Personal Thoughts

When Jesus cried, “It is finished!” What was finished?  What did He mean by these words just before He expired on the cross?

1.  Paid in full: “[Financial] receipts  are often introduced by this phrase,” according to Moulton & Milligan’s Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament. In general the word means: to fulfill obligations, to pay.” Charles Swindol expanded:

 “It was a Greek expression most everyone present would have understood. It was an accounting term. Archaeologists have found papyrus tax receipts with “Tetelestai” written across them, meaning “paid in full.” With Jesus’ last breath on the cross, He declared the debt of sin cancelled, completely satisfied. Nothing else required. Not good deeds. Not generous donations. Not penance or confession or baptism or…or…or…nothing. The penalty for sin is death, and we were all born hopelessly in debt. He paid our debt in full by giving His life so that we might live forever.”

---

2. The simplest meaning of “finished” in the form He spoke it on the Cross is “All is fulfilled, All is accomplished!”  This, to me, fits better in the context since Jesus was not talking about an unpaid bill but the fulfillment of all prophecy.

Everything God commissioned Jesus to do has been “completed,” the saving work whose earthly completion according to J[oh]n is at the cross. [Kittell vol VIII 59]

He gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to cleanse for himself a people for his own possession, eager to do good works. (Titus 2:14)

No scripture more clearly, simply, and emphatically explains redemption, freedom from the bondage to sin to serve the Lord. A closer examination of this verse, perhaps, shares all we really need to know for now about the efficacy of Jesus’s death. But like children, always eager to learn, we shall continue to seek deeper truths. But we must begin here.

Jesus gave Himself, His crucifixion was voluntary. As He said, “No one takes it from me, but I lay it down on my own. I have the right to lay it down, and I have the right to take it up again. I have received this command from my Father.” (John 10:18) And He did this “for us.” This is not only voluntary but vicarious.

Some interpret the word “for” to mean “for our benefit” or “for our good,” a meaning worthy of the word, but an interpretation which cannot stand alone here because in so doing He has redeemed us. Redemption is first and foremost the purchasing of our salvation (ransoming us) by His blood (Acts 20:28) which is a vicarious substitution. Yes, indeed, for our benefit; because He did this (the translation simply reads “to”) in order that He might redeem us, (set us free via a ransom in His blood.)

“In order that” shows “purpose or end.” ¹ Jesus’s death did not provide our freedom from sin’s bondage as an unintended consequence of a unfortunate death of a good prophet. Jesus, God’s Son, submitted to the Father’s plan and gave Himself willingly to the lash and the cross knowing that this was the means to our freedom from sin’s grasp!

Redeem, redemption, is a term that comes from the word meaning “to set free.” The truth could not be clearer. It is correctly understood as our “ransom” after the analogy of the Old Testament sacrifice, and some believers like to reference Hosea 3:1-2 where the prophet purchased his wife, Gomer, back off the slave auction block.

Freed us from what? Lawlessness. ² This word supports Prof Craig’s contention that our Savior’s death was a penal substitution. ³ Martin Luther allegorically wrote, “The Law growls, ‘All right. If Your Son is taking the sin of the world, I see no sins anywhere else but in Him. He shall die on the Cross.’ And the Law kills Christ. But we go free.” ⁴

“I am using a human analogy,” Paul employed the slavery motif to explain that now instead of enslaved to sin, we should be our Lord’s life-long indentured servant. (Exodus 21:5-6) “because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you offered the parts of yourselves as slaves to impurity, and to greater and greater lawlessness, so now offer them as slaves to righteousness, which results in sanctification.” (Romans 6:19)

But not just a servant to God, but a “pure” or cleansed (from sinful thoughts and motives) servant of God; we serve no other lord. There is implied here no other motive or personal interest other than pleasing our Lord.

