally, the word means the process of ‘tying up again’ or ‘re-binding’ (from Latin).

The first christians were those who followed the Christ.  They were called this by the society of their day some of whom spoke with a certain contempt for them and what they stood for.  They stood for freedom – what else would one expect?  A contest between religions can be argued.  But theirs was no contest between religions; it was a contest between religion and freedom.  By (original) definition, religion is how you undo freedom and freedom is how you undo religion.

For far too long, ‘christians’ have peddled a story of polite bondage while saying they were preaching a gospel of freedom.  Neither they nor their converts are christians by Christ’s definition; they are acting more like Pharisees.

Governments and civil authorities of the day – as also in our day – survive by ‘keeping the rabble in line’.  The first christians were ‘rabble’ to all forms of authority and before a few centuries had passed (persecution only serving to embolden the Christians) another method had to be found to quell the rabble’s freedom.  In exchange for status, money, property rights and protection, ‘christian leaders’ agreed to quell the rabble’s freedom by a process of institutionalisation.  Religion is not a particular philosophy or type of philosophy; it is the process of quelling people’s freedom, binding them up again.  The philosophy behind it can be theological or political or both.

Today, the institutions created nearly 2,000 years ago hold sway.  It is now a common belief that to be a christian, one has to be connected to one institution or another, otherwise you are in rebellion against God.  It seems that few stop to think and ask whether the founder, Jesus the Christ, is still a rebel.  Which institution would Jesus choose?  Ummmmm?  And if He is a rebel and God is Three in One and One in Three, that makes God a rebel by our standard.  Argh!!!

What we end up with is worship of a god made in the image of man.  Somewhat ironic, don’t you think?  Man, made in the image of God, worshipping a god made in the image of man.  Man is the Emperor and God is his subject!  We get to define God (often scientifically) but He is not allowed to define us – that’s too unscientific!  Clearly we have no idea of the meaning of the word ‘God’.

What this suggests to me is that being a christian – by the standard of Jesus and the first christians – involves standing clear of that which binds up again: ‘religion’.  (See Galatians 2:4.)  One could legitimately translate Galatians 5:1 as ‘For freedom Christ has set us free, stay away from religion’ (religion being ‘burdened again by a yoke of slavery’).

And on a more positive note, being a christian is being set free, by the love of the Christ who lives within, from our hostilities, our guilt and all our bondages.  We are bound to none except to Jesus the Christ, the Lord, and by him to all others in the same condition.  We are not bound to any institution – neither should we be.  And if we are going to take Jesus seriously, we have a two-pronged obligation of love: love God with all our being; love those around us as we intend to love ourselves.

Peter, James, Jude and Paul – four first-century apostles of Jesus – all counted themselves willingly as “bond-servants” of God and of His Christ, Jesus of Nazareth.  For them, being a Christian meant a lifetime of glad and willing service (“ministry”) to the one who had given them new life and set them free from the bondage of ‘sin leading to death’.  This attitude of service clearly reflects the ancient Jewish practice described in Deuteronomy 15: “It shall come about if [a kinsman] says to you, ‘I will not go out from you,’ because he loves you and your household, since he fares well with you, then you shall take an awl and pierce it through his ear into the door, and he shall be your servant forever.  Also you shall do likewise to your maidservant.”

And what of voluntary association?  Voluntary association with our myriad religious organisations is about the same as putting a ring in your nose so you can be led about by the institution wherever they please – not forgetting the pain when you resist their tugs.

On the other hand, if God sends for us and calls us, we go, but with no rings in our noses – not for anybody; not at any price.  And why would we when we can gladly and willingly serve the One whom we love and who loves us and with whom we fare well – the “friend who sticks closer than a brother” (Proverbs 18:24)?

How many stories of loving God with all our heart and loving our fellow-humans as we love ourselves does it take for us to realise what being a Christian is – and that Christian is a noun, not an adjective?
One final question: how can we possibly imagine that the bile and hate spat from our ‘churches’ towards loving disciples of Jesus (and towards ‘outsiders’ wanting to know about Jesus) constitutes loving God with all our heart and loving our neighbour as ourselves?

[I did a Google Images search on “being a christian” and quickly found this one below.]

David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons have researched and described it well: UN-christian church.  [un-christian: what a new generation really thinks about christianity...and why it matters - Baker Books, Grand Rapids, Michigan: 2007]

Because of our totally insufficient, inadequate and preposterous definitions, it is today possible to be an un-christian christian.  God forbid!

Gifts; Ministries; Effects

Over the years, I have spent many hours studying, writing and teaching on the subject of “spiritual gifts”.  Through all of that, one thing has become very clear and has presented itself to me on many occasions: the real point of spiritual gifts is not that we are ministered to (that we receive the ministry of those gifts) but that we serve the Body of Christ by means of ministering to others our gifts in the power of the Holy Spirit (that we give the ministry of those gifts).  I believe that, as individuals, our focus is to be on serving, not being served.

And, according to Paul, it is by this means that the Body of Christ grows into its Divinely-planned maturity which matches and complements the maturity of Christ, as each one of us does his/her part.  For over twenty years now, one of the central passions of my life is to see every ecclesia within my purview functioning along the lines that Paul articulated to the Corinthians:

Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.  --  1 Corinthians 12:4-7

And what that looks like on the ground, so to speak, was also written by Paul to the Corinthians:

What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. All things must be done for edification. --  1 Corinthians 14:26

However, most don’t want what I have to offer; neither do they want what many other Spirit-gifted men and women have to offer; though they do insist that we have what they offer.  What most appear to want is for us to manipulate and regulate our gifts to suit the preferences and the structures and the job descriptions of the particular church we are part of.  Many simply want supporters of and contributors to “my vision for this church”.  Even though there is no new covenant biblical precedent nor any new testament teaching to support such notions, we often don’t even get to attempt to manipulate or regulate; this is done for us by a chosen circle of people holding church authority – by means of “papal bulls” by other names.  [A Papal Bull is a formal proclamation issued by the Pope.]

