Welcome to my blog...whatever image springs to mind, be it a hippopotamus, Tigger, red-haired Highland cattle, or a simple kitchen table, 'Unless a Seed' is a four-legged creature. My hope is that having read a Book Review, a Poem, or a What is a Christian? or some random post in Everything Else, you will be kind enough to leave a comment or a short reply. And I hope you enjoy reading its contents
Loose Change
Pig. The ceramic one that stares at me
Frozen in time
Is still fed, when food is found,
But his expression
Is little altered
A decade has passed
Since his last oil change
The rubber seal left undisturbed
Until this morning
And out it, they, pour
Metallic sounds
Like snapping branches
And small sounding cymbals
Announce the purging
Tanners, shillings, and half-crowns
Jostling, like children
For their place
Woe betide anyone who says to them
‘Loose change’
The Queen’s face will not be amused
There is a date that must not be spoken aloud
Valentine’s plus one, 1971
In a stroke, at midnight,
The pig became a museum
And its currency lost all purchasing power
Like all of us, sons of Adam,
Caught up in a Messiah on a cross
Brought into His death
Losing all our old purchasing power
And buried, out of sight
And now? The whole of creation
Stands on tip-toe
Waiting for the new currency
God’s loose change
Sons of God, to be revealed.
Baptism – beyond the controversy Part III
When John the Baptist was preaching, he prophesied: ‘I baptise you with water, but there is coming One who will baptise you with Holy Spirit and with fire’ Mat 4v11, Mk 1v 8, Luke 3 v 16, John 1 v 33
In the third of four blogs on Baptism - getting beyond the controversy we continue with Part III: John the Baptist prophesied that he baptised with water, but someone was coming who would ‘baptise with the Holy Spirit’. But what does it mean to be baptised with the Holy Spirit?
Click here to read Part II
Baptism in the Holy Spirit
Acts 1 v 5 ‘John truly baptised water, but you shall be baptised with the Holy Spirit’
There needs to be someone to administer the baptism: it’s not DIY.
When John the Baptist was preaching, he prophesied: ‘I baptise you with water, but there is coming One who will baptise you with Holy Spirit and with fire’ Mat 4v11, Mk 1v 8, Luke 3 v 16, John 1 v 33
Jesus repeated John’s prophecy to the disciples: ‘John truly baptised with water, but you shall be baptised with the Holy Spirit’.
He said this just prior to the Ascension. The three years of Jesus’ discipleship of the apostles, and others, had led to this moment. Jesus would ascend into heaven but from there would baptise the disciples with the Holy Spirit.
Jesus is the baptiser with the Holy Spirit and when the Spirit was poured out on the disciples on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2) true Christianity began:
‘When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place and there came a sound from heaven…and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them the ability’.
This pouring out of the Holy Spirit was repeated throughout the book of Acts, as people came to faith, they received the baptism in the Holy Spirit; some at the point of conversion, some before (see Acts 10 v44), some after (see Acts 8v 1-17).
Why are not all believers baptised in the Spirit? Most often because they either haven’t been told about the Holy Spirit, but we will deal with this later.
What should be commonplace in the churches is not. When I was taken to church in my childhood, I could not understand why the services were so unlike the ministry of Jesus and the apostles. It was largely because of this mismatch that I doubted the authenticity of the New Testament and, like so many, although I was attracted to Jesus, his teaching, his criticism of the religious leaders, and miracles, the disparity between what I was seeing and what was being read to us from Scripture was too great. Whatever longings I might have had to believe in Him were buried in the lack of evidence around me in church that the Scriptures were genuine. And so, I, along with so many of my generation, swelled the ranks of the agnostics.
I then began to hear and read accounts of individuals and churches that were experiencing the very things I knew as so lacking in my experience of church. After a great deal of soul searching and reading, I was faced with a choice. Eventually, I believed. I’m one of those who had an instantaneous conversion to Christ. Nothing dramatic. As an agnostic, I had stopped reciting the Apostles Creed during church services for years, but on one particular Sunday morning, I opened my mouth and as I said the familiar words ‘I believe in God, the Father…’ I believed. The speaking and believing were simultaneous. It was very quiet. No altar calls or dramatic music. And yet everything changed in that moment. It’s difficult to describe.
And yet I also knew, from reading accounts of the baptism in the Spirit, that this baptism hadn’t happened automatically for me at that time. That came later.
To return to the subject matter, baptism in the Spirit is not about baptism in water; Baptism in the Spirit is Jesus immersing us, flooding us, saturating us with the Spirit of God.
Jesus’ vision of the Christian faith is described in John chapter 7:
‘If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the scripture has said, , out of his heart will flow rivers of living water’ But this he said concerning the Spirit…Who had not yet been given’ (John 7 v 37-39).
This was Jesus’ understanding of the fundamental nature of what has become known as Christianity; it should be our normal experience.
The baptism in the Spirit is all about thirst. How thirsty are you? I’ve only been seriously dehydrated once. Foolishly, I didn’t take enough water with me walking around Snowdon and around the ridges leading off Snowdon away from the well-worn paths. There were no streams at all, it’s arid up there. And, unusual perhaps for Wales, it was a very hot, sunny day, with not a cloud in the sky. By the time I staggered back to where I had a small bivouac by a stream, I lay down headfirst in the stream and drank and drank, desperate for water.
The problem for so many of us in the West, in England and elsewhere, is that we have been steeped in a view of the world from the Enlightenment onwards that has left us with an empirical, evidence and reason-based view of the world…to the exclusion of spiritual revelation. As a Chemistry teacher by profession and someone who was always fascinated by science, I have been ‘baptised’ if you will in that view of the world. I love teaching about Galileo and others who were imprisoned for not following the church’s Aristotelean dominated theories about forces and so on, dropping weights from the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Empirical evidence trumping the thought experiments of Greek philosophy. Both, ironically, exalting Reason above all else, the ability of the human mind to ascertain truth.
But Jesus did not operate like this. On one occasion he fed five thousand with just a few fish and loaves of bread. Reason would have told him to dismiss the crowd so they could go and buy some food. In fact, as I read the bible, Old Testament and New, I found out that all the bible characters had similar experiences. Somehow, they had heard from God, believed what they had heard, and ‘it came to pass’. Reason and evidence has its place, but not to be exalted above all else. It’s hard for us to switch systems! Not that God’s word is a system, the bible says it is living and active, like a two-edged sword, discerning between soul and spirit. ‘Soul’ being our reason, our will, and our emotions; ‘spirit’ being the part of us, our innermost being, where we commune with the Holy Spirit. Essentially, we are spiritual by nature. Our souls and our bodies are amazing, even if they malfunction, but our essential self is spiritual, spirit. And we can become so spiritually dehydrated our innermost beings cry out to be quenched.
The key is the baptism in the Spirit. If we are saturated with the Spirit, if the Spirit becomes this fountain that Jesus spoke about. It is easier to see, then, that we might begin to learn to operate like Jesus. Like the apostles. Like many other ordinary believers as recorded in Acts and the Epistles did. It’s not for the few, it’s for anyone who is thirsty.
Lastly, speaking in tongues and other ‘gifts’ of the Holy Spirit.
To start with I think it is worth saying that for many, like me, the miraculous is such a far cry from our childhood and maybe adulthood experience of church that it is hard to equate speaking in tongues, prophecy, healing, and miracles with church or ‘Christianity’, especially in England! Putting it bluntly, if you were to drive to the nearest town, attend the Morning Service, you are not likely to hear someone speak in tongues, or prophesy, or a miracle of healing take place before your eyes. These things are so foreign to our expectation of Sunday services, we would be shocked to see or hear them.
And yet this is exactly what the New Testament teaches, and the early church practiced. But not only then. There have always been churches that have known this reality and there are a growing number – even in England!
It all starts with being thirsty. As Jesus said ‘If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink…’
The baptism in the Spirit is not an ‘experience’, although many do experience a sense of power, or speaking in tongues (other languages), or prophesy, but is the foundation and doorway of the true and normal Christian life, which is led by the Spirit, not our ability alone to think; our reason.
Please click here for Baptism – getting beyond the controversy Part IV
Baptism – getting beyond the controversy Part II
In the second of four blogs on Baptism - getting beyond the controversy we continue with Part II: In his letter to the Romans, Paul writes about being ‘baptised into Christ Jesus’. The passage in Romans 6 is often used to explain the imagery of water baptism but what did Paul really have in mind?