Because we are ransomed, He bought us with His blood, we are His, His own, His own possession! And the purity of our service is evident in an expressed zeal or passion to live for Him, to do “good works.” (We are reminded that one of the Fruit of the Spirit is goodness. Galatians 5:22; Ephesians 5:9)

Proclaim these things; encourage and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard[despise] you. Titus 2:15

¹ Thayer. 302
² “It is characteristic, of course, that [lawlessness] should become one of the chief terms for sin.” Kittell, vol IV. 1085
³ “Paul’s exposition of the way in which Christ’s death achieves reconciliation with God is suffused with forensic terminology rooted in Jewish notions of law and justice.” Craig. 51
⁴ Martin Luther, Epistle to the  Galatians. 54-55

There is an interesting word for “sin” found in the Greek translation of the Old Testament, used over 62 times, that never made it into the Gospels or the Epistles of the New. And even if the Hebrew has no equivalent term, the concept it embodies is, nonetheless, very Jewish. The question to ask is not “What was my sin” as if a single misstep or a single act of indiscretion needs forgiveness. The question with this Old Testament Greek word is not “what” but “where.”

Where did I go wrong?

In the New Testament we see sin either as the expression of fallen nature (sinfulness) or we reference our individual misdeeds, misplaced passions, and abusive words; but in the Old Testament—and this is, as I said, very Jewish—sin means being out of harmony with nature. I found a relevant Einstein quote, Even though he was known to be  an atheist, he didn’t denigrate believers.: Douglas Leblanc said, “He heard the music of the spheres.”

‘What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos.’

 

To sin, to use a Classic Greek metaphor, is to be “out of tune.” When we are as we should be, as God ordained, we are making music. But when a false note is hit, when we “sin,” the discordant sound causes all nature to jump in offense  The Ancient Greeks would say, “He made a false note!” A false note is another way of saying “a mistake or error” in judgment was made.

All sin is out of tune, out of harmony,  first and foremost, with our relationship with God, then each other, and finally with our own person, our own dreams, desires, and happiness—with our own world.

The Hebrew Bible meets us with a full acknowledgement of these manifold aspects of human suffering, and blends wrong doing and suffering to a remarkable degree, setting forth sin in its relation to God, to society, and to a man’s own self. [Robert Girdlestone. Synonyms of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Grand Rapids Book Manufacturers, Inc. 1974), 76 ]

Moses hinted at this idea when he cautioned God’s people about carefully following God’s precepts, , “Listen, Israel, and be careful to follow them, so that you may prosper...” [Deuteronomy 6:3]  It is a loving Creator who knows the science behind proper living that encouraged Ancient Israel to follow the rules—follow the laws that kept them in harmony with His world.  Wish they had!!!

The Greek for Psalm 34:22, which is in the Septuagint Psalms 33:22 is encouraging, “those who hope in Him shall not go wrong” [οὐ μὴ πλημμελήσωσιν πάντες οἱ ἐλπίζοντες ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν].

But let’s not toss the Hebrew to the curb!  It reads, “The LORD redeems  (will rescue) …  His servants, and all who take refuge in Him will not be punished.”

We “kind-of” get the message that God’s Eden is still on His mind where—before that fatal bite—all was in harmony…..

What a beautiful description of heaven, the place of total, absolute, and eternal harmony…..

Isaiah  prophesied, “he [God’s Suffering Servant, I.e. Jesus] will carry their iniquities…”^⁠1   Peter referenced this text ( Isaiah 53:11 & 12). 

I Peter 2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree

The word “carry” in Isaiah is a word in the original which described a “heavy load,”^⁠2 In Isaiah 53:4 God’s suffering servant carries a burden of pain^⁠3 and sin that He took off our backs and put on His own, i.e. vicariously! Isaiah went on to prophecy, “…he bore the sin of many…”^⁠4 where it means He was “accepting of suffering of the guilt of others”^⁠5 to which Peter added—clarifying who God’s suffering servant was and when Isaiah’s prophecy was finally fulfilled,  “in His body on the cross.” Peter then pulls back the curtain revealing God’s plan. “So that,…. we might live for righteousness.”^⁠6  In Paul’s words,^⁠7 “…in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too may walk in newness of life.” 