But here we are: a small group of men and women drawn together by the love of Christ and the belief that there is such a thing as the Body of Christ, and by an undying compassion for fellow-man.  And the critical thing is, I believe, that it is not about putting these gifts to work in a man-made “church”, but in whatever ecclesia we find ourselves in – where two or three are gathered; or twenty or thirty; or perhaps more.

The grace of God in us (for that is the true meaning of ‘charismata’) is just that: the grace of God.  We do not own these things; neither does any organisation or institution.  Many churches have adopted some variation of the basic business model, even including the position of CEO at times.  And in the business model, the business owns the gifts and talents of its members and, increasingly, the product of the use of those gifts and talents in church.

But we are stewards of the graces given to us; and when we live like that, God the Great Conductor will bless whom He wills with the product of our combined faithfulness.  And when we prostitute ourselves to another (the ‘church’ for instance), we deny each other and God’s audience the blessing of the complete symphony He is producing in us – precisely because of the manipulation, the regulation, the compromise, the neglect, the hubris and many other things that are endemic in modern church.

As far as I can tell, this is how it is supposed to work – in brief:

·         As far as God is concerned, to be part of His household, we must be born again;

·         We are born again as an act of God’s grace and mercy,

·         in response to repentance, faith and baptism;

·         We are born again as God’s Holy Spirit kills the old life and begins a new one;

·         The substance of the new life is being filled with the Spirit of God,

·         joining each one to Christ and to one another to form one new living Body;

·         The Spirit of God is the life-giving spirit of that one new living Body;

·         And the Spirit of God cannot be present without ‘manifestation’;

·         So each one receives a unique “manifestation of the Spirit”;

·         The manifestation consists of Spirit-empowered character and abilities;

·         And that manifestation becomes visible via the fruit of the Spirit in one’s own life,

·         and in the lives of the others in the Body, moving towards maturity;

·         This Body is “The Bride of Christ” under construction;

·         The construction comes about via gifts being employed in ministries producing “effects” or out-workings, as God “works all things in all persons”,

·         so that, at the marriage supper in John’s Revelation, the whole Body is present and accounted for and God’s household is completely complete.

This is the nature and the structure of the new covenant of the kingdom (household) of God in Christ Jesus.  A little research will produce new covenant scripture references for all of these points.  I always encourage my readers to apply the Berean model and “search the scriptures to see if these things are so” (Acts 17:11).

A couple of times in the scripture record, a ‘voice from heaven’ is heard saying, ‘Come out of her my people; save yourselves from the fierce anger of the Lord’ (allowing for variations in English translation).  Both (Jeremiah 51 and Revelation 18) refer to Babylon.  The first was the actual historical, geographical Babylon; the second was the metaphorical Babylon.  But both mean the same thing: organised religion, oozing hubris, trying to reach God by means other than God’s covenant relationship.  And whenever church is organised, religious, oozing hubris or adding requirements to the pure simplicity of “Christ in you the hope of glory”, it is Babylon; it is “another gospel”.

And the call of God resonates permanently and continuously throughout history:  ‘Come out of Babylon my people’.  And the one call we ought to be well aware of is that of apostle John writing before the end of the first century: “...so that you will not participate in her sins and receive her plagues.”

Remember Jesus said, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.”  Read Ezekiel 34 and John 10.

From the days of apostle John til now, there has been an untold number of God’s sheep wandering about on the hills and mountains, prey to all manner of hurt and harm; but they are there because, without realising it, they responded to that call.  It is how God protected them and kept them alive.  And He has become their one true living Shepherd.  Against all the odds; and against the wishes, demands and even threats of modern Pharisees, they have followed their intuition (the leading of the Holy Spirit in discernment-based knowledge) and distanced themselves from that which threatens their life and their sanity.

But the time is now for these ‘scattered sheep’ to understand that they are all gifted by the Holy Spirit for the unity and maturity of the Body, and to employ those ‘varieties of gifts’ in ‘varieties of ministries’ to achieve ‘varieties of effects’ for the kingdom of God, under the baton of Christ the Head, and not for the consumption of Babylon and her false shepherds and false prophets.

God intends to punish those shepherds who manipulated, regulated, controlled, compromised, consumed, etc, the “manifestation of the Spirit” given to each one of His dear children for the accomplishment of His purposes in the Bride of Christ.  His warning is clear – don’t be there when the judgement happens or you will share in her sins and her plagues.

Furthermore, if you are out with the other abused sheep, you will be rightly positioned to welcome the ensuing outpouring of broken, wounded, half-dead sheep and, by means of varieties of gifts, ministries and effects, bind up their wounds and bind them to their one true shepherd and yours, Jesus Christ the Lord.

Our job is not to act like demigods or high-priests and seek to save the sheep and ‘set them free’ by binding them to us or to our vision or to our ministry or to our ‘church’ or to our religious culture – that’s what the Pharisees did.  Our job is to point them – even deliver them on a stretcher if they cannot get themselves there – to the true Shepherd of their souls.  Peter described him this way: “Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.”  Paul says that Jesus “...was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord.”