In the second of four blogs on Baptism - getting beyond the controversy we continue with Part II: In his letter to the Romans, Paul writes about being ‘baptised into Christ Jesus’. The passage in Romans 6 is often used to explain the imagery of water baptism but what did Paul really have in mind?
Click here to read Part I
Getting beyond the controversy does not mean that baptism is not controversial! Look at this exchange between Jesus and his opponents, the religious leaders:
‘Tell me,’ Jesus said, ‘the baptism of John – was it from heaven or from men?’ Luke 20 v 4
They refused. They couldn’t say ‘heaven’ otherwise they should have been baptised. But they couldn’t say ‘men’ as they feared the crowd.
And Luke comments earlier in his gospel that ‘the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptised by John’.
As a reminder here are three ‘baptisms’ we are considering are:
Romans 6 v 3 ‘Or do you know know that as many as were baptised into Christ Jesus were baptised into His death?’
Romans 6 v 3: ‘Or do you know know that as many as were baptised into Christ Jesus were baptised into His death?’
The question posed by Paul is relevant today.
It’s really two questions:
Do you know you were baptised into Christ?
Do you, who were baptised into Christ, know you were baptised into His death
I have been a member of three ‘evangelical/charismatic churches’ and I haven’t heard one sermon, and certainly no consistent teaching, on ‘baptism into Christ Jesus’ and ‘baptism into His death’. Not one!
Isn’t that controversial?
As a taster of a fuller explanation, it appears that many theological colleges that prepare ministers and preachers for various denominations, especially Protestant colleges and seminaries, limit their understanding of the crucifixion of Christ to the ‘substitutionary’ nature of Christ’s sacrifice: He died for us and in our place.
That, of course, is wonderfully true. Hymns and songs are written in their thousands and sung with fire and passion to celebrate this truth:
And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Saviour’s blood?
Died He for me who caused His pain
For me who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be
That Thou my God should die for me?
Or…
Who brings our chaos back into order
Who makes the orphan a son and daughter
The King of Glory, the King of Glory
This is amazing grace
This is unfailing love
That You would take my place
That You would bear my cross
You lay down Your life
That I would be set free
Jesus, I sing for
All that You’ve done for me
This is Amazing Grace
But where are the sermons, where are the hymns and songs that are gripped with joy over the ‘inclusive’ sacrifice of Christ; that his sacrifice on the cross included us? If it is not taught in theological colleges, it’s therefore locked away in the New Testament like a well-preserved vintage wine. Maybe it’s time to pop the cork?
I think so.
I’ve heard many sermons on baptism explaining that it symbolises a believer’s conversion: leaving their old life behind, ‘dying to sin’ (v2), being buried under the water, like Jesus in the tomb, and then raised up to a new life in Christ as Jesus was resurrected. But many limit themselves to verse 2 – and pick up on the phrase ‘died to sin’ – referring to the person’s decision to leave ‘sin’ behind and put their faith in Christ. Wonderful though that is, and important, this is not what Paul is referring to when he writes of being ‘baptised into Christ Jesus’.
It is not the act of water baptism that produces this spiritual transformation. Not even those who practice infant baptism say that by baptising a baby you ‘make them a Christian’. We don’t bury people to make them die! But when they have died, we must bury them! That’s the explosive message of the gospel! The good news! A new life, baptised into Christ Jesus!
To quote the first six verses of Romans chapter 6:
‘Do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore, we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so, we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him’
To understand how we can have ‘died with Christ’, been ‘crucified with Christ’, when we haven’t even been born when He was crucified, we need to understand the biblical concept of being ‘in’ someone.
The bible speaks of Levi, being ‘in Abraham’ paying tithes to Melchizedek. Abraham had paid the king of Jerusalem, Melchizedek, a tenth of his wealth. Levi was Abraham’s great-grandson and not born when Abraham paid the money. But by being ‘in’ Abraham’s loins (Hebrews 7 v 10) from a biblical perspective he paid the tithes. The Israelites following Moses through the desert were ‘baptised into Moses in the cloud and the sea’ 1 Cor 10 v 1. We are born ‘in Adam’. The biblical understanding is one of inheritance. Once we are ‘in’ someone we inherit all that they are and all they have done. In ‘Adam’ therefore we inherit a sinful nature which explains why we fail to keep any commandments (not just the Ten, but any rules we would like to impose on others; at some point we will probably fail even these!)
But now, says Paul, we have been baptised into Christ and so we are ‘in Christ’. Once we see this and believe it and place our faith in it, we begin to find out just how true it is!
In technical language, this is the ‘inclusive’ sacrifice of Christ. God included you and me in the death of Christ. In His burial. And in His resurrection. When we understand this, our life is put on a completely new footing. No longer is the Christian life one of attempting to be more like Jesus, or even trusting the Holy Spirit to improve us steadily or sanctify us. Rather it is a huge relief, and we are left permanently in a state of utter thankfulness. As if often said about grace: ‘We don’t deserve it, and we didn’t earn it’. It is given freely. As Jesus said ‘freely have you received, freely give.’ That ‘old man’, that ‘in-Adam’ man has been crucified with Christ.
‘I have been crucified with Christ, it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me, the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave Himself for me’ Galatians 2 v 20
Or as Paul says elsewhere: ‘we are new creations in Christ Jesus, the old has gone, see, the new has come!’
The word baptism, as we have seen, means to plunge into, to make thoroughly wet with whatever an object is being baptised into. If it was a piece of cloth being baptised into a vat full of a particular dye, it would emerge soaked in that new colour. Someone has to baptise the cloth; it can’t baptise itself!
In water baptism, usually, there is one person, sometimes two, who baptises the person; so the question arises ‘who is it who baptises us into Christ Jesus?
It is God who baptises us into Christ Jesus.
‘It is of God that you are in Christ Jesus’ 1 Cor 1 v 30
We become thoroughly soaked with Christ…that’s Christianity. Just as you cannot separate the dye from the cloth once the cloth has been dipped, baptizo, nor can you separate Christ from the new believer of the believer from Christ.
Water baptisms are a great occasion. We are symbolically burying someone who has died. But, true to form, we are also celebrating the resurrection in Christ of a person who knows they have died and raised as Paul puts it to ‘walk in newness of life’; Christ’s life penetrating every part of this new life, like the cloth dipped, or baptizo, baptised with a vivid new dye.
To finish, remember the man who was in the hotel and was baptised standing under a sudden storm on his hotel balcony? The longer version of this story of that he had been struggling with Christianity and had decided to read the New Testament, probably the hotel room Gideon bible, I can’t remember. Over the course of a few days, he began to understand and believe what he was reading. Then he read about baptism and realised he needed to be baptised.
In his case God did both baptisms; the one in water as he was drenched in the shower and spiritually.
Baptism – getting beyond the controversy Part I
This is the first of a short series of posts on Baptism and how baptism in water relates to three other baptisms mentioned in the New Testament: baptism into Christ, baptism with the Holy Spirit, and the Spirit baptising us into the body of Christ, the church.
This is the first of a short series of posts on Baptism and how baptism in water relates to three other baptisms mentioned in the New Testament: baptism into Christ, baptism with the Holy Spirit, and the Spirit baptising us into the body of Christ, the church.
I want to write something about baptism. But, if possible, get beyond the controversy over the means of baptism (sprinkling or full immersion) or the timing of baptism (infant baptism or ‘believers’ baptism).
In the New Testament, the Greek word ‘baptizo’ is used for a range of contexts, not just water baptism. The purpose of this article is to explore the following three:
Romans 6 Baptism into Christ Jesus
Acts 1 Baptism in the Holy Spirit
1 Cor 12 Baptism by the Spirit into the body of Christ
I’ll divide the blog into four separate posts. These will be published over the coming weeks.
The first is a brief run-through of the historical background to water baptism, particularly in England. It will touch on the ‘church/chapel’ divide and the ‘non-conformist’ denominations that grew up in Europe and England in part over the controversy over infant baptism.
Then a brief look at what Jews in Israel, alive at the time of Jesus and the apostles, would have made of John the Baptist’s insistence on water baptism before tackling the above trio of passages from the New Testament. If you want to go straight to the last section, you can! I’ll mark each section with a sub-heading.
The next three will tackle the three types of baptism, as mentioned above.
Post One: The historical background
My childhood included a reasonable degree of connection with the local Anglican church. This connection with the CofE and Christianity wasn’t limited to attendance of Sunday Morning services; there were the daily school assemblies with scripture readings, hymns and prayers, Ascension Day service in another CofE church, Cubs, then Scouts, and carol services in Canterbury Cathedral.