There is only one kind of life in Christ, eternal life.  Removing sin from our lives as believers has no temporal significance although it starts in this life.^⁠8 Jesus called it a “well of water springing up into everlasting life.”^⁠9  It is a life in the Son which makes our  salvation^⁠10 more than a condition or a hope but a way of life, a new way of life, that we begin to experience the moment we accept Him and appropriate Calvary. It could not reasonable be anything less.  Jesus made that point emphatic in our favorite childhood verse, John 3:16. We know this already as believers but here our focus is solely on this truth—He took our sins and sinfulness^⁠11 and took them as far from us as the rising sun is from the setting sun (the east is from the west).^⁠12  There is much more to discover about our Lord’s suffering on Calvary but this one provision alone is the offer of eternal life in its scope and importance.

But what exactly does Peter mean by saying, that He “carried away” our sins? We use a theologically inspired term: expiation.^⁠13 Not only the sin and sinfulness but the guilt is gone and replaced with a peace that confirms the totality of God’s forgiveness.  He didn’t forgive in words^⁠14 but in action thru His death. 

One undeniable characteristic of God’s, now within a believer and later on Christ’s return in His eternal presence, is that Heaven is a sinless place because it is a holy place.  For this reason, John could make an amazing proclamation, “We know that everyone who has been born of God does not sin, but the one who is born of God keeps him, [himself] and the evil one does not touch him”^⁠15

• • There is: The Kingdom within:^⁠16 Hebrews 9:26 the removal of sin by the sacrifice of himself.  
  • There is: The Kingdom to Come:^⁠17 Hebrews 9:28 so also Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but [without sin] to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.
  • As Daniel saw it,^⁠18 
    • “to bring the rebellion to an end,
    • to put a stop to sin,
    • to atone for iniquity,
    • to bring in everlasting righteousness,”

Non-believers question the logic behind a purposeful God requiring the crucifixion of His Son.  We are not prepared yet to address this query. But our faith recognizes God’s authority over sin in our lives thanks to what Jesus did on the Cross.  It is more than forgiveness.  And “sin” needs to be further defined. But there was a dynamic at work in those hours of darkness on Golgotha’s hill:  The Temple veil was torn away and what had been a once a year appointment in the Holy of Holies for the Jewish High Priest became a doorway to prayer for all who would enter into communion with God!  There can be no communion between God and sinfulness.^⁠19 Explanations aside as to how this all works in God’s heart and in our lives, we, nonetheless, now know as believers that it is all very real.   

 

---

¹ Isaiah 53:11
² BDB, p. 687
³ Isaiah 53:4 “..he carried our pains…”  Most English translations use the word “sorrows” which might not be an adequate description.
⁴ Isaiah 53:12 הוּא חֵטְא־רַבִּים נָשָׂא
⁵ Gerhard Kittell. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids , MI: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974), vol IX. pg. 60. 
cp. Numbers 14:33 ““Your children will be shepherds in the wilderness for forty years and bear the penalty for your acts of unfaithfulness until all your corpses lie scattered in the wilderness.”
⁶ 1 Peter 2:24
⁷ Romans 6:4
⁸ Romans 6:4 Therefore we were buried with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too may walk in newness of life.
⁹ John 4:11 & 14
¹⁰ 1 John 3:14 We know that we have passed from death to life because we love our brothers and sisters
¹¹ Both ideas are in the words used for sin.
¹² Psalm 103:12.  This distance is infinite and no matter how fast or slow the earth turns, the east and west are never closer.
¹³ the act of extinguishing the guilt incurred by something
¹⁴ Luke 23:34 records Jesus pronouncing forgiveness from the cross but this portion of the verse might be added later.  It was rated a C by the textual critics in the NA27 edition of the Greek text.
¹⁵ 1 John 5:18
¹⁶ Luke 17:21 YLT “t…he reign of God is within you.’”
¹⁷ Matthew 8:11 “ tell you that many will come from east and west to share the banquet[fn] with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.
¹⁸ Daniel 9:24
¹⁹ Psalm 66:18 NIV If I had cherished sin in my heart, the Lord would not have listened.