When those gifted as apostles, prophets and teachers are permitted and encouraged to work at their gifts, ministries will emerge that then allow other ministries to be born and to flourish, all under the baton of the Master Conductor (the Head of Ecclesia); all without us trying to manipulate things, gloriously evidencing the passion and mission of God for the completeness and maturity of the Bride for the Son.  In other words, all moving inexorably towards the out-workings the Spirit of God longs to see, works towards, and intercedes for.

Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit.  And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord.  There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons  But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.   (1 Corinthians 12:4-7)

What is “the common good” Paul was talking about?  Today we describe the common good for political purposes and ends; Paul was talking about something quite different.  I believe he expresses it in his letter to the Corinthians:

...all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ.  For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit...  so that there may be no division in the body, but the members may have the same care for one another.  (selected from 1 Corinthians 12:12-25)

This is consistent with Jesus’ deep prayer for those he left behind (John 17 – “that they all may be one...”); it is also consistent with the record Luke gives us concerning how those same disciples lived immediately following Jesus’ ascension (Acts 1:14) and following the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:42-47).

To the Ephesians, Paul wrote of the common good this way (chapter 4):

...for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.  As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, Christ, from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love.

There are certain “effects” or outcomes that God, by the Holy Spirit, is faithfully and unremittingly working out within and among and for His Body.  He is achieving that by establishing and cultivating a vast array of “ministries” within and among and for the Body.  These “effects” and “ministries” are the reasons He grants a glorious spectrum of manifestations of Himself (His individual grace-gifts) to every member of His Body as He sees fit, according to His aims and goals.

Neither the effects (outcomes) nor the ministries nor the gifts are random; rather they match who and what each one is and how each was created – according to how He knows us and how we know Him in Christ.  And all of this manifests the deeply symbiotic relationship that the New Testament calls “in Christ” – the relationship that comes into being divinely and sovereignly by what Jesus told Nicodemus about (John 3): being born again – born of the Spirit; the second and spiritual birth.  And the relationship moves forward towards its end-game as Paul described in Romans 8: “living according to the Spirit."

Heaven & Hell and the More Important Stuff (5)

Intimacy With God

It seems to me that, while our interest seems to be focused largely on matters of 'Heaven and Hell' - almost to the point of obsession - God's interest is on relationship: His relationship with us and our relationship with Him.  And that brings me to one other book: Let’s Start With Jesus, by Dennis F. Kinlaw; Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan; 2005.

Chapter 2 in this book is titled “The Level of Intimacy God Desires: Three Metaphors Illustrate God’s Purposes for Us.  Those three metaphors are: the Royal/Legal metaphor (the ‘forensic’); the Familial metaphor (the concept of family); the Nuptial metaphor (husband-wife; bride-groom).

The Royal / Legal Metaphor

In most modern Western societies – even those with monarchies – the royal courts where the sovereigns reign, the legislative assemblies where laws are made and the courts where judicial decisions are made are separate things and there exists what we call a “separation of powers”.  In times past, this was not usually the case.  As Kinlaw points out, “... in the Old Testament, the world in which Israel existed, the sovereign was the supreme judge.  God was seen as both King and Judge.  He was the giver of the law and the guarantor of its execution.” (p. 47)

In old Israel, Yahweh was king; He was also shepherd.  As shepherd, God assumes responsibility for the welfare of his subjects.  He invites his subjects to dine at his table and be at home in his dwelling-place.  And Kinlaw goes on to say, “But Yahweh as king is also the eternal judge.  He is the guarantor that righteousness and justice will ultimately prevail in his cosmos.” (p. 49)  You may recall I mentioned Genesis 18:25 earlier: “Shall not the judge of all the earth do right?”

This theme emerges throughout the New Testament in the expression “the kingdom of God”, not least in the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth.  And although a latecomer to the mantle of apostleship, Paul well understood and declared the kingdom of God.  Everywhere he went, his first impulse was to declare, to the Jews, the kingdom of God (in Jesus the Christ).

 

This metaphor gives us the background and the context for understanding the teaching of justification by faith – a major emphasis of Paul.  God can and does reach out across the “gulf too far” to satisfy the just requirements of the law and His own standards of righteousness.  And He does so by sending forth, from his eternal presence, His own son to be born of a woman and born under the law in order to redeem those under the law – us humans.

In the New Testament, basileia (Greek for kingdom) is primarily an abstract noun speaking of dominion; regal power; sovereignty.  Secondarily, it is used as a concrete noun speaking of the territory or the people over whom the king has dominion and authority.  This is what Jesus was talking about when he said, “All dominion, rule and power has been given unto me” in his commissioning of the first apostles.  A person’s kingdom is that which the person has dominion, power and authority over.

By definition, God’s kingdom is that which God has dominion, power and authority over.  But don’t blindly jump in and conclude that, therefore, everything is God’s kingdom.  Note what Jesus said: ‘my kingdom is not of this world’.  The kingdom of God is an eternal kingdom, not a temporal kingdom.

For a moment, think back to the story of the temptation of Jesus as recorded in Luke 4:5-8:

And he [Satan] led Him [Jesus] up and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.  And the devil said to Him, “I will give you all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. Therefore if you worship before me, it shall all be Yours.” Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD AND SERVE HIM ONLY.’

