What Does Jesus Mean By Hating Father and Mother?

Question:  Luke 18:26 ….please explain what Jesus said about if we do not hate our mothers, fathers etc. This saying from the Jesus I do not understand.

Answer:  The passage you mention is Luke 18:29–30, And he said to them, “Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or wife or brothers or parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, who will not receive many times more in this time, and in the age to come eternal life.” (ESV).  In Luke 14:26, Jesus says, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.”

Jesus did not hate his mother but provided for her at his death by committing her to John’s care.  Jesus’ is talking here about our priorities.  Our first priority as Jesus’ disciples must be to follow and love him above all else.  He could not say this if he were not God.  Jesus is calling us to love God above all others because only then will we be able to love our loved ones in the truest way.  So Jesus is speaking in heightened terms here to make the point.  It is intended to shock us into thinking deeply about our most prior commitments.  But he also promises that such commitments will yield reward in the kingdom.

What Are the Proper Elements to Use in the Lord’s Supper?

Question:  My Church has been using Oyster Crackers for unleavened bread ? And Grape Juice for the wine. I am very concerned about the Crackers. Are we not supposed to use unleavened Bread ? I’m very concerned !!!

Answer:  Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper during Passover and at Passover they would only use unleavened bread to remind them of the day they left Egypt in haste and left behind all the old life.  There is nothing said in Scripture about what exactly we must use in our supper to commemorate Jesus’ sacrifice and promised coming again, but we have historically used elements similar to those at the Passover dinner to show continuity with that past deliverance and our own.  Jesus is our Passover Lamb.

But I don’t believe we are required to use unleavened bread.  There are some places on earth where believers would have a hard time coming up with either of these elements (I’m thinking Papua New Guinea and other remote places).  The most important thing is that we are recognizing in these elements the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ for us and anticipating the great wedding feast of the kingdom when we will sit down to meal with Jesus as his bride and commemorate the coming of the kingdom to earth.

If Christians are forgiven, why are we going to be judged?

Question:  It says in the Bible that those who are in Christ are free from condemnation. If this is so, why then willLast Judgement, Triptych we face judgment? And child molesters, rapists, and murderers, are they also free from condemnation when they accept Christ and repent? What sort of judgment might they receive? We will be judged according to our deeds? What does that mean? Christians say we should be free from guilt and shame and accept the free gift of grace and salvation. Then they say we will be judged. This is confusing to me. Should I fear for my salvation or just believe all is well? And honestly, where’s the justice? For those who lived a life of abuse and neglect, hurt, and shame caused by another, God says He will make things right for us. But if the perpetrator is forgiven completely, where’s justice for the victim?

Answer:  There are several judgments mentioned in the Bible.  The final judgment is mentioned in Revelation 20:11-15 and is often referred to as The Great White Throne Judgment because if depicts Jesus sitting on a white throne as he carries out this judgment.  But only unbelievers are present at this judgment, only those whose names are not found written in the Lamb’s book of life.  They are thus judged for not having believed in Christ and they are also judged on their works.  This suggests that there are degrees of punishment in hell (see my article on this).  Dante, in his book Inferno, sought to describe what these different degrees of punishment looked like but there are no specific descriptions given in Scripture.

Believers, on the other hand, will appear before the Judgment Seat of Christ (2 Corinthians 5:10):

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.

Though it may sound as if this determines whether we are saved or not, Paul makes it clear in all his writings, and especially in 1 Corinthians 3:10-15, that this judgment is really about determining our reward in heaven.  Just as there are degrees of punishment in hell, there are degrees of reward in heaven.  There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ (Romans 8:1).  When we believe we “pass from death to life” (John 5:24).

But your question suggests that for those who have been abused the presence of their perpetrator or any perpetrator in heaven because they repented and were forgiven may compromise your sense of reward.  This assumes that the sin of the perpetrator is different in kind than your sin and less worthy of forgiveness.  And truly, the sin of the perpetrator is egregious and heinous, having devastated and tortured the life of the victim in extraordinary ways.  But we are also rebels against God’s kingdom and rule.  We too have rejected the love and grace of God until He visited us in grace and forgave us.  We are equally undeserving of heaven.