Jesus’s death is not allegorical, since, His death is not a story told to explain truth. It IS the truth that needs to be explained. Jesus’s death was an historical fact which Dorothy Sayers referred to as “the only thing that ever really happened,^⁠1 …miraculous and unfathomable.”^⁠2 Steve Hindalong & Derald E. Daugherty picturesquely used words like mysterious and scandolous:

At the wonderful, tragic, mysterious tree
On a beautiful scandalous night, you and me
Were atoned by His blood and forever washed white
On a beautiful scandalous night

We have used the word motif to explain what happened on Calvary, but is this best? A motif, I am told, is “a distinctive feature or dominant idea with symbolic significance” but what is that dominant idea we are hoping to describe? That’s the quest. We know Jesus dealt effectively, completely, resolutely with the sin issue that separated us from a Holy God.^⁠3 We know we are forgiven.^⁠4 We know, thanks to Jesus’s death and resurrection, we have newness of life,^⁠5 a new birth,^⁠6 a new beginning in our relationship with God^⁠7 (and one another). We know that had Jesus not bleed and died on Calvary, none of these would have been true.^⁠8 We know if there had not been a Calvary, we would have died in sin^⁠9 and been relegated to a “lost” eternity.^⁠10

But some question why did He have to die—and specifically on a Roman cross—to provide all this.  Does not God have the power and authority to provide our salvation another, less painful, way? When we consider God’s love for His Son, [Luke 3:22] it is not reasonable to assume that there was another way. His love for His Son^⁠ would have provided that other way without blood. But the Scripture suggests there was no other way. As the writer of Hebrews confirmed “never without blood.” [Hebrews 9:7]

“Father, if you are willing, take this cup away from me  —  nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done.”^⁠11

Calvary is not a parable. It is not a story to teach a moral truth. Jesus death was an historical reality that made possible God’s gift of eternal life. Calvary was not symbolic. Calvary was the execution of a Divine plan,^⁠12 a plan God carefully and thoughtfully drew up in eternity^⁠13 and executed through His obedient Son.^⁠14 Trying to understand the reasoning behind the Divine plan in story form is not what faith is about. Faith is accepting or recognizing that, through His death, Jesus offered us eternal life.^⁠15 [Acts 16:31]

A better question to ask might be: What really took place on Calvary? What happened when Jesus suffered and died? Or better still: What did Jesus’s death provide for us? (Leaving the “why” question to God, for now.)

The task of inspiration through the writing of the apostles and prophets was to share with us the event that God, in the person of His son, was going to die on a Roman cross and this single event would have eternal significance, It would become the moment by which all history would hereafter be interpreted and judged.

Our theology would have to present a new concept: Grace, a word unknown in ancient times. And, like the love that proclaimed it, requiring a faith that was open to comprehending the otherwise incomprehensible. Paul clarified, “…the person without the Spirit does not receive what comes from God’s Spirit, because it is foolishness to him; he is not able to understand it since it is evaluated [discerned] spiritually.”^⁠16

The title of this work asks “Why;” why did Jesus died on the Cross? But “why” is the endless question small children ask when they are caught doing something that mom and dad  called “bad.” We don’t need to keep asking “why,” going deeper and deeper into a line of reasoning, hoping to spiral down into some mysterious eternal truth. [Deuteronomy 29:29] We’ll take a look at this central Truth, since, there are still mysteries associated with what Jesus accomplished on Calvary that sound the depths of a divine love for us that will require our glorification to grasp. John 3:16 reads “God so loved…” What kind of love is that? How big is His heart? Much of God’s provision through Christ remains to be experienced by us who only know now “in part,”^⁠17 a “downpayment”^⁠18 if you will, of a guaranteed heavenly experience yet to be fully embraced.

But instead of asking why let us study Jesus’s death from the perspective of the spiritual provisions which we can begin, in this life, to appropriate and appreciate. John in his epistle declared, “We know that we have passed from death to life because we love our brothers and sisters.”^⁠19 Let’s start there.