The whole point of Jesus’ coming; the whole point of the proclamation of the good news of the kingdom of God; the whole point of the existence of ecclesia; is for Jesus’ victory over death and the power of the devil to be realised and then enforced.  Jesus won the victory and set that process in motion; his body on earth now (ekklesia) continues and completes it under the dominion (the kingdom) of God the Father, the headship of Jesus the first-born Son, and the power and encouragement of the Holy Spirit.

Satan thought that in the death of Jesus (which was his ultimate objective) he had won, but the opposite was true; Satan thought he had untouchable control over the kingdoms of the world, but Jesus stole them from him.  Until the resurrection, Jesus couldn’t say “all dominion, power and authority has been given to me”, but the victory of the resurrection is that the kingdoms of the world are now ripe for a transfer of allegiance from Satan to Jesus, and thereby to the Father and His family and household.

In between Jesus’ resurrection and ours, the kingdom of God grows almost imperceptibly – as a mustard seed.  But the final victory is after our resurrection when, according to John’s revelation, “... the seventh angel sounded; and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, ‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever’.”

Paul notes a profound truth in his introduction to the Romans (1:1-4):

Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the good news of God, which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord.

How much clearer does anybody need to be?  God revealed to Paul (who has so clearly revealed to us) that the good news of God is that Jesus Christ our Lord is powerfully declared to be God’s unique Son by his resurrection from the dead through the ministry and power of the Holy Spirit.  That resurrection absolutely changed everything – forever!  How different is God’s story (Romans 1) from Satan’s story (Luke 4)?

And what makes this so profoundly important is that which John foresaw and recorded early in his gospel.  He notes that the life that was in Jesus was “the light of men” and that light would shine in the darkness and the darkness would neither comprehend nor apprehend that light.  For all his best intentions and his best efforts, Satan could neither comprehend the light of Jesus nor was he able to make it his own!

As a result, in every sense of the word, the groundwork for the redemption and reconciliation and justification (and hence the salvation) of us humans had been irreversibly laid.  This is why Paul could write to the Romans (10:8-15):

But what does it [the righteousness that comes from faith] say? ‘The word is near you, in your mouth, and in your heart’ [refer Deuteronomy 30:14]; that is, the story of faith, which we preach: that if you will confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and trust  in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.  For with the heart, one trusts unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, ‘Whoever trusts in him will not be disappointed.’ [refer Isaiah 28:16]

For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, and is rich to all who call on him.  For, ‘Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.’ [refer Joel 2:32]  How then will they call on him in whom they have not trusted?  How will they trust in him whom they have not heard?  How will they hear without a herald?  And how will the heralds proclaim unless they are sent? As it is written: ‘How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news of peace, who bring glad tidings of good things!’ [refer Isaiah 52:7]

And to the Corinthians he could write (1:1-2):

Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and our brother Sosthenes, to the assembly of God which is at Corinth; those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place, both theirs and ours: grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

In terms of the royal / legal metaphor, the job is done!  Everything necessary has been established once and for all.  It only requires that we humans come to grips with the reality and the gravity of our situation – and the amazing grace of God in establishing it all for us – and trust Him alone (not priest or pastor or parent or spouse or friend or system or institution or code or rite or any other person or thing) for our right standing in His presence.  And even the ability, the will, the motivation to do that is stirred up within us by the Spirit of God himself.

 

 

Coming back to my earlier illustration: through the completed work of Jesus of Nazareth (by which he is powerfully declared to be The Son of God), the four legal pillars of God’s justice are established and man is free to be who he ‘ought to be’ and to achieve all God our Father ever planned and hoped for.

Salvation – in the fullest possible sense of the word – is established through redemption, justification and righteousness.  And with that (as we note in Paul above) we are, in God’s sight, ‘saints’; ‘sanctified in Christ Jesus’.

God’s standard of justice and righteousness and sanctification have all been achieved in Jesus and established for all people for all time.  Try as he might, Satan cannot win.  We as humans can lose if we reject what God has done on our behalf and do what Paul describes the Jews of his day of doing: “But Israel, chasing after a law of righteousness, didn’t arrive at the law of righteousness.  Why? Because they didn’t seek it by trust, but as it were by works of the law.  They stumbled over the stumbling block.”

Whereas the non-Jew, “[the Gentiles], who didn’t chase after righteousness, attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is through trust.” (see Romans 9:30-32)  Righteousness before God comes via trust in God our Father, the finished work of Jesus and the daily, on-going work of the Holy Spirit.  His intention never was and isn’t now one of punishment and censoriously watching over humankind with a big stick.  His intention always was and ever is what we would call today a healthy, functional family based on honour, respect and trust (my definition of love): harmonious, reconciled and productive.

The only thing that stands in the way of that is our obstinacy.  Like the prodigal son in Luke 15, we need to fess-up, own-up and man-up and return to our father, who is waiting with open arms.  But when we return, we need to do so on the basis of a clear understanding of who is God and who is the ratbag mortal.  Pride will keep us from righteousness; but true righteousness will keep us from pride.

Can I recommend you take a little time to meditate on the artwork “Divine Embrace” following.

It’s not about ‘going to heaven when you die’ (or hell for that matter); it’s about being reconciled with God our creator and father.  And everything we need has been done.

The Familial Metaphor

After 50 years of walking the disciple life with Jesus, and after countless hours of study – both formal and informal – I have come to the conclusion that the essential nature of God is ‘Father’.  Sure, He’s creator and ruler and judge and so on, but as I’ve studied these other facets of God, that study, over and over again, takes me to the ‘fatherhood’ of God.  It seems to me that the way God works as creator, ruler, judge, etc. is that of active fathering.  It also seems to be that His motivation for His other works is His fatherly care.  And certainly, His own expressed wish, articulated by the Old Testament prophets, was repeatedly something to the effect of ‘I will be a father to you and you will be a son to me’ (e.g. Hosea 1:10) – reiterated by Paul in his second letter to the Corinthians (6:18).