One way or another I, along with many of my generation, were soaked in scripture, we knew the major bible characters, Adam and Eve, Moses, David, John the Baptist, Jesus, and the parables. But the connection was mostly surface deep; there was little or no discussion about ‘religion’ at home or at school and certainly no expectation to ‘believe’. What was on offer was more tradition than conviction; th church was there for life’s important milestones, ‘hatch, match, and despatch’ – and hatch meant infant baptism, or ‘Christening’. A good excuse for a family celebration, photos, presents, expensive suits and dresses are bought and, if you’re lucky, a good feast is attached. Life goes on.
Anyone who does not ‘conform’ to this pattern is still included and so, whatever their true beliefs; it is the willingness to go along with tradition that keeps the traditions alive. Many Vicars will baptise the infants of atheists and agnostics as much as the children of the more devout. It says something of the place of the CofE in the life of the nation – it is almost seen as part and parcel of their civic duty, a ‘service’, if you will, to anyone born in the Parish.
Baptism in the New Testament was anything but normal or uncontroversial. Nor was it confined to baptism in water. The term ‘baptism’ was a Greek word used around the Mediterranean for a number of contexts and its use in the New Testament is not restricted to water baptism.
‘Baptizo’, the Greek word for baptism, can have a range of everyday meanings such as sprinkling, dipping, or submerging, or immersion. It is used as the verb to immerse a cloth in a dye, or to wash away or cleanse, or, figuratively, be overwhelmed, or buried. John the Baptist and subsequently the writers of the New Testament, would not have thought of the word ‘baptizo’ as a word exclusively related to spiritual matters. It was a word in common use.
Unlike for us. In Britain and elsewhere, the word baptism is almost exclusively used in connection with either christening or as an initiation into a church. It can be used metaphorically, borrowing from biblical phraseology, for example the phrase ‘baptism of fire’ is used for someone of any age who is joining a team or a business that is known to be a challenging project, either due to controversy or great success.
Throughout church history, since the first century, there have been groups of Christians who have believed that the time to baptise an individual is after they have ‘come to faith’, or ‘believed’, or been ‘born again’, or ‘saved’, or ‘converted’ to Christ i.e. not at birth or shortly afterwards. Famous amongst those groups are the Baptists and Anabaptists who were persecuted and discriminated against for holding such subversive and non-conformist views. It seems odd to us in the 21st Century but until the Toleration Act in England in 1688, holding that view about baptism often resulted in imprisonment and execution. So it has a residual element of controversy to this day.
Churches such as Baptist, Pentecostal, Methodist, and Quakers are still referred to as ‘non-conformist’ churches and the divide between ‘church’ and ‘chapel’ persists even if the heat has diminished.
In this sense I am a non-conformist. My reading of the bible is that it is only those that had committed their lives to Christ that were baptised – you will not find an exception to this in the pages of the New Testament. An infant cannot be expected to make such a choice! The term ‘anabaptist’ means to re-baptise. Many who joined the anabaptists had previously been christened but were baptised once they had come to faith in Christ.
An often-quoted phrase that summarises the belief about baptism amongst many non-conformists is that baptism is an ‘outward sign of an inward spiritual reality’. Arguments will continue on whether those who are ‘christened’ in infant baptism, can take that baptism as sufficient once the spiritual reality has become their experience later in life. That is a personal decision.
This article is not about the controversy surrounding ‘infant baptism’ or ‘believers’ baptism, or the method of baptism: sprinkling, full immersion, in a river, the sea, and so on. This article is about the spiritual realities that are at the heart of the references in the New Testament with respect to baptizo, or baptism.
John the Baptist and after John
We know from the gospels that John the Baptist baptised many in the River Jordan. Jesus spoke of John’s baptism as a baptism of repentance:
‘The word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness. He went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.’ Luke 3 v 3
Not far from where John was baptised were communities of the ‘Essenes’, Jews who were looking for the kingdom of God to appear. To prepare spiritually for the coming of this new kingdom they baptised themselves daily.
John’s baptism, therefore, was similar in that the forgiveness of sins was not simply about being cleansed from personal guilt but, without forgiveness, they would remain in exile, outside the kingdom of God.
When Jesus’ disciples were baptised, the meaning of baptism had advanced, the kingdom of God had arrived in the person of Jesus the Messiah and so the people were now baptised in the Name of Jesus the Messiah (Messiah is the Aramaic word meaning Anointed One, in Greek: ‘Christ’).
Baptism, then, is a highly symbolic act. It represents a clear dividing line between the past and the future.
Later, after Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and the coming of the Holy Spirit, we see how baptism had taken on new significance. An important insight is given in the opening verses of chapter 19 of Acts:
‘Paul…came to Ephesus and, finding some disciples, he said to them ‘Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?’ They said to him, ‘We haven’t heard whether there is a Holy Spirit’. And Paul said to them ‘Into what then were you baptised?’ They said, ‘John’s baptism’. Paul then said, ‘John indeed baptised for repentance saying to the people they should believe on…Christ Jesus’. When they heard this they were baptised in the Name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.’
Today, if a Gentile wishes to become a Jew, he or she is baptised in a pool with a flow of water, like a river. The river flowing past takes away his or her old identity as a Gentile and he or she is raised out of the water as a member of Israel.
Baptism, then, is a highly symbolic act. It represents a clear dividing line between the past and the future.
In the following posts, which are about references in the New Testament using the word ‘baptizo’ but in a different context to water baptism, it is important to hold onto one thing: baptizo was a common Greek word meaning to plunge into or be submerged into or dipped under to be soaked by.
‘Full immersion’ is a good phrase that gets to the heart of the meaning of the word ‘baptizo’. ‘Sprinkling’ is OK but only in the sense of having a very long shower, so you are completely soaked. The very cursory sprinkling carried out by many priests in the CofE or Catholic Churches and others maybe is sufficient ‘symbolically’ but only if you know the true meaning of the word baptizo. Personally, I prefer a full immersion.
I’ve seen baptisms in church baptistries, in the sea, in large tubs in someone’s back garden. I know someone who was so keen to get baptised but was in a hotel in a non-christian country. He prayed and felt God say go and stand on his hotel balcony. It was a hot, arid country. He obeyed this inner ‘nudge’, went outside. A black cloud came overhead and he was deluged in a sudden storm. He took that to be his baptism!! The method is the least of our worries… it’s what baptism means that matters.
I hope you enjoy reading the next few posts.
***
Please click here for Baptism – getting beyond the controversy Part II
Psalm 23 for the Invisible Ones
I am a film star
But no-one know
I have forgotten my own name
I am a doctor healing
And no-one saw
The coldness creep over my heart
I am the pastor preaching
Yet I am the one
In deepest need
I am the navigator
And no-one knows…
…I can’t see my way home
I am the one sheep
Alone in the herd
Needing to hear your voice
Just one word
My name
And peace, the quiet waters by
Restore my addled mind
River running
Cool. Calm. Clear. Deep.
The Number 4 Bus…or Unless a Seed revisited
From the perspective of the bus, the starting point was the bus station. So each of my morning journeys was really a journey to the start punctuated by various stops.
From the perspective of the bus, the starting point was the bus station. So each of my morning journeys was really a journey to the start punctuated by various stops.
It’s a little like this for my Facebook and website blog posts. I’ve arrived at the start; the start being Jesus’ very short parable about the seed falling into the ground and dying. Short but it packs a punch.
‘The time has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Most assuredly, I say to you, unless a seed falls into the ground and dies it remains alone. But if it dies it produces much fruit.’ John 12 v23-25
The crowds had just greeted Jesus as he made his way on a donkey into Jerusalem ‘Hosannah! The Son of David! The king of Israel!’ was shouted from the onlookers as they cut down the palm branches and their coats for the donkey to walkover. Palm Sunday. Glory, the coup d’état to remove the Romans, coronation…all seemed possible…Israel, at last, redeemed, the Messiah the Son of David is here!
Jesus agrees ‘The time has come for the Son of Man to be glorified’ but the route to true glory was, he knew, via crucifixion and death. But he understood that death as the necessary prelude to glory.