¹ Dorothy Sayers. The Man Born to be King. (San Francisco CA: Ignatius Press. 1990) Page 290.
² Dorothy Sayers. Creed or Chaos (Manchester,NH: Sophia Institute Press, 1974), Page. 8ff.
³ Colossians 1:22 But now he has reconciled you by his physical body through his death, to present you holy, faultless, and blameless before him
⁴ Ephesians 1:7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace
⁵ Romans 6:5 For if we have been united with him in the likeness of his death, we will certainly also be in the likeness of his resurrection.
⁶ John 3:3 Jesus replied, “Truly I tell you, unless someone is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
⁷ 1 John 1:2-3 that life was revealed, and we have seen it and we testify and declare to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was revealed to us  what we have seen and heard we also declare to you, so that you may also have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.
⁸ Romans 5:9 How much more then, since we have now been declared righteous by his blood, will we be saved through him from wrath.
⁹ 1 Corinthians 15:17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.
¹⁰ John 3:16 For God loved the world in this way: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.
¹¹ Luke 22:42
¹² Isaiah 53:1 Who has believed what we have heard? [believed our report] And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
¹³ Matthew 25:34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
¹⁴ Hebrews 5:8-9 Although he was the Son, he learned obedience from what he suffered. After he was perfected, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him,
¹⁵ John 14:1 Don’t let your heart be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me.
¹⁶ 1 Corinthians 2:14
¹⁷ 1 Corinthians 13:12 Now I know in part, but then I will know fully
¹⁸ 1 Corinthians 5:5 Now the one who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave us the Spirit as a down payment.
¹⁹ 1 John 3:14

Recently in a men’s Bible study Philippians 2:4 was presented for discussion.¹ The leader read from the English Standard Version while I read along in the New International. They were not the same!

English Standard: Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.

New International: not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

The Problem

The ESV added the words “only” and “also” interpreting the Greek word, “kai,” most often translated, “and.” But should it be in this verse? I looked at 13 other versions all translating the word “kai” with: also, as well, not only, but also, or too. ² One of the translations, “The Christian Standard” translation for Philippians 2:4 in the Blueletter Bible app read differently than what I read in the Bible Gateway app.³ Same version!!

Other Translations

So, I dug deeper. I looked at Luther’s translation,⁴ the Latin Vulgate,⁵ and even a Hebrew translation.⁶ And I referenced two commentaries.⁷ One, J. P. Lange, was more interested in the phrase “each of you” since in the Greek it is a plural, for which we have no English equivalent. He correctly concludes that Paul is referring to “every member of the church”⁸ Professor Lightfoot preferred interpreted this as if the “also” was not there, i.e. “let them look beyond their own interests to those of others.”⁹

We shouldn’t skim over this text. So I inquired of the Textual critics, the guys and gals that decide whether or not the word “and” [also, too, as well as, not only but also, etc.] was in the original. They placed as a critical sign a small circle elevated above the word as a prefix¹⁰  (°[kαι]) indicating that “the word following [i.e. ‘and’] is omitted by the witnesses cited.”¹¹ The word is also in square brackets since “the textual critics … are not completely convinced of the authenticity of the enclosed words.’¹²

The Witnesses Cited

Look at the list of manuscripts that represent the absence of this word. [D, F, G, K, P⁴⁶ א ψ] Included is P⁴⁶. “P⁴⁶ is an example of one of the earliest forms of the New Testament.… While P⁴⁶ was copied more than a century after Paul originally wrote his Epistles, this codex is nevertheless the closest that modern scholars have been able to get to Paul’s original words.”¹³ [One Textual Critic, who was a friend of mine, Dr. Howard Eshbaugh (we pastored in the same town), did his dissertation on P⁴⁶ attempting to show its autographic quality.] The word “and” in this verse, is not in P⁴⁶. We are suggesting that, perhaps, the Greek word “kai” might have been added later. ..that it was not original with Paul!

The Context

And why should we care? Verse 5!  “Adopt the same attitude as that of Christ Jesus.” In view of this context, that of Jesus Christ’s sacrifice for our sins, is it conceivable that any conscientious or deliberate effort would have been spent by Paul on any selfish thought of a private or proudful interest in matters of his ministry? To the contrary: Paul sought to know this Jesus “and the fellowship of his sufferings, being conformed to his death” [Philippians 3:10],

The word “and” here would water down this sincere and wholehearted devotion to following Jesus that Paul exemplified. Look closely: Let each of you look not only to his own interests….  The word only [ESV] in an effort to translate the Greek word “and” opens the way for believers to condone and justify self-interests unlike the Savior who gave all for you and me.