And over those years, many times I have heard a particular response to the idea of God as Father and His people as family that goes roughly like this: ‘I really struggle with the concept of the fatherhood of God because I had a lousy father myself’.  Now I can certainly sympathise with the idea – one could fairly say that modern Western societies have had great struggles with “absent fathers” and dysfunctional families.  Having said that, it is not an argument that ever crossed my mind in relation to my own father.

I remember in the week following the death of my father having important discussions with two of my older brothers about our dad and what kind of father he was and what kind of life we had had.  It seemed to me, listening to my older siblings, that we had two dads; the dad I knew seemed to me to be quite different from the dad they knew.  But one of those brothers said to me, ‘actually we had three dads: the dad the two eldest children knew; the dad the middle two children knew; and the dad the youngest three children knew.’  I am among the youngest three.  I was born in 1952; the firstborn was born in 1943.

I sometimes say to people that God ‘arrested me with His love’ love’ and they look at me strangely and as if I have said something unintelligible.  But Paul used this concept in describing himself in his letter to the Philippians (3:12).  For me, from that moment on, God has always been a very dear father to me.

My dad was small, wiry, very strong, very fast and a coalminer with a reputation that nobody messed with and a temper to match.  His knick-name was ‘hell-fire Jack’.  When I was seven, Billy Graham came to Australia and my dad was swept up in the move that saw many Australians turn to face God and deal with their lives.  Dad gave his life to God – I knew that.  Dad had issues – I knew that.  And we three younger children came to know a dad that the older ones hadn’t really known as young children.

In 1959, God ‘arrested’ my dad: the Divine Father was now his Father.  God arrested me four years later and attached me to Himself with a bond of love that cannot be broken.  Dad’s Father had become my Father too.  Dad knew that; I knew that; and dad knew that I knew that.  And the Father knew us both – each named, called and arrested in his own way in his own time.

I don’t dispute that we have bad fathers, absent fathers and dysfunctional families; but it seems to me that we often come at the subject from the wrong end – back-to-front, if you like.  Often what we are doing is measuring and assessing the fatherhood of God by the standard of earthly fathers we know.  And this is to be expected, given that so much of human life is so very self-centred.  For many of us, our concept of ‘god’ is that he is a different version of ourselves: better in some respects; but not beyond caprice and what appear to us as ‘random acts of violence’.

To arrive at the judgement that God is capricious and prone to random acts of violence is to do precisely what I am saying here: measuring God by our standards.  Capriciousness and a tendency for random violence are traits of the human race, fallen as it is far from what it ‘ought to be’, what it sometimes genuinely wishes to be, and what it was originally created to be.  And often, the reason for this vast discrepancy is that our perception of our own self-importance – our own self-centredness – drives us inexorably to the conclusion that we are not creations of God nor accountable to God in any way.  We conclude that if there were a God, He would have to act in ways that fit with our ideas of what God ‘ought to be’.

In which case, He is not God but, as I said, a different version of ourselves – a god made in the image of man.  And for that, we need a different version of the bible; or maybe no bible at all, but our own personal philosophy.  This is precisely why some people spend a lot of time re-jigging the bible to fit their personal philosophy.  But what if that is a fundamental error and the central flaw of the human race?  We don’t understand the history, so we sneer at the idea of the fatherhood of God because, in our arrogance, we judge God by our own failures and weaknesses.  “If God were a good father, He would not do certain things and would definitely do other things.”

I am a father of three daughters; and as a father, more than anything else what I want from my children is trust.  They are full humans in their own right and I do not control them; but a parent’s real longing so often is that their children – now as responsible adults – trust them.  I believe I am like that because I am a man made in the image of God; this is a divine standard of fatherhood.  Take a look at Hebrews 11:6.  Properly translated, it says, “Without trust it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must trust that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.”

Hubris is when we take the position that, today, I am going to believe (note I didn’t write trust) that there is a God because I need something from Him.  So I try to remember some things I was taught about God and about prayer.  I expect God to perform according to my wishes, and if He doesn’t, He’s capricious and I won’t believe in Him anymore – until the next time I need something to go my way.  It’s embarrassing I know, but this is actually how vast numbers of people view the relationship.

How do I know?  1) Because I listen to how people talk and how they pray and how they describe their experiences to other people; 2) because, at the human level, that is exactly how many of us live from day to day in our family relationships.  Reflect a little: can you hear the child yelling abuse at the father because the child didn’t get what he/she wanted?  Life’s not fair because my wishes were not met as I expected; things are not as they ‘ought to be’ according to my scheme.  And of course it is the father’s fault; he hates me; he doesn’t understand me; he wants me to suffer; I must be a terrible person (or he must be).

As far as I can tell, the most common way we try to relate to God is like that of our human relationships: He ‘ought to be’ as I wish Him to be.  We spare little thought for whether or not the father has his own ‘ought to be’ or whether his ‘ought to be’ is perhaps preferable, and what in fact ought to be.  We are ever so focussed on ourselves; we don’t truly understand the nature of the relationship; we don’t put our trust in that relationship or in the fact that he has our best interests at heart.  We just come – and we want everything our own way.