Seeds are alive
Seeds are alive. A small part of the seed is alive. Most of it is a food store, but just a few cells are respiring slowly. That’s why Jesus said a seed ‘has to die’. Imagine an apple ‘pip’ or seed falling into the ground. As it germinates and grows a small root and shoot and the first leaves, it uses up its food store…the seed has died. What is growing now is not the seed. The seed has done its job and has died. The same life but in a different form is growing. Eventually, a tree is formed, branches, blossom in the summer and fruit…hundreds maybe of apples. Inside of which are 6 seeds. Just like the original. Containing the same life. The original seed has reproduced its own life in countless other seeds inside the fruit. That is Christianity.
Into the grave went the Messiah. The one seed. ‘Messiah’ means the Anointed One. In the OT Kings, Priests, and Prophets were anointed by the Spirit of God. Jesus was all three. The Son of David, the true High Priest, and a Prophet speaking the word of God.
Each believer in Christ is one of those new seeds. The whole plant is the resurrected Christ but ‘in Him’ are all the believers. We are ‘in Christ’ and Christ is in us. In fact, the NT goes further than this. Consider each of the apple seeds. Their life IS the life of the original seed. There is no life independent of the original seed or the rest of the tree. Their life is produced and sustained entirely as a result of the one seed going into the ground and dying.
Half a Zebra
Standard Gospel Models 1.0 and 2.0 are fundamentally flawed. The evidence for this is that 1.0 and 2.0 fail to explain the NT position on sanctification and glory. As 1.0 had to yield to 2.0 so 2.0 will yield to 3.0.
How not to measure sanctification
I have three friends who are physicists. In my experience, these Guardians of the Universe treat us lesser mortals with equal measures of pity and patience. When answering any question, glasses are removed and polished languidly, before replacing them, having considered how to explain to a mere mortal the intricacies of The Standard Model as the basic kit needed to peel away the scales from my eyes.
You may know the drill?
Shocking news then this week that the Standard Model which has proven to be an excellent theoretical basis for, well, everything…may not be as perfect as once assumed. The W Boson, apparently, is heavier than predicted by the Standard Model and this has left Physicists scratching their collective heads.
Shocking news also for evangelical theologians as their Standard Model may need to progress to 3.0 from 2.0
In Science, theories and Standard Models are as good as they are until a result comes its way that requires the theory to be modified or rejected. History tells us that pioneers of the former theory fight tooth and nail before yielding to the greater wisdom of a new theory. A classic example is the Newtonian Theory of Universal Gravity yielding its pre-eminence to the warping of the space and time care of Albert Einstein in his superior theory of General Relativity.
Is this the case in theology? By ‘theology’ I mean, in essence, correct biblical understanding of the scriptures, or doctrine, if you will.
My thesis on the Standard Gospel Models
Standard Gospel Models 1.0 and 2.0 are fundamentally flawed. The evidence for this is that 1.0 and 2.0 fail to explain the NT position on sanctification and glory. As 1.0 had to yield to 2.0 so 2.0 will yield to 3.0.
NB the original apostles who wrote the NT understood, taught and experienced all of the material they wrote. Much of that early teaching was diluted and forgotten as church traditions grew. Since the Reformation we have been in a ‘recovery’ mode of rediscovery; 1.0; 2.0; and 3.0 are all necessary stages on that recovery road.
Standard Model 1.0 Evangelical (from 1520 to 1900)
Romans 1-5 the remaining chapters are outliers e.g. confusion over Romans 6 and 7 and straight contradiction of Rom 8 v 28 – 30.
In summary: salvation from sin and the gift of eternal life, the gift of righteousness, salvation by grace not by works, sola fide, and justification by faith.
The Reformation theologians re-discovered much of 1.0.
Standard Model 2.0 Pentecostal/Charismatic (1900 to…)
As above but in addition the rediscovery of Jesus not only as Saviour and Lord but as Baptizer in the Holy Spirit and a re-awakening to the work of the Holy Spirit in and through each believer e.g. the gifts and the fruit of the Spirit.
Charles Fox Parnham was the early 2.0 pioneer Charles Fox Parham (1873-1929) (revival-library.org)
Standard Model 3.0 Nicknames take a while to land…
Before we look into 3.0 there is an important point to face.
Luther and others who defied Rome and called for a Reformation and rediscovered what was always there in the Scriptures were shunned, opposed, persecuted, and worse. European history is a sorry tale of Reformation and Counter-Reformation, of opposing politico-religious forces, with consequent wars, theological tussles, and wrestling matches. It was costly moving into 1.0.
Equally the early Pentecostals who experienced the baptism of the Spirit were often rejected by evangelical churches and forced to form their own churches, the Pentecostal churches. Many mainstream denominational churches in the 1970s embraced baptism in the Spirit as part of their NT doctrine, taught it, becoming the charismatic churches we see across the UK and the world – whatever the denominational label on the side of the building.
But still, in 2.0, sanctification and glory are ‘outliers’, Romans 6 & 7 are not integrated into the theology and Romans 8 v 28-30 is routinely contradicted. They stick out like wrong-shaped jigsaw pieces.
Standard Model 3.0 attempts to incorporate Romans 6 & 7 and Romans 8v28-30 and gets to grips with what it means to be ‘in Christ’.
Billy Graham preached the 1.0 version of the gospel, as had Luther, Calvin, John Wesley, George Whitfield, and countless others before him. Those converted under those ministries speak of being ‘born again’ or of ‘being saved’ or of the assurance they have of their salvation from the ‘witness of the Spirit’. They would be encouraged to be part of a church, pray and read their bibles as the word of God and be willing to share the gospel with others. It is estimated that over 3 million individuals came to faith in Christ through Billy Graham’s ministry alone. I have met many in the UK converted through his preaching.
From 1967 until 2019 another evangelist, the German Reinhart Bonkke, trained in Swansea Bible College before preaching mainly in Africa. It is estimated that over 70 million came to faith in Christ through his ministry. He preached the 2.0 gospel like Charles Fox Parnham and William Joseph Seymour at Azusa Street in Los Angeles in 1904 had before him. In many other continents since the 1960s and 1970s many ‘evangelical’ 1.0 version preachers and ordinary believers experienced the baptism in the Spirit and saw miracles. Churches were transformed and the greatest growth in the church worldwide has come from the Pentecostal/Charismatic churches. In all the major cities and many towns across the UK, you will find at least one if not many churches that preach 2.0 and have done for at least a generation.
My contention, and the contention of many others, though is that the biblical basis for 2.0 is restricted to Romans 1-5 + baptism in the Spirit. Hopefully, I can give a clear explanation of the differences between 1.0 and 2.0, and 3.0.
Under 1.0 and 2.0 salvation is understood as Justification by faith followed by a lifetime process of sanctification and then resurrection and glory. Inherent in this understanding of the gospel, sanctification is seen as a gradual transformation of the individual into the likeness of Christ.
By the end of Romans 5 Paul has taught us that the crucifixion of Christ was ‘substitutionary’. I was the sinner that deserved to be punished but Jesus, in dying willingly on the cross, stood in my place and took the punishment I deserved. A typical illustration used is of a thief awaiting sentence in court. But the judge acquits the criminal: ‘Acquitted. Fine paid.’ The guilty man looks at the judge in astonishment. The judge himself had paid the fine and the criminal is free to go.
The great problem with this illustration is that, although the debt had been paid, the nature of the thief has not fundamentally changed. He is still the same man that leaves the court. Whether he commits another crime or lives an exemplary life from that point on is not the point; he is still the same man. In more biblical terminology: his sins have been forgiven but the sinner remains. He may even use the phrase to describe himself as a ‘sinner saved by grace’ – this is a distortion of the gospel.
In Romans chapter 5 Paul begins to use the language to describe the whole of humanity as either ‘in Adam’ or ‘in Christ’ to show that, in the crucifixion of Christ, God not only dealt with our sins but sin itself and, therefore, the sinner. For example, v19: ‘For as by one man’s disobedience (referring to Adam) many were made sinners, so also through one man’s obedience (referring to Christ) many will be made righteous’.
How this has occurred is explained in the following chapter, chapter 6.
‘Do you not know that as many of us were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death…knowing this that our old man was crucified with Him…’ v3-6
Paul is showing us that Christ’s death was not only ‘substitutionary’ but ‘inclusive’. That the old ‘in-Adam-sinner’ died, was crucifed with Christ and the new ‘in-Christ’ person has come to life.