Can there be such a thing as a selfish believer? See Philippians 2:21.

My Conclusion

I have a textual right to exclude the word “and” putting my brother and sister in Christ above myself without exception.  I have a textual right to read with the NIV: not looking to [my] own interests. I dare say, that was most assuredly Paul’s heart.

¹ The Biblical Greek SBL – Society of Biblical Literature & Westcott and Hort: μὴ τὰ ἑαυτῶν ἕκαστοι σκοποῦντες, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ ἑτέρων ἕκαστοι.
² The Living Bible: Don’t just think about your own affairs, but be interested in others, too, and in what they are doing.
³ Copyright © 2017 by Holman Bible Publishers.
⁴ Luther ... ein jeglicher sehe nicht auf das Seine, sondern auch auf das, was des andern ist.
… each one does not look to his own, but also to what is the other.
⁵ Vulgate non quae sua sunt singuli considerantes, sed ea quae aliorum.
Look not every man on his own things, but  those of others.
⁶ The Society for Distributing Hebrew Scriptures: אַל … איש לטובַת … לְבֵדו כי אִמ־גֵמ לְטוֹבֵת ךַעֵהו
not …each to the good of theirs alone but with also to the good of his neighbor.
⁷ J. P. Lange’s Commentary, The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians by Karl Braune, 7th printing,  and
Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians by J.  B. Lightfoot, 15th printing
⁸ Lange, pg. 82
⁹ Lightfoot, pg. 110
¹⁰ °[kαι]
¹¹ The NA 27 edition, Introduction in English page 56.
¹² ibid. page 54.
¹³ https://apps.lib.umich.edu/reading/Paul/perspective.html

There is historically a natural tension in a democracy between the branches of a shared government.  In the U.S. the House and the Senate, or the Legislature and the Judiciary, for example—it is only reasonable to assume—are engaged in this political tug-a-war which pulls the nation in one direction or the other. In the U.S. it is at times an unseen but powerful war between the White House and the Congress. …and our 45th President was a “fighter.”

The nation is quiet “for now,” or so it appears, since, thanks to the latest election, the occupant of the White House is a docile leader willing to give Congress its due. We sigh in acceptance of Mr. Biden’s administration and enjoy the political quiet that might be more perceived than actual.  But we will take it, as I said, “for now.”

We look back at some presidencies and evaluate their performance in terms of the emergencies of the time: a global conflict, a devastating national poverty, a failing economy, etc.  And more often than not we are thankful that the person in the White House was who it was at the time: FDR during WW2, and who could not appreciate the historical significance of George Washington during our national infancy.

So what of “Trump”? Masses of Americans shouted their love for him! Will he be back for a second term? If I may: I hope not, even though, I am glad he was in the White House when he was. President Trump came to us compliments of a growing national discontent over class tensions misdiagnosed as racial. The nation was hurting but couldn’t identify the source of its pain. President Trump became—what I metaphorically call—the contrast in a bureaucratic MRI that exposed a reality Americans had no idea existed within the body politic. …He exposed a malignant class struggle which is misnamed as racism by those who want to profit by it.

Exposed!? I learned more about government in the last four years than in all the books I read. I even came to recognize voices in the Congress during the recent impeachment trial. What was exposed by President Trump’s Administration? It is a class struggle between Main Street and Wall Street, between fly-over America and the Coastal states, between the stench of greed washed and perfumed as a social concern for the poor and the hope we affectionately call the “American” dream.

So what now?  I called this a political—and a social—malignancy that hopefully is not in some final stage for which the U.S. Constitution has no remedy. We might want to laugh off the idea of China’s economic and military dominance.  We may want to silence the voice of middle America though what they offer the economy is irreplaceable and essential to our national well-being. We might be just enjoying the peaceful relationship between the press and our aging president who strolls the White House grounds in a mediocre display of calm.