Besides, when we are fully enveloped in the love of heaven, we will be able to love the perpetrator the way God loves the perpetrator and the way He loves us.  We will be able to say as Christ did, “Father, forgive them.”  The perpetrator will be able to acknowledge how deeply and gravely he injured those he abused and seek reconciliation.  We have seen a bit of this miraculous transformation in the aftermath of the end of apartheid in South Africa and in the forgiveness offered after the slaughter of Tutsis and Hutus.

There is a need in human beings, generated by the uncompromising love and justice of God, to see justice done and to see hatred quashed.  God has figured out a way to do both.  If there is not justice for the least infraction, there is no justice.  If there is not forgiveness for the worst infraction, there is no forgiveness.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Is Jesus Angry If We Do Any Business or Trade at Church?

Question:  The one(?) time that Jesus got angry was when there were merchants selling stuff in the temple. How is that different than the craft fairs or church bazaars where people are selling stuff at the church?

Answer:

There were several times Jesus got angry (check out this article), but the thing that made him angry on this occasion was that as worshipers came to the temple for a proscribed or required festival and had to make sacrifices, it was much easier to buy an animal once you traveled to Jerusalem than to bring one from your town far away.  But the leaders in Jerusalem determined that you could only pay for them with a certain temple coin, so that required making a monetary exchange.  It was not a one-to-one exchange.  I suppose you could say there was a money-changing fee attached, but it ended up being a tax and a hardship on many.  Then, of course, the law of supply and demand caused the prices for animals, etc, there in the temple precinct to be inflated.  Instead of helping people worship God it was making it difficult.

In other words, that is completely different from having a church bazaar or craft fair or a bookstore, for example.  Now if a church were requiring you to buy a craft in order to participate in their worship service, that would make Jesus mad.

Is Jesus God or the Son of God?

Question:  Was Jesus God or the Son of God–did God beget him or was he always around–and did he (Jesus) create the world?

Answer:  Yes.

All of that is true.  Mark 1:1 says Jesus is the Son of God.  John 1:1 says Jesus is God.  John 1:3 it says nothing was made without Jesus.  Colossians 1:15,16 says Jesus is the firstborn of all creation and that in him all things were made.  John 1:18 says Jesus is either “the only [begotten] God” or  “the only [begotten] Son” depending on what the correct text is.  And I put the word “begotten” in brackets because there is a question as to the meaning of the Greek word used here, monogenes.

The word monogenes could mean “only begotten” or it could mean “one and only” or it could mean “unique.”  It is used of Jesus in John 3:16.  But it is also used of Isaac in Hebrews 11:17.  Was Isaac Abraham’s only begotten son?  No, he had sired Ishmael earlier.  But Isaac was his special son by Sarah, the one to whom he was giving his inheritance.  Is Jesus begotten by the Father, or does this term monogenes simply designate him as the unique Son of God as opposed to all created beings who might be designated sons of God?

I lean toward the view that monogenes, when applied to Jesus, means “unique” Son of God.  However, Scripture also says in 1 John 5:18 of Jesus that he is “born of God.”  There is a doctrine that has developed from this called the eternal generation of the Son, which it says is “an eternal personal act of the Father, wherein, by necessity of nature, not by choice of will, He generates the person (not the essence) of the Son, by communicating to Him the whole indivisible substance of the Godhead, without division, alienation, or change, so that the Son is the express image of His Father’s person, and eternally continues, not from the Father, but in the Father, and the Father in the Son.” (See Theopedia)

What this means is that from all eternity God the Father has been in a relationship with the Son by which He has generated the personality of the Son (and He and the Son have “generated” the personality of the Spirit) so that they share the same essence (deity, divine nature).  This makes them entirely equal in every sense of the word so that each is rightly called God, and yet Jesus can also rightly be called the Son of God.  This doctrine makes a lot of sense of the data of Scripture concerning Jesus absolute deity (John 1:1) and yet his submission to the Father in all things.  This makes it reasonable for him to be the one who takes on human nature (the Father and the Spirit did not do this) and to rule God’s kingdom until it can be handed over to the Father (1 Corinthians 15:24).  Jesus is thus “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Hebrews 1:3), which seems to speak of some kind of derivation from the Father, and yet at the same time exact equality.