Our salvation, then, is not just that our sins have been forgiven (that is wonderful of course) but that the sinner has been dealt with in the crucifixion. This is consistent with verses elsewhere in the NT:
1 Cor 1 v 30 ‘But of Him you are in Christ Jesus who has become for us wisdom from God and righteousness and sanctification and redemption’
‘If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation, old things have passed away, behold all things have become new’ 2 Cor 5 v17
‘I have been crucified with Christ, it is no longer I who live, but Christ, who lives in me. The life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me’ Gal 2v20
‘For you died and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is our life…’ Col 3 v 3,4
Once we ‘see’ this it changes our starting point as believers. We are brand new in Christ. The future then is a process of growth and maturity, not self-improvement. We have been sanctified by God setting us apart in Christ. Sanctification/holiness and saints are all equivalent Greek words. 1 Corinthians – a letter written in part to address serious moral failings in the church in Corinth – affirms that the believers are saints i.e. are holy, are sanctified. That isn’t in doubt:
‘To the church…to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints…’ 1 Cor 1v2
NB translators who are from 1.0 and 2.0 contradict Paul’s statement and insert ‘…called to be saints…’ but this is not in the Greek text. If you belong to 1.0 or 2.0 then clearly in Corinth the problem was a lack of sanctification. But in 3.0 sanctification is the starting point. We are saints, not, of course, by virtue of our innate goodness or moral superiority, but because we have been made new in Christ. The problem, as Paul argues in 1 Cor 3, was of immaturity, of living by the flesh, and imitating ‘mere men’ i.e. old-in-Adam men not by the Spirit.
‘I could not speak to you as spiritual people but as carnal as babies in Christ…you are still carnal…and are behaving like mere men’ 1 Cor 3v1-4
This is why the NT describes the Christian life as one of moving from glory to glory not Adam to Christ; our starting point is Christ as is our end:
‘But we all…are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory’ 2 Cor 3 v 18
In 1.0 and 2.0 this is simply re-interpreted as ‘from our old man progressively into the new man’…a self-improvement programme run by the Spirit. But this verse shows us that in the first instant of time after placing our faith in Christ we have been glorified and are set then to grow in that glory…because the glory is in Christ.
In 3.0 Romans 8 v 28-30 works smoothly.
‘’…whom he called, these he also justified; and whom he justified he also glorified.’
Paul’s use of the past-tense for ‘glorified’ doesn’t fit with 1.0 and 2.0 and appears to be the wrong-shaped jigsaw piece. Consequently, commentaries written by 1.0 and 2.0 believers routinely contradict and re-work Paul’s use of the past tense:
FF Bruce
Sanctification is glory begun, glory is sanctification is glory completed. Paul looks forward to the completion of the work.
Thomas R. Schreiner
The glorification posited here does not start in this life
Douglas Moo
While not experienced yet the divine decision to glorify those who have been justified has already been made
Ellicott
Glorified: strictly, the glorifying of the Christian awaits him in the future, but the Apostle regards all these different acts as focused together as it were on a single point in the past.
Matthew Poole
Some, under this term of glorification, would have sanctification included; because, otherwise, they think there is a great defect in this chain of salvation.
Cambridge Bible School
Glorified: a past tense used, with wonderful power, of a thing future.
None agree with Paul that glorification, as well as sanctification and justification, are all wrapped up and describe the salvation we enter by faith. They cannot agree because their Romans 1-5 faith is limited to the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Once the cross is seen as inclusive as well as substitutionary Paul’s use of the past tense makes sense and is logical.
We move, as the apostle wrote, from glory to glory.
Paul’s prayer in Ephesians ‘to Him be glory in the church in all generations’ Eph 3v21 is within the remit of the gospel not a fanatical hope and cannot be postponed to the end of the age if the glory is to be in the church in every generation.
Final Comments
1.0 and 2.0 Christians believe in half a zebra.
If you are in 1.0 or 2.0 you believe and hope that there will be a little less of me and a little more of Jesus as time progresses, mirroring John the Baptist’s words ‘I must decrease; He must increase.
But, as we have seen, according to the New Testament, you have been crucified. You cannot decrease!
You cannot measure sanctification on a supposed scale of holiness, in holy Zebras, or any other unit of holiness, there is no scale.
‘Of Him, you are in Christ Jesus who has become for us our…sanctification…(so)…glory in the Lord’’ 1 Cor 1v30
The Normal Christian Church Life – Watchman Nee
I first read The Normal Christian Life by Watchman Nee in 1977…What you’ll find below are some key quotations from the book and a few personal comments where relevant.
I first read The Normal Christian Life by Watchman Nee in 1977. It was only a few months ago, though, that a friend, Chris Welch, mentioned he had also written The Normal Christian Church.
What you’ll find below are some key quotations from the book and a few personal comments where relevant.
Some context:
Have you noticed during the Pandemic that many preachers are crackling with static electricity, presenting a range of prophetic indicators about the future of the church on the basis that the pandemic has afforded us an opportunity for a re-set, a pause, a time-out, and a re-think. This, of course, is mirrored in the world: the name of the 50th World Economic Forum in 2020 was ‘The Great Reset’.
If you’re familiar with Naomi Klein’s book ‘Shock Doctrine, you’ll see how Milton Friedman free-marketeers are similarly disposed to respond to disasters, such as the Boxing Day Tsunami 2004, taking the opportunity of destruction to reconstruct economies in a way that suits their purposes.
In the mid-1970s when I, a poorly informed agnostic, was considering Christianity seriously, there was much discussion of Jesus’ parable of ‘new wine and new wineskins’ and looking at the early church, as recorded in Acts, for inspiration as new churches were forming. In other words, whilst the experience of the baptism in the Spirit was sweeping the parts of the church that were thirsty, they turned to scripture for guidance.
Watchman Nee’s Normal Christian Life, a series of lectures on Romans, and The Normal Christian Church, a series of instructions to his co-workers, do the same; open to God but looking to scripture for inspiration.
In this exercise, I am like a small boy throwing stones into a pond. Each of these quotes is one of those stones. You’ll see by my occasional comments that I’m not saying he is ‘right’ but I do feel as if his thoughts, written in 1939, are worth a fresh airing.
One final comment before the ‘off’: if you haven’t read The Normal Christian Life…I thoroughly recommend it.
Quotes from The Normal Christian Life
Quote #1
“If we belong to any human organisation, then divine headship ceases to be expressed in our work”
This will be a recurrent theme, that once a group has human leadership in place to execute a purpose, the persons employed in that purpose obey the human leader. This is not how the church should be.
Quote #2
“A stationary apostle is a contradiction in terms”
By apostle Nee is not referring to just the 11 originals. One more apostle was selected from among Jesus’ disciples after Judas departed. Then Paul and Barnabas were appointed apostles and sent out from the church in Antioch. Nee takes the view that the Spirit sends out certain members of churches as apostles to break new ground. But once new converts are formed into a church the apostles appointed elders to govern the church and they moved on.
Quote #3
“One of the reasons why so many present-day converts are not filled with the Spirit is that the apostles settle down to shepherd them and take upon themselves the responsibility that belongs to the Holy Spirit”
Quote #4
“The present pastoral system is quite unscriptural; it is an invention of man. In scripture…there was always more than one elder…in a local church”
By ‘present pastoral system he is referring to churches that have one leader e.g. a Vicar, a Priest, a Minister, a Pastor, a Leader
Quote #5
“The failure of Protestantism is that it has substituted organised churches for the Church of Rome instead of returning to the divinely ordained local churches”
Whilst this is historically accurate for several groups it is worth noting that since the very beginnings of the church in the First Century there have been groups that have rejected any ‘organisation’. They have often found themselves at the butt end of rifles, persecuted non-conformists that defy the authority of organised churches. EH Broadbent’s excellent book The Pilgrim Church researches many of these groups.
Quote #6
“In…divinely constituted companies…authority is spiritual, not official”
To do justice to this quote I would have to quote a few paragraphs but this is the essence of his argument. Like the opening quote, in a human organisation authority comes from rank whereas in a church, if it is divinely constituted, it is run by the Head of the church just like our heads coordinate what our bodies do. And Christ is the Head of any local church and His will is made known by the Holy Spirit. It is an entirely different modus operandi.
Quote #7
“The trouble today is that men are taking the place of the Holy Spirit…workers have no direct knowledge of the divine will, but simply do the will of those in authority over them”
Quote #8
“A good organisation of men serves often serves as a bad substitute for the power of the Holy Spirit, by holding itself together even after all its vitality has gone”
Quote #9
“Central control has many evils. It makes it easy for God’s servants to disregard the leading of the Spirit and readily develops into a popish system”
I don’t want to diminish the size of that stone as it lands in the pond. That’s more rock than stone perhaps?