But there is a presidency to “fight” for, because there is a nation, our nation, that needs his /her spunk, her/his strength of character and vision, to lead us into a good future. We need to get the cancer, the class struggle, that is not American, by any definition, out of our system.

Okay.  I’ll say it!  We need the Church, a church on its knees and promoting the message of the Cross.  Senator Swalwell was more on point than he knew when He confused Calvary with cavalry.  We do need to raise the Christian banner of the former without calling out the later.

I am thankful that there was a President Trump.  There!  I said that, too!

 

Jesus lovingly encouraged, “blessed is the one who isn’t offended by me” [ Luke 7:23] But perhaps most of us have been offended at one time or another in something He said that challenged our way of life, that pushed-back on our interests, that exposed a argumentative side to our temperament not in keeping with the Spirit of His message, or simply showed a disinterest in something we thought had great merit. Scholars, using a Biblical phrase, call this a “lithos proskommatos” a “stone of stumbling” and Peter saw this as intentional on God’s part. Jesus can be offensive.

For it stands in Scripture: See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and honored cornerstone, … that the builders rejected … a stone to stumble over…. They stumble because they disobey the word…. 1 Peter 2:6-8

In Mark 10:21, Jesus told a rich young man [because He genuinely cared], “Go, sell all you have and give to the poor …. Then come, follow me.” He instructed a concerned son to leave the burial of his [aging?] father [Matthew 8:22] to someone else. He told married men that the price of service outreached any love of—even one’s—spouse [Luke 14:26].

And while greed or the love of money remained an enemy of godliness [Matthew 6:24] Jesus commended a thieving steward for his financial prowess. [Luke 16:9]  One commentator explained, “the ethical character of its use is represented as cleaving to itself.”  In other words, mammon is okay for unfaithful stewards to use.  Smart is smart!  But I should buy my friendships!? The NIV: “use worldly wealth to gain friends…”

Regarding marriage, Jesus failed to sanction gay unions by reaffirming that God made us male and female [Mark 10:6] giving the preacher no leeway in the matter. Aborting the unborn, likewise, fails the test of  Scripture.  It is impossible to surmise God’s disinterest in the welfare of the unborn.

G. R. Evans [in Alan of Lille (Cambridge, OUP,1983),pp.33—41. ] tells us that, “Augustine frequently discusses Scripture’s peculiar “usus loquendi” [manner of speaking]. [Augustine] sees such departures from the ordinary way of putting things … as a reflection of the power of the divine Word which breaks the bounds of ordinary grammar.” Take, for example, Luke 12:29: Don’t strive for what you should eat and what you should drink, and don’t be anxious.

The anxiety here is the greek word meteorizesthe which, says Professor Lange, “echoes also in our [word] ‘Meteor.’” Meteors are known for their fiery entry into our atmosphere on their momentous fall to earth. Luke’s use of this term, to restate Augustine, “breaks the bounds of ordinary grammar” and sets forth in metaphor a profound truth. Lange explains, “Especially does the high flight of fancy appear to be meant, when one creates imagined necessities for himself, and for this reason is doubly ill-content with reality, and … allows himself so much the more to be seduced into unbelieving anxiety.”

The Greek dictionary uses such words as “elevated with false hopes… unsettled…wild thinking, vain imagining..of doubtful mind” to describe this meteoric rise into the realm of foreboding desires. David called it in Psalm 131:1 an “exalted heart” and Obadiah 4 sees it as a desire to “soar.. among the stars”.