This is a difficult concept to wrap our heads around, but then God is the most amazing and unique being of all, infinite and beyond our ultimate ability to comprehend, yet able to correctly reveal Himself to us in true ways that enable us to know Him.

So the answer to all your questions is, “Yes.”

Is It Wrong In Every Case to Cuss?

Question:  A lot of people quote Ephesians 4:29 when they tell me cussing is a sin, but it doesn’t say cussing its talking about corrupt speech.  I always thought that means verbally going off on someone to make them feel like crud. I didn’t think it was referring to cussing, and the individual who told me this really laid it on thick.  I haven’t even said I dreamed a dream to my mom in a long time cuz it has the word h**l in it, but does the bible really tell us not to cuss?

Now don’t get me wrong I try not to use foul language especially with people but I mean like for those who sing or act, if it is in the lyrics or script would it then be acceptable since you’re not going off on someone? I guess for this one I just wonder what is scriptural and what is just going overboard.  I know a lot of Christian actors or singers who have a hard time choosing if it would be okay in that instance or not.

Answer:  What is the purpose of using cuss words? To shock, to shut someone up, to inflict pain? Does that comport with Paul’s instructions in Ephesians 4:29 to only let words that build others up to come from your mouth? Now an actor, portraying someone who cusses might be a different issue since the role is seeking to communicate a message about how people interact or whatever. But some uses of cuss words are completely gratuitous and unnecessary and it is questionable whether believers should put themselves in such movies. This too is not an open and shut case.

Question:  But I don’t know if I’m just dumb or what but the whole Ephesians 4:29 still feels wrong.  I mean I was raised to see words as just words unless you put your intent behind them.  For instance if I cuss someone out and make them feel like crud then yes it goes against that scripture, but what about if I cuss in a joke to make a friend feel better or sometimes a motivational speech had a cuss word in it.  Now I don’t know if I’m alone in this but a cuss word is meant to portray a stronger emotion either good or bad. I have never thought that cuss words were inherently bad. Am I wrong?

Plus, what is and is not a bad word is cultural also, so I mean take the word bloody for instance to me it means nothing, but if I go to England is basically like saying d**n or the F bomb.

I honestly don’t mean to be argumentative but I just don’t understand how we can take this scripture and apply it to certain sets of words that our society has decided are bad over time, I mean am I wrong in thinking that Ephesians is referring to how you use words? Cuz like I pointed out even a supposedly bad word can be very edifying if used properly.

Answer:  You are not wrong, there is nothing inherently wrong in most of the words we have designated cuss words. I can see the situation you are talking about when a cuss word might actually cheer a friend. It is all about intent and purpose. Perhaps the only reason a cuss word would cheer a friend is because our culture has chosen to express emotion that way. This might suggest that we are bad at communicating emotion or that there are just certain emotions that demand a harsh word. Words that denote a sexual act may fall into a different category in that we are treating something precious as crude. Maybe it is better that we overcome our derogatory views of sexuality than submit to a cultural usage in that case.

You are being discerning and I think that is the mark of a Christian. We don’t conform to the world if the world is portraying a wrong perspective, but there are still beautiful and valuable aspects to our world’s cultures that we can endorse. It is God’s common grace to all (Matt 5:45-48) that enables human beings to do good despite ourselves.

Is There No Forgiveness For Intentional Sin?