Quote #10
“In not a single scriptural church do we find mention of a “minister” controlling its affairs; such a position is always occupied by a group of local elders”
By ‘scriptural’ he is referring to the various churches recorded in the New Testament
Quote #11
“In God’s word there are local elders, but no local apostles”
The word ‘apostle’ is Greek for ‘one sent out’. The Greek words that have often been translated elder are otherwise translated as overseer or bishop. The term bishop tends not to be used in non-conformist denominations in the UK that have distanced themselves from the Church of England. The CofE and other more hierarchically organised churches tend to reserve the use of the word Bishop for those that oversee a number of Priests or Vicars in local congregations.
A few personal reflections
I was brought up in a family that attended the local CofE church, so my introduction to church included a model of leadership of a one-man leader, the Vicar, who was paid a salary. The next church I attended was a Baptist Church led by a Minister, paid for by the church. He was an excellent bible teacher and introduced an eldership, but he was still the paid Minister. After, during my University years, I was in a ‘charismatic church’ with a group of elders one of which was the lead elder. I don’t know if he received any income from the church. Then a church that originally had an eldership none of whom were paid by the church. That has evolved into a church that employs several workers and, in certain circumstances, pay their congregational leaders. I supported this trend. I’m reviewing that now in the light of scripture.
NB At first sight you might think that Watchman Nee is simply pushing the ‘Brethren’ or even the ‘Quaker’ view of church. Not really. They may mimic certain structural ‘church government’ thoughts but the essential mix Nee is looking for in the church, to make it truly scriptural, is that the eldership is not only formed around leaders of good character but they must be baptized in the Spirit and led by the Spirit, exercising gifts of the Spirit, exhibiting the fruit of the Spirit, and recognising that the same Spirit is at work in each member of the church; hence Paul’s description of typical church services in 1 Cor 14 with the underlying theology of gifts and fruit in 1Cor 12 and 13. You can have a Brethren Assembly with an eldership as dead as a Dodo and an Anglican one-man ministry who is leading his congregation into the fullness of the Spirit. Take your pick!
I have benefited immensely from each church I’ve been a member of. But this exercise is a meditation on scripture. A meditation in the Spirit, not just an academic exercise, treating the NT as a manual, like a Haynes Manual (just to show my age!).
I lob these quotes out there for your reflection.
Melancholy – a prelude
Above ground we are all Mariupol
Tulips remaining in bud
Nervous to unfold vivid colours of Spring
Clinging to the past
In hope of what?
Above ground a million Covid masks
Squelched into the mud
Trailing from bins
Forgotten in jacket pockets:
Yesterday’s news
Today’s news, a jumble of images
A glossary of sadness:
Oligarchy, Donbas, Slava Ukraini,
Thermobaric bombs
An A-Z, or just unjust Z.
Below ground. How are you?
It’s in the winter that spring is planned
That invisible quiet hinterland
Of the human heart
Where the seeds of heaven fall
Where melancholy gives way
Where winter loosens its grip
Where…those that go out in tears
Bearing seeds for harvest
Will come home rejoicing.
The Upside-Down Kingdom – or ‘A twist of lemon’
The ‘Upside-down kingdom’ is one of those catchy phrases that bible teachers use to rip away at the familiar wrapping paper surrounding the message of the New Testament. In the UK and other countries where Christianity has had a foothold for centuries, there is a real problem: the ticking clock that you can’t hear anymore.…
The ‘Upside-down kingdom’ is one of those catchy phrases that bible teachers use to rip away at the familiar wrapping paper surrounding the message of the New Testament.
In the UK and other countries where Christianity has had a foothold for centuries, there is a real problem: the ticking clock that you can’t hear anymore.
We drive past churches, even visit the ones that are open, without wondering too much about the beliefs that drove men and women to build them. Or we have bibles on our bookshelves but rarely open them. It’s as if we’re inoculated against the Christianity that peers at us curiously from some past era that we’ve outgrown.
To get past that deafness and blindness preachers and teachers hunt for ways of presenting the message with a twist of lemon, hence using non-biblical phrases such as the ‘Upside-down kingdom’ to engage our curiosity. We’re all used-car salesmen at heart!
The idea it tries to convey is that the ‘kingdom of God’, that Jesus invites us to be part of, is unlike any other kingdom or political power that is seen on the earth that relies, like Rome in its day, on wealth and power to execute its rule.
So, here are some thoughts about the Upside-down kingdom. And it’s to do with letter writing protocols and etiquette, not, it would appear the raciest of titles. But hang on…everything is upside down, remember?
Point One: writing to the Queen Etiquette & Protocol – Kent Lieutenancy (kent-lieutenancy.org.uk)
‘There is no strict protocol about how a letter should be written, though some people wish to observe the traditional forms. In which case, people may write to The Queen with the formal opening ‘Madam’ and close the letter with the form ‘I have the honour to be, Madam, Your Majesty’s humble and obedient servant’.
In the New Testament, there are 27 books of which 19 (arguably 20 if you count Revelation) are letters written by the apostles Paul, Peter, and John to churches and some individuals.
The letters follow a loose protocol and etiquette which may appear to our circumspect British eyes as mere formal courtesies like ‘Dear…’ when the truth may well be that the person you are writing to is anything but Dear to you!
All Paul’s letters: ‘Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ’ Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon
Hebrews – not written to a particular person or church
1 and 2 Peter: ‘Grace to you and peace be multiplied’
1 John – as Hebrews
2 John – ‘Grace, mercy, and peace will be with you from God the Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ…’
3 John – ‘Peace to you’ written to close the letter
Here’s the ‘upside-down kingdom point 1:
We need to invert our thinking. The apostles are not at the top of some pyramidal structure called the church to which they are deigning to share their spiritual insights like gurus. – for a fee! Nor are they trying to herd cats and keep them on the straight and narrow by exerting authority and power.
In the kingdom of God they are the servants writing to ‘kings’ – ordinary’ pew filling, hymn singing, hand raising, tongue-speaking, Holy Spirit saturated believers.
In 1 Corinthians Paul writes: ‘You are already rich…you reign as kings…God has displayed us apostles as…fools for Christ’s sake…as the filth of the world, the offscourings…’ 1 Cor 4 v 8-13
And Peter writes: ‘But you are a royal priesthood…’ 1 Pet 2 v 9
And John: ‘To Him who…has made us kings and priests…’ Rev 1 v 6
It is so hard to shake free from the grip that of the usual picture of a kingdom where one person reigns and is fabulously wealthy and powerful and whose reign and authority trickles down through a hierarchy to the lowly servants. Even many churches mirror this view in their structures if not in their spiritual ethos with a pyramidal authority structure, a Pope or equivalent, then layer upon layer of administration, until we reach the humble believer not allowed to wear priestly robes. In the New Testament, every believer is a king and a priest and wears robes of righteousness.
In the New Testament the apostles did not rule over any church, they were its servants. Delivery boys. They came with supplies. Fresh supplies. Supplies for each believer who they considered to be Kings.
Fresh supplies of grace, and mercy, and truth.
Paul put it like this:
‘For if by one man’s offence (Adam) death reigned…how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace…reign in life the rough the on (Jesus Christ)’ Romans 5 v 17
And the Upside-down kingdom point 2:
Fresh supplies. Not of money or power or influence. Not a worship band upgrade or pimping up the church website. Or wearing a sharper suit. Or by elevating those with theological degrees. Or by increasing tithes.
Apostles are not CEOs in the hiring and firing game, protecting and promoting their brand.
No. They come with supplies of fresh grace. And mercy. And the cooling streams of peace.
The whole kingdom is sustained by grace. Our reign as kings and priests in Christ is not dependent on our hard work. The kingdom is not a meritocracy. It’s grace. Freely you have received freely give. That’s what Jesus taught the disciples. Jesus, The King, didn’t take a salary. Didn’t ‘earn’ the power to do miracles through his moral uprightness and hard work. It was grace.
John put it like this:
‘We beheld his glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of grace and truth…and of His fulness we all receive, grace upon grace’ John 1 v 14-16
Grace doesn’t make you lazy, it frees you to be filled, just like Jesus, and live like Jesus, in thankful dependency on the Father. Many of our struggles are because we live in a world that preaches meritocracy. It’s hard to be re-tuned. But in the kingdom of God, we can’t earn a penny, and nor shall we ever deserve it. Everything is different. Upside-down, Inside out, back to front – just not as we’re so used to. And the apostles arrive with fresh supplies.