I hate to be the one to break it to you – or maybe I don’t – but God can’t be manipulated like that, precisely because He is God and He is our one true Father.  And if He allowed Himself to be manipulated and behaved consistent with what we think He ‘ought to be’, He would not be true to Himself and, therefore, not God at all.

Me and my dad: we were OK – not because he was “the best dad ever”; clearly he wasn’t.  We were OK because he came to know and trust that God was his one true Father – his primary Father.  And we were OK because he also understood that, for me to be in the right place, I needed to also know and trust God as my one true Father – my primary Father.  He would always be my dad, and he would always remember his own dad; but God is Father to both of us.  We all grow up; we never cease to be sons, but we do stop being children; we become, equally, sons of God.  And, as far as I can tell, that is precisely how God thinks things ‘ought to be’.  And when they are, we are ‘right’ before Him – righteous.

I know I can bring a smile to God’s face – I can “bless” Him – when I live the reality of Hebrews 11:6.  I come before my Father trusting in Him and trusting that He has my best interests at heart because that’s what Fathers do; and I trust that my seeking Him will be rewarded according to His good intentions for me – even if his intentions include discipline, advice and withholding, along with all the resources that come with being His son and heir.

I don’t make my dad a lesser father when God becomes my primary Father; in fact, I appreciate my dad more, especially since I came to learn that he understood this too.  What it in fact does is elevate fatherhood to what it ‘ought to be’ and I can be a better human father (and grandfather) because of the relationship my primary Father God has carried me into.

And I believe that it is from this that our entire life as brothers in ekklesia (as sons of God together) receives its motivation and vitality.  Our primary (heavenly) Father is the Father of a new breed, and, for me, there is one particular reason this is unique and so special: Jesus.  Jesus is the first-born, the prototype, of the new breed.  And that new breed is both empowered and destined for eternity and immortality. According to Old Testament prophet Isaiah (chapter 57), God says of Himself that He inhabits eternity: eternity is His zone; His living-space; His domain and kingdom.  Paul wrote about it to the ekklesia in Corinth in these terms:

 Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.  Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.  For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality.  But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory.  “O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?”   The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. (2 Corinthians 15:50-57)

Part of our destiny is, via our own resurrection, to take on imperishability, incorruptibility and immortality – as Jesus our prototype did via his resurrection.  And even though we are not there yet, Jesus’ apostle John wrote that when we see him as he now is – in the time of our resurrection – we shall be transformed into his likeness (as Paul discusses here).

So, since we are sons of God and brothers and co-heirs with Jesus, Jesus is, in effect, our elder brother, and we know from scripture that Jesus is “not ashamed to call them brothers” who, like Him, fully put their trust in the Father (Hebrews 2:11).  And likewise, God our Father is “not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them”.

Our old English bibles sometimes refer to Jesus as “the only begotten Son of God”.  Given that ‘begotten’ means born, the text is saying that Jesus is the only born son – which is patent nonsense.  In Greek, the word translated ‘only’ can also be translated ‘first’ and ‘once’.  Why either or both of these options was not chosen by the English bible translators I can only guess, but both these alternatives work.  Jesus is the first-born son of the new breed.

But Jesus is also – and I stress this is absolutely unique – the once-born son of this breed.  The uniqueness of Jesus is that he only needed to be born once.  But when he is talking to Nicodemus (John 3), it becomes clear that all the sons to follow have to be born twice: a natural birth and a spiritual or ‘second’ birth.  In other words, being born again (the second birth) is necessary.  Nicodemus was like many of us today – he scoffed at the thought, asking ‘how can this be?’  “Can a man enter into his mother’s womb a second time and be born?”  Of course not.  So Jesus told Nicodemus how it happens.  And today, we need to be told how it happens – and that it is necessary!  For without it (note Nicodemus again) one cannot see the kingdom of God.

And what did Jesus tell Nicodemus?  “Except one receive birth from above, he is not able to see and perceive the kingdom of God.” [literal translation]  And the second time he said, “except one receive birth out of water and spirit, he is not able to enter into the kingdom of God.” [literal translation].

That God is our father is a metaphor to help us understand important truth.  It is equally important that we realise it is much more than just a metaphor:  it is a relationship of more importance than our human relationships because it links us back to where we were detached from and places us in the condition we ‘ought to be’ – right with God: back where we belong; ‘accepted in the beloved’ (Ephesians 1:6).  In fact, when this relationship is right, all our other human relationships function better.

But it does contain some surprises.  One day (see Mark 3 and Matthew 12) Jesus was out and about and his disciples delivered him a message that his ‘family’ wanted to see him.  He replied to his disciples, “‘Who are my mother and my brothers?’  Looking about at those who were sitting around Him, He said, ‘Behold My mother and my brothers!  For whoever does the will of God, he is my brother and sister and mother.’”

As the prodigal son story Jesus told is intended to teach us, life as we know it here on earth is the small stuff; we were built for much bigger things – for eternity and the kingdom of God – and we will be reunited with our one true Father through trust in Him and in the completed work of His Son, Jesus of Nazareth, our eternal elder brother.

Father – son is a different degree and different level of intimacy from that of King and Judge with his subjects.  God’s passion for us is not only that we be justified, but that we enter into his den with Him where he teaches us the family business – the kingdom of God present and future – and shares His life with us as the true Father who never dies and never forsakes us.

 

No-one fathers more or better than God our eternal Father.  The crucial question is whether we stay living far away from His presence (as the prodigal son did until he came to his senses) or whether we “draw near” as true sons via trust in His presence, His Fatherhood and the inheritance we are part of when we, as Jesus said, “do the will of my Father”.