Question:  Hebrews 10:26 says that if we sin willfully knowing better there is no more sacrifice for our sins.
Well I have been taught that if you keep sinning over again knowing you’re going to do it, like premeditated sinning I guess you could call it, that’s what the scripture is talking about.  Others say that its talking about rejecting Christ as savior after knowing the truth.   So which is it?

Answer:  Let me let you decide.  Here is the full passage:

Hebrews 10:26, If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. 28 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?

Does it seem clear to you that the deliberate sinning being talked about here is equivalent to having “trampled the Son of God underfoot”?  And if you view the letter as a whole it is written to a church with many Jewish believers who are considering returning to Judaism.  Context clearly answers your question.

But the other question here is one of choosing to deliberately keep sinning.  How does that affect you?  I think the answer is it hardens your heart and your conscience to sin.  It makes it harder and harder to really come to a place of repentance.  You are damaging your soul and certainly hurting the heart of God.  A true believer cannot lose his or her salvation.  But God will certainly, out of love for you, discipline you until you come to a place of righteousness (Hebrews 12:4-11).  That is not an enviable place to be.

See also:

Do I Have to Hate My Family to Follow Jesus?

Heart of Jesus

Heart of Jesus (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Question:  “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26).  Can you help me with the “hate” part of this?

Answer:  We know that Jesus wants us to love our family.  Jesus loved his mother enough to entrust her to his disciple John (John 19:25-27).  His apostles have taught us to love our families (for example, Ephesians 5:25).  So Jesus must be speaking in a purposely exaggerated way to make a point.  He said it another way on another occasion:

Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. (Matthew 10:37)

Jesus wants his disciples to understand that living for God and His kingdom is more important than anything, including any relationships.  Now living for God and His kingdom, as we saw above, includes loving your family.  But there are people who have chosen to reject God because their family members didn’t want them to become believers (think of conversion to Christianity among Muslims).  And there are times when we mistakenly think that focusing on our family instead of God will actually help our family when just the opposite is true (think of those who won’t take their kids to church just because they say, “I don’t want to go.”).

To be sure people can abuse this principal in the opposite way.  A pastor can think that he must spend all his time at the church helping parishioners and yet neglects his family.  But Jesus is not addressing that issue here.  He is addressing the issue of how much commitment is required to follow him.  In the very next sentence in the Luke 14 passage he says, “And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.”

We have to love him more than our own lives, as well.  Knowing God is the most important thing in our lives.  Nothing can eclipse it without endangering our souls.  No other reality can make us the persons we need to be in order to love our families and make a positive difference in the world.  This one commitment must trump all others or we will fail to be the people God created us to be.

Was John the Baptist the Promised “Elijah” Who Was to Come?

Question: In Matthew 17:11-13 Jesus tells his disciples that Elijah has already come and he was not recognized. It goes on to say that the disciples understood that Jesus was speaking of John the Baptist, however in John 1:21 when John is asked if he is Elijah, his reply is “I am not”. I am having a bit of trouble understanding this part of the scriptures and would be thankful for any clarity you could offer about this.

Answer: Jesus does not quite say that John the Baptist is the Elijah to come (a prophecy from Malachi 4:5,6 that says Elijah will come before the great and dreadful day of the Lord to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and of the children to their fathers). He says, “Elijah comes and will restore all things” (i.e., he is coming in the future to do this), but “Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him.” And in Matthew 11:14 he said, “If you will accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.”

This suggests that like many prophecies there is a near fulfillment and an ultimate fulfillment. John the Baptist is not Elijah. But he was acting like the predicted Elijah of Malachi 4 calling the people to repentance in anticipation of the coming of the day of the Lord, a day when God visits His people for judgment and then blessing.

What would have happened if the leadership had accepted John’s testimony and received Jesus as the Messiah? Would God have brought the end of the ages to completion? Wouldn’t Jesus have still had to die for our sins? He would have had to die for our sins but we may suppose he would have been killed at the hands perhaps of the Romans instead of at the instigation of the Jews. Peter says in Acts 3:19-21 that if the people of Israel would repent that “the times of refreshing may come from the Lord.” He further said that Jesus “must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets.” If the nation as a whole had responded to the gospel at that point perhaps He would have sent Jesus back and in essence John the Baptist would have fulfilled the role of Elijah in its ultimate fulfillment.