Extracting the marrow of this truth: Jesus is talking about an anxiety built upon imagined necessities—or if the needs are real, imagining our Lord somehow negligent in meeting them—making such a christian doubly ill-content with his or her reality. …and living with longings that faith should be able to meet, emotional waves which faith is well able to calm. Jesus labeled this an example of little faith. [In the biblical language this is one word never used before. Did Jesus invent it? [oligopistoi Luke 12:28]

In translating this text we cannot be sure if Luke was recording only the anxious anticipation of hunger, that God might not give us tomorrow our daily bread …like He has all along. Somehow empty coffers unnerve even believers. Or have we gone higher in our anticipation? In the interest in having something which represents a frivolous desire, something someone else has, or, perhaps, something we rationalize we are entitled to have, we are overwrought with a most unreasonable quest for things. Instead of calming this maverick passion or lust through a time of prayer we entertain a growing anxiety—not over what God promises, because He, all along, has proven Himself faithful. We are not at peace within because we have our eyes on circumstances that might deny us “things,” things that have no eternal value and are, therefore, of lesser concern to God once our basic needs are indeed met by Him. Earthly interests are meteors burning up in the atmosphere of a hot passion for the “higher” life. Are they not!?

Luke 12: 30-32, 34 “…Your Father knows,” Jesus reassured, “that you need [the basics: food, clothes, etc.]. “But seek his kingdom, and these things will be provided for you. Don’t be afraid, little flock, because your Father delights to give you the kingdom. …

Then in verse 33 Jesus seemed to go too far: Sell your possessions and give to the poor.

But think about it. If we are less attached to our “things,” if we are “poor in spirit” [Matthew 5:3], we will see more clearly by faith that God has indeed provided all we ever really needed. And then there’s this [the rest of this verse and the next]:

“Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”

The miracle of Jairus’ 12 year old daughter’s “rise from death” deserves a closer look since it is a story of limited expectations.  God thru Jesus unexpectedly raised her from the dead, similarly to Lazarus’ resurrection which shocked the popular senses. Both Martha and Mary somehow knew that had Jesus been there earlier, their brother, Lazarus, would not have died. They believed that much in His healing powers.  As for the resurrection, that is an eschatological event but never expected before then. [How often theology gets in the way of faith!]

Then Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother wouldn’t have died. … … Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”  – John 11:21, 24 & 32

We know that Jairus did not anticipated Jesus arriving at his house after his daughter’s passing. vs 42, “she was dying….” Jairus knew that his princess, his life’s source of joy, was near death, [but still alive.  He was desperate now.]

He fell down at Jesus’s feet and pleaded with him [Jesus] to come to his house, …. Luke 8:41-21

But someone came to him with an update,

“Your daughter is dead. Don’t … [annoy] the teacher … [any longer].” — Luke 8:49.

I didn’t know God was annoyed by our supplications especially if it concerns our children! The “messenger” informed Jairus possibly over the noise of an excited crowd of followers.

The record says of them: [vs 40] “When Jesus returned, the crowd welcomed him, for they were all expecting him.” (We do tend to welcome Him more readily if we have been waiting on Him.)

“Jesus heard” [vs 50] are one of my favorite phrases in the Bible. We need to learn, perhaps, to trust Him in matters that frighten us into thinking the unthinkable.

This is the confidence we have before him: If we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. – 1 John 5:14

Luke’s account adds:  Only the parents and Peter, John & James were welcomed to join Him into her bedroom where she lay in state but Jesus claimed was only asleep. [How transparent is truth. vs. 51. “and the child’s father [oh, yes,] and mother.” The value of this verse awaits another blog.]

A group of mourners had gathered in the living room of the house beating their chests and wailing loudly [vs 52]. “We can easily imagine how great a din.” writes J. P. Lange.  [They went from mourning to laughing—not exactly typical of a truly broken heart. vs. 53]

This was unlike the cry of those mothers who saw their infant sons thrust through by King Herod while Jesus was secretly swept away into the protection of an Egyptian exile until the king died. In the Christmas story: “A voice was heard in Ramah, [a] great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children; and she refused to be consoled…..” [Mt 2:18] The language in this account is not a public display like the gathering at Jairus’s house but a private and unsharable pain that only God is merciful enough to hear.

When Jesus took her by the hand, sat her up, and instructed them to feed her [vs. 56] her parents were “astounded”!  This is not the voice of praise but the sound of a limited expectation of God’s loving involvement in a traumatic loss.  Let faith reveal untold possibilities that God might do for us.  We might not know what God is going to do when we pray but let’s not be so surprised when He does it.