For what it’s worth, I consider that there is only one relationship more intimate than the relationship between father and son (or parent and child if you like) and that is husband and wife.  This leads us to the third metaphor of intimacy we are considering.

The Nuptial Metaphor

The Old Testament scriptures contain much about God as king over His people and the Righteous Judge among them; it also contains much around the familial metaphor of God as Father with His sons.  But of no less significance is the nuptial metaphor – of God as Husband and His people as His bride and wife.

The whole of the Song of Solomon is an allegory (a bit like a metaphor) for the kind of intimacy God seeks with His people and has made provision for.  And the nuptial metaphor is common in the writings of the Old Testament prophets: Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Hosea to name a few.

In Jeremiah 2, the prophet writes of God remembering the early days of the formation of Israel as the people followed Moses through the wilderness.  Their statements of devotion and even ‘betrothal’ (what we call ‘engagement’ in Western countries today) are remembered but they are contrasted with the flirtations and ‘affairs’ or prostitutions of Israel.  They said they were His and even had their ‘wedding’, but they still acted like a donkey on heat (Jeremiah 2:24) or a Bedouin prostitute (Jeremiah 3:2).

It is worth noting that, as Kinlaw points out in chapter 2 of his book, “The ancient world tended to see marriage as a means to secure an heir, and it valued a woman by her success in producing an heir.  However, it is highly significant that the Song of Songs with its canticles of love never mentions children anywhere.  Children do not seem at all necessary to justify the validity and sanctity of nuptial love; they are not to be the purpose of love but its marvelous by-product.” (page 63)  How that contrasts with much traditional christian thinking and teaching!

And, as Kinlaw goes on to point out, there is the “perpetually perplexing” matter of the location of the mark of the covenant God had with Israel: the penis.  Kinlaw: “The female carried no such mark, but the fact that the sign was at the point where bride and groom meet may have something to say theologically.  Human sexuality’s biblical origin does not seem to lie in biology.”  Kinlaw suggests that the biblical origin or human sexuality has a ‘pedagogical’ (or ‘teaching/learning’) purpose with God who made us either male or female.

For Kinlaw, the thought of the teaching/learning purpose of God in human sexuality goes invariably to the Old Testament concept of “holy” (qadesh in the Old Testament).  He notes, “Holy is particularly and uniquely Yahweh’s word.  His claim on the word seems to have implications for his claim on human sexuality as well.  God’s purpose for coming to us in Jesus is to restore true sanctity to those holy things that humanity has corrupted, sexuality among them.” (page 63)

With that in mind, consider apostle Paul: in his teaching in Ephesians 5, human sexuality – the nuptial relationship of bride and groom – becomes the metaphor for communicating the truth about the ekklesia, the “Body of Christ”.  Keep in mind that Paul was the apostle chosen by God to deliver what we know as the core Christian truths of justification, righteousness and the ekklesia into the new covenant era.  He bore that burden, so he knew what he was talking about.

The relationship of love between the Groom (Christ) and the Bride (the ekklesia) is portrayed as a metaphor for how a husband ought to love his wife.  But it not a love with offspring as its primary focus; it is a love about intimacy, purity and chaste monogamy – for intimacy’s sake.  The offspring – the children – are a “marvelous by-product” of the relationship, not its purpose.

The cross of Christ (and of course the resurrection) expresses the profound love of the Father, the magnificent sacrifice of the Son and the perpetual grace of the Holy Spirit first in justification, redemption and righteousness.  But it likewise expresses the love of God in greeting aliens, strangers, foreigners – ‘sinners’ – as sons and heirs, co-inheriting with His own first-born, once-born Son Jesus.  And Kinlaw picks up the third aspect when he writes, “He [Paul] insists that Christ has given the supreme example in the cross: the love expressed in his self-sacrifice is God’s picture of the love a husband should have for his wife.  The cross is the great expression of Christ’s love for his Bride.”

Then Paul extends the metaphor to say that the Bride of Christ is also the “Body of Christ”.  The universal ekklesia – the ‘family’ by the new or ‘second’ birth of repentance and faith; “those who do the will of my Father” as Jesus said – is the Body of Christ, is the Bride of Christ.  Hence Paul, quoting Genesis 2, says “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”

When I married my wife Lesleigh, I left my father and mother and was united with her, becoming one flesh.  The sign of the covenant is on the penis and husband and wife share that member when they ‘become one flesh’.  It’s about the intimacy and the connection, not about the offspring that may or may not come to be.

Likewise in new birth, I ‘left’ my father and mother to be joined to Christ – as also did my father and mother if they were truly born again.  My union with Christ is not a mechanical or perfunctory union in order to produce ‘legitimate’ offspring; it is intimacy for intimacy’s sake.  Offspring will be a ‘marvellous by-product’.

To understand God’s work in salvation, justification, redemption and righteousness, we think of a king, a ruler, a judge – albeit a just and wise and compassionate one.  By this means, I stand ‘righted’ before God because Jesus completed his work and secured my redemption.  I am now in the position and condition I ‘ought to be’ and, by the power of the Spirit, I am able to do all I was created to do.  Imagine facing your king, ruler and judge and knowing that there is nothing between you separating you, causing anxiety, and making either of you want to avoid the relationship.  Instead, you seek each other out, knowing that you both understand the nature and the depth of the relationship and you know how important it is to keep the relationship transparent, honest, respectful and full of trust.  This is truly a wonderful place to be, but allow me, if you will, to point out that while it begins here, it doesn’t end here – there is so much more in store.