Mercy too. Yes, we might need fresh mercy ourselves at times. But God fills us with others in mind as well. In the parable of the Good Samaritan Jesus concludes ‘go and do likewise’. The man who was robbed, beaten up, and left for dead, received mercy. He then could ‘go and do likewise’. It’s a parable, a description, of how the kingdom works. We may identify with the man, beaten and robbed, left on the side of the road, but God will have mercy. He will pour oil on our wounds, and pay for our recovery, filling us with mercy so we can be merciful to others.
Peace. Peace was more than a greeting. When Jesus appeared to the disciples the first words he said were ‘Peace to you!’ It wasn’t a formal or even a casual ‘Shalom’. They needed that peace. They were confused, in grief, shock, and fear. Sometimes our need for peace is acute.
But the point about the upside-down kingdom is this. We run on good fuel: grace, mercy, and peace. And just like cars, we need to be taken to the garage every so often for a good spiritual MOT.
Out from our thinking goes the old oil of meritocracy, or the worn brake linings of our hardness of heart, or our forever blinking indicators of inner turmoil. In comes fresh supplies: grace mercy and peace.
1054 and all that…
Surely you mean 1066
Hastings and one-eyed Harold
The Conqueror and Norman arches?
One Sunday in October
Dawn quiet disturbed
And weary autumnal soil
Running blood red:
All over by tea.
Another Sunday
Twelve years before
Split East from West
Constantinople from Rome
Communion wafers suffering schism
No longer handed one to the other
You can still hear the painful cries:
The tearing of the map
No more so than in besieged Kiiv
Or battered Mariupol.
Turning our tears to
Higher ground
The wounds to heal,
Turning our tears
To Higher ground
Our wounds to heal
Revolution
Press Lord, press me under
Under, under your grace
Wrench me free
Free from regulations that fail to regulate
From striving that fails to check self and sin
‘We are born free, yet everywhere
We are in chains’
I’m not so sure Jean-Jacques
‘For freedom, Christ has set us free’
Paul, for this, my unending applause
The Pharisee chained no longer to law
Out of his depth in grace
Feet off the bottom grace
Nothing, no more, depending on him:
Swimming in unexpected love
‘Freely you have received
Freely, freely give’ you say
No charge, it’s all in the offering
Press Lord, press me under
Under, under your grace
Seeds – dead or alive?
Let this retired Chemistry (and a spattering of Biology) teacher try and be as clear as a crystallised amino acid. All dead seeds are dead – they have shuffled off their mortal coil All other seeds are alive – dormant, resting, inert; all these wonderful Norwegian Blue parrot contributions are somewhat nailed on the fence…
Let this retired Chemistry (and a spattering of Biology) teacher try and be as clear as a crystallised amino acid.
All dead seeds are dead – they have shuffled off their mortal coil
All other seeds are alive – dormant, resting, inert; all these wonderful Norwegian Blue parrot contributions are somewhat nailed on the fence
One of the great joys in teaching is to ask a provocative question and let a class or an audience battle it out. Quite often, in fact, they know the answer but need to follow the breadcrumbs from what they already know to the answer, reversing out of some blind alleys along the way.
Here’s what you probably already know. (Oh! I should warn you: if you’re mad enough to read this…you are being drawn into a theological trap. You have been warned)
Pollen grains contain male sex cells or gametes. Along comes an unsuspecting bee; the pollen grains stick to the bee’s back and legs, are carried to the next flower, and transferred to the female stigma. (Faint memories from school days resurfacing?). The pollen grain then grows a tube down through the stigma to the ovaries where the female eggs are located. Down the tube fall the male sex cells, now liberated from the pollen grains, and they fertilise the eggs to form seeds, which mature, grow, and harden. That’s pollination and fertilisation. Still awake?
‘Unless a seed falls into the ground and dies it remains alone; but, if it dies, it produces many seeds’
Recap. The male sex cells are alive. Not much good dead! The female eggs awaiting fertilisation are also alive. Therefore, the fertilised eggs, called seeds, are alive. But…
Only a small part of the seed is alive. Most of it is a food store. The living cells located in the ‘embryo’ of the seed just tick over. They are taking in oxygen, respiring, and excreting carbon dioxide but very, very, very slowly. Nevertheless, all seeds (unless they have died) are alive and well – but one could hardly say their life is that exciting compared with what could happen after germination.
That seed will exist like that unless (usually) it falls into the ground. Even in the ground, it will remain dormant, unless the ground is moist and at the right temperature. But given the right conditions germination follows. The living cells in the dormant seed wake up and start reproducing…they take their food for the growth of the shoot and the root from the food store until they can poke their first leaves above ground and make food for themselves by photosynthesis. By this time the seed itself has vanished. The food store has been raided and the cells that were in the seed have been transformed into plant cells.
Jesus frequently spoke about nature, seeds, farming, harvest, birds, the sky and so on. Perhaps one of his most profound nature parables is found in John 12v24:
‘Unless a seed falls into the ground and dies it remains alone; but, if it dies, it produces many seeds’
Jonah’s 3rd Day
I remember the past
But cannot tame its power
When coins had names:
A tanner, half-crown, and a shilling
When ten-bob notes were brown
Coal was black and coke was grey
An age of miracle and wonder
Rolling Rs, blowing gum bubbles
As big as your head,
Waggling ears and wood-pigeon coos,
And smiling girls perfecting handstands
With long straight hair
Early mornings full of swirling fog
The sound of cars sawing
Choke in and choke out
Of ice inside the windows and
Fighting for the three-bar-fire
Winter school in shorts
And family secrets
Dying with the pipe-smoke in the lounge
My hero demoted to decay
The strong so weak
Wretched mourning over the empty chair
And the failure of truth to hide
Making my way detached
From anyone who could know
The questions no-one had words to answer.
No-one I knew anyway
Until I, in the pub,
Spilt my beer – and my words:
‘Christ!’
And she said:
‘Why did you say that?’
That was the prodigal son
Coming to his senses
That was Jonah’s third day
The light guiding me home
O! I remember the past
But cannot tame its power
‘Christ!’ I say now
Kneeling with tears of joy
Steadfast
A poem for Ukraine inspired after walking past Antony Gormley’s one hundred iron statues on Crosby beach, unmoved, facing the wild waves and gale-force wind off the Irish Sea.
A poem for Ukraine inspired after walking past Antony Gormley’s one hundred iron statues on Crosby beach, unmoved, facing the wild waves and gale-force wind off the Irish Sea.
***
Who ignited this fire you must not see
Behind my sad stern eyes?
Impassive and unflinching I stand
Tight with resolve:
I shall not be moved
Pack me in your ice floes
From the east and from the north
And I will melt you
I may look cold as steel or as a statue of stone
Yet, you will find, I am too hot to touch
A day is coming when I will bend once more
When I will shed a tear
When I will again export wheat and rum and light
When my flames will brighten the night sky
And I will walk in Another Place
Keeping it simple
Keeping it simple. A poem by John Stevens.
Jesus went out of the house and sat by the sea
No publicity
Just sat on a beach
I like that
Mary left the kitchen, put down her knives
And sat at his feet
No fuss, no words
I like that
I need that
To keep it simple
Reincarnation Jim, but not as we knew it
A quote from David Torkington’s book ‘Wisdom from the Western Isles’: ‘My belief in reincarnation…not the reincarnation of every man, but of the perfect Man, who makes himself flesh again in as many different ways as there are those who would receive Him’ That is true Christianity. David’s book is well worth reading, written from…
A quote from David Torkington’s book ‘Wisdom from the Western Isles’:
‘My belief in reincarnation…not the reincarnation of every man, but of the perfect Man, who makes himself flesh again in as many different ways as there are those who would receive Him’
That is true Christianity.
David’s book is well worth reading, written from the perspective of a Christian mystic.
More conventional scriptural versions include:
‘It was fitting for Him for whom all things and by whom are all things, in *bringing many sons to glory*, to make the captain of their salvation, perfect through sufferings’ Hebrews 2v10
Or Romans 8 where ‘the sons of God will be revealed’
Or the beautiful verse from John: ‘Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us that we should be called the children of God, and that is what we are’ 1 john 3v1
And CS Lewis said true believers in Christ are like ‘mini-Christs’.
When the Rabbis Cry
Failing to follow the general rule of thumb, ‘start small and build from there I decided for my first attempt to write a Christian paperback, to choose one of the most contentious subjects – Israel.