This also suggests that it may not be literal Elijah (revived from the dead or resurrected) who comes in fulfillment of Malachi 4, but someone who comes “in the spirit and power of Elijah” (Luke 1:17) as was predicted by the angel when he announced John the Baptist’s birth to his father. The “Elijah” yet to come will be like Elijah in the way he ministers and calls Israel to repentance.

Should John the Baptist have understood that he was the one to fulfill an Elijah-like role in Israel?  Should he have answered yes to the question of the religious leaders when they asked him if he was Elijah?  Perhaps it was dependent on the leaders recognizing him as such before he could boldly claim that role.  Perhaps he was unwilling to take that title upon himself, leaving that to Jesus, the king.

For further reading:

http://carm.org/bible-difficulties/matthew-mark/was-john-baptist-really-elijah

http://www.gotquestions.org/John-Baptist-Elijah.html

http://www.equip.org/articles/was-john-the-baptist-elijah/

Does Satan Have the Power of Death?

Question:  When someone goes in for an operation and others say it’s in God’s hands, is it, or is it in Satan’s hands, since he can give death not God–because God does not kill and God gave Satan the power of death.

Answer:  I presume you are thinking about this from the standpoint of the teaching in Hebrews:

Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil (Hebrews 2:14).

I think, however, that you may be interpreting this without taking into account what the rest of Scripture says about who holds the right to determine whether someone dies or not.  You may recall that in the garden in Eden that God told Adam that in the day he ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil he would die (Genesis 2:17).  Satan, through the serpent, contradicted that statement (Genesis 3:4).  But God declared to Adam after he ate it that he would return to the ground from which he was taken and also removed the couple from the garden so they couldn’t eat from the tree of life and live forever (Genesis 319, 22-24).  God also delivered one of Adam’s descendents, Enoch, from dying by simply taking him (Genesis 5:24).

When human sin became so great that God decided to send the flood, he told humans that this would happen in 120 years (Genesis 6:3) and decided to end all life but Noah’s and his family’s (Genesis 6:13).  After the flood God told Noah and all mankind that He was giving them the responsibility to take human life from those who murdered other humans (Genesis 9:6).  In Genesis 22 God told Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac, but of course withheld his hand and provided a sacrifice in his place.

In the Exodus from Egypt God required the lives of all the firstborn of Egypt, saying that He would go through the land to accomplish this (Exodus 11).  In the laws He gave Israel through Moses He required the death penalty for several infractions other than murder (for example, kidnapping, Exodus 21:16) to be carried out by Israel’s leadership.

Now, in the book of Job, when Satan engineers the deaths of Job’s children, Job does not blame Satan, but says, “The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away” (Job 1:21).  Perhaps Job was just ignorant that it was really Satan who made that decision.  But we are assured that is not the case when Satan wants to afflict Job.  God specifically tells Satan that he must not kill Job (Job 2:6).  In other words, it is God alone who determines who dies.

But this leads us to think of a very helpful distinction we must always observe.  There is the primary cause of all things, God, and there are secondary causes that God uses to accomplish His purposes.  He determines who dies, but He puts it in the hands of human officials to carry out the sentence, and sometimes allows Satan to carry out the work of bringing a deadly situation to a human life.

So when the author of Hebrews says Satan has the “power of death” we need to think clearly about what that means.  Does it mean he has the absolute power to determine who dies and who doesn’t?  Apparently not.  In the context the author speaks of the slavery we are under to fear of death.  Could the “power of death” be referring to the power Satan has to make us afraid of death?  This makes much more sense in context.  In this sense, then, Jesus has broken his power by making it clear that death leads to an eternal life with God through Christ’s sacrifice.  Satan no longer has the ability or “power” to enslave us with the fear of death.

Randall Johnson