 

To understand God’s work in reconciliation and welcome forgiveness and sharing all He is and has with the people He created, we think of a father – albeit a sincere, integrative and understanding one.  And despite the protests of the religious clans demanding greater reward for their self-satisfied superiority, by His grace I am honoured, respected and trusted as a twice-born son who will one day reign in His kingdom with Jesus His first-born, once-born Son – not because I have worked hard to be a better person, but because He has chosen to accept my repentance and trust in good faith and welcome me to His table: “He brings me to His banqueting table and His banner over me is love.” (Song of Solomon 2:4)  Imagine yourself like the ‘prodigal son’ in the Luke 15 story: you have come to your senses and realised how estranged and far away from your father you are, so you persuade yourself to “get up and go to my father, and will say to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in your sight; I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me as one of your hired servants’.”  Imagine yourself actually doing this [don’t just imagine it, live it]:

So he got up and came to his father.  But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion and ran and embraced him and kissed him.  And the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’  But the father said to his slaves, ‘Quickly bring out the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet; and bring the fattened calf, kill it, and let us eat and celebrate; for this son of mine was dead and has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.’  And they began to celebrate.

 

And to understand God’s work of intimate union; of self-giving love (as Jesus described so tenderly in John’s gospel record chapter 17 for example) we think of a husband – albeit the kind of husband just about every woman ever born dreams of being married to.  Kinlaw continues: “Biblically, marriage is the union of two persons in such self-giving love that they share a name, their bodies, their possessions, their vocation, their common life – their total selves.” (page 67)

[I add that they also share the one mark or sign of the covenant as discussed earlier.  The mark or sign of the covenant of Israel was male circumcision.  In marriage, this sign is shared equally by husband and wife in the most intimate act of all.  The sign or seal of the new covenant, according to Ephesians 1:13, is “the Holy Spirit of promise”.  This sign was placed on Jesus at His baptism. (see Luke 3:21-22): “Now when all the people were baptized, Jesus was also baptized, and while He was praying, heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him in bodily form like a dove, and a voice came out of heaven, ‘You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased.’  Paul, in Ephesians 1:13 recounts the events of that first new covenant Pentecost when he writes: “In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.”  The possession being redeemed here is the ekklesia, the new covenant children of the Lord; the reference point for this is Psalm 127:3 – ‘Children are a heritage from the Lord – a reward from Him’.  As the ‘Bride’ of Christ, we the twice-born sons, the ekklesia, are the heritage of the Lord and the pledge of that inheritance is the gift of the Holy Spirit which we share with our Groom in the most intimate union of all – we are joined to Christ: “Therefore, my brothers, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.”  (Romans 7:4)]

And Kinlaw adds, “This is supposed to be a picture of the relationship that every believer may have with Christ.”  Imagine that!

And Kinlaw goes on: “For a married person to share his or her body with any other than one’s spouse is to violate the covenant that has been established between them.  But for true lovers, keeping a covenant with each other is no restriction.”  Likewise, imagine that!  My body is not my own, it belongs to my Groom, my Husband – and to share it with anyone or anything else is to violate the covenant we have between us, sealed with “the Holy Spirit of promise”.  And in like manner, being true to that covenant is a true pleasure, not a chore.

 

In summary: not an enemy but a friend; not just a friend, but a son [and ‘son’ is not restricted to male]; not just a son, but a spouse – with the God who created us and the cherished first-born, once-born Son of His love; at His banqueting table; with a huge ‘LOVE’ banner over us all.  And so begins the dance of eternity future.

So – how did we manage to trash all of this, call it religion, and insist on subjecting ourselves and others to it?

For me, religion – ‘Christian’ or any other – is a gigantic act of treason, rebellion and insubordination, and prostitution – and I have the backing of the scriptures to view it as such.  The intimacy God seeks (friend, son and spouse) will kill religion; or religion will kill the intimacy God seeks.

Conclusion

Here we are, imagining that the most important question in the world is “are you going to heaven when you die?”  We get all flustered and deeply irritated when people suggest, on the one hand, that they’re not interested in God or heaven or what happens when we die and, on the other hand, that it’s not a question God ever asked or condoned us asking.

In truth, it is a dumbed-down triviality of our self-centred Westernised culture christianity; and it looks absolutely ridiculous when compared with the intimacy God seeks with us humans and the incredible depths of passion God has gone to – and continues to go to – to have us turn our eyes and our hearts towards Him and home.

For me, the three-pronged question – are you righteous (i.e. as you ‘ought to be’) before God by trusting Jesus, justified freely by His grace; are you reconciled with God by trusting Jesus, known by God as a son of His grace; are you doing the bridal waltz with your Groom by trusting Jesus, honoured as the Bride by His grace at the ‘marriage supper of the Lamb’? ... this question makes “are you going to heaven when you die?” look and sound like the babble of a first-day kindergarten child who really does think he knows it all.

Seriously – when are we going to grow up?  When are going to stop pretending?  When are we going to come to our senses? When are we going to get off our ‘me’ merry-go-round carousel?  When are we going to at least start acting like we understand that God is God and that we are His creation, not the other way round?  And when are we going to start doing things God’s way, and doing so for the sheer pleasure and joy of it?

As I walk in those three levels and types of intimacy with God, the question ‘are you going to heaven when you die?’ never comes up.  He doesn’t mention it and neither do I.  When you walk with God in intimate union as we’ve discussed here, the question is an absurdity.  And thank God for that!

 

- ENDS -