Failing to follow the general rule of thumb, ‘start small and build from there I decided for my first attempt to write a Christian paperback, to choose one of the most contentious subjects – Israel. Having done so, I learned a great deal about the doctrinal controversies and historical assumptions that Christians have been subjected to over the centuries. ‘When the Rabbis Cry’ is an attempt to do justice to the biblical arguments, but, at the same time, keep a firm footing in the history of Israel and the Jews from the time of Christ to the present day. It may surprise readers to know, for example, that there are more churches full of Jewish and Arab believers in Israel today in 2022 than at any time in history. If that whets your appetite please go ahead and buy a copy!
Things are not what they seem…Part II
When Paul wrote his first letter to the church at Corinth, he opened his letter with these words: ‘To the church, which is at Corinth, to those having been (hagiazo) sanctified in Christ Jesus, called (hagiois) saints…grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.’
For Things are not what they seem… Part 1 please click here
When Paul wrote his first letter to the church at Corinth, he opened his letter with these words:
‘To the church, which is at Corinth, to those having been (hagiazo) sanctified in Christ Jesus, called (hagiois) saints…grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.’
The church at Corinth was riven with divisions and barely coping with a pastoral issue following a case of sexual misconduct and yet Paul addresses them as ‘sanctified’ and ‘saints’ – not, as we might expect, ‘needing sanctification’ and ‘called to be saints’ as some translators have inserted into the Greek text.
Paul goes on to address the problems in the church as products of spiritual immaturity rather than castigate them for their lack of holiness. More of that later. Holiness, by the way, is of the same family of Greek words hagios.
At first sight, this may produce in the reader the thought that Paul got this wrong; even to evangelical readers, who consider the bible to be the word of God. Indeed, those translators who have inserted ‘to be’ into the text were all evangelical and yet felt the need to correct the apostle!
The reason for this, I suggest, is a clue that there is something missing in the fundamental presentation of the gospel in many churches.
Many churches – and therefore their ministers, priests, vicars, pastors who may all have attended bible colleges, seminaries, theological colleges, and the like – correctly preach the substitutionary death of Chris but not the inclusive death of Christ.
A symptom of this one-legged gospel is a false view of sainthood and sanctification – and therefore holiness.
The gospel – the ‘good news’ of the kingdom of God – is both substitutionary and inclusive.
To use the prophecy in Isaiah 53 ‘He has borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows…He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities…the Lord laid on Him the iniquity of us all…He bore the sin of many’ the death of Christ on the cross was substitutionary and we, the guilty, are ‘acquitted’ and declared ‘justified’, ‘not guilty’, to use the language of Paul in the opening chapters of Romans and elsewhere.
This wonderful substitutionary aspect of the gospel secures our forgiveness and opens us to the love of God. Our ‘sins’ are dealt with but not the ‘sinner’.
If you have believed the gospel and understood the substitutionary sacrifice of the cross, you will use phrases like ‘I am a forgiven sinner’ and believe that, now, through a process called ‘sanctification’ you will progressively be changed into His likeness; the ‘old man’ progressively dies as the ‘new man’ is formed within. In the resurrection, in the ‘twinkling of an eye’ somehow the process will have reached its fulfilment, and you will be transformed from corruption into incorruption and enter a permanent state of glory (see 1 Cor 15 v50f).
But this is not what the New Testament teaches and I hope to show how understanding the inclusive death of Christ enabled Paul to address the Corinthians as ‘saints’ and ‘having been sanctified’ – and, if there’s time, to understand how Paul can use the present tense when saying that we have been glorified (Romans 8 v30).
The inclusive death of Christ.
In terms of Paul’s letter to the Romans, the substitutionary aspects of the death of Christ will get as far as chapter 5 but no further. Romans 6 will be a fog, as will be chapter 7, and so chapters 8 onwards will be forced to conform to the one-legged ‘chapters 1-5 gospel’ with some inevitable doctrinal consequences.
Romans 6 v 6 ‘knowing this that our old man was crucified with Him…’
Galatians 2 v 20 ‘I have been crucified with Christ, it is no longer I who live but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave Himself for me’
Col 3 v3 ‘For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God’
2 Cor 5v17 ‘…if anyone is in Christ he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold all things have become new’
It is clear from the above verses that Paul understood that God has, in the death of Christ, included us by virtue of the fact that we have been placed ‘in Christ’ and, in so doing, has dealt a death blow to the ‘sinner’ as well as dealing with our ‘sins’.
In the Old Testament, this dual aspect of the death of Christ was prefigured on the Day of Atonement when two, not one, goats were sacrificed. One, the scapegoat, carried the sins of the people far away – just like John the Baptist announced, ‘Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world’. That’s the substitutionary aspect of the death of Christ. But the other ram was killed in front of the altar as a burnt offering, never more to live. That’s the death of Christ that includes us:
‘Do you not know that as many of us that have been baptised into Christ Jesus were baptised into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too should walk in newness of life’ Romans 6 v 3,4
Sanctification, therefore has nothing to do with improving the ‘old man’ or the ‘old creation, or the ‘in Adam’ you – the ‘old man’ has been crucified, dead and buried. A ‘new man’ a ‘new creation’ has taken his place in Christ.
The mystics may teach the experiential side of this but it is important to ‘know’ that the work has been completed not because of our attempts to become holy but because God has placed us ‘in Christ’ and therefore we share in all that has achieved on our behalf.
‘But it is of Him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God and righteousness and sanctification and redemption’ 1 Cor 1 v 30
Sanctification, therefore has been achieved not is being achieved through our increasing spiritual maturity. In order to shift focus on sanctification as being a life-long process to something included in the death of Christ just like justification, salvation, redemption, and righteousness we need to understand what the word means.
Sanctification means to set apart for a particular purpose. A ‘saint’ is someone who has been set apart, in Christ, for a particular purpose therefore this includes all believers; not just those who have reached whatever level of spiritual maturity. To use an everyday analogy, when you buy a car you buy it with a particular function in mind – to get you and others from A to B. You might, after purchasing it, fill it with plants and use it as a greenhouse, but that doesn’t alter the original purpose for which it has been set apart. All you have to do to rediscover the purpose for which it was set apart or sanctified (or consecrated) is to remove the plants, clean it up, and start driving: it didn’t become a greenhouse by using it as a greenhouse, it was still a car meant to be driven from A to B.
So it is for all believers, for those in Christ Jesus.
We are made holy, saints, sanctified, set apart when God places us in Christ. Through the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus He has forgiven us our sins and given us the gift of righteousness and justified us. Through the inclusive death of Jesus we have been crucified with Him and now we are new creations in Christ, saints, with a holy sanctified purpose.
That’s the starting point. From then on sanctification is permanent and eternal and so Paul writes to the Corinthians – who have, to use the above analogy, filled the car with plants – and reminds them that they ‘have been sanctified’ and are ‘holy’ or ‘saints’ in Christ Jesus and sets about calling them back to fulfilling their original purpose.
In doing so he analyses why they have got themselves into such a mess – seemingly a contradiction of the status conferred on them due to the death of Christ.
Having laid the spiritual foundations in the first two chapters together with an outline of the divisions in the church, Paul addresses the problems in Chapter 3:
‘I could not speak to you as spiritual but fleshly (carnal), as to babies in Christ. I fed you with milk and not with solid food for, until now, you were not ready to receive it. Even now you are still carnal! Are you not carnal and behaving like mere men? 1 Cor 3 v 1-3
Paul is painting a picture of all mankind. First, there are ‘mere men’, then there are immature ‘carnal’ or ‘fleshly’ believers, then there are the mature ‘spiritual’ believers.
Mere men – are simply men and women who do not believe in Christ, either because they haven’t heard the gospel or they have rejected it.
A fleshly or carnal believer is almost indistinguishable from ‘mere men’ because they are operating from their own resources, their souls – the mind, the emotions, and the will. Because they have believed they are trying to live the Christ-like life but failing because they are attempting to do so with their own abilities.
The mature, spiritual, believer is one that has given up trying to do the impossible, to live the life only Christ Jesus can live, and has ‘ceased from his works’ (Heb 4v10) or, to use an Old Testament scripture has learnt not to ‘lean on his own understanding’ to live life from his own resources. To repeat Gal 2v20: ‘I have been crucified with Christ, it is no longer I who live but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave Himself for me’
The mature are ‘spiritual’ that is they are living from the new resources of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Christ, being poured out within.
So, whatever failures the believer may experience does not contradict the justification and sanctification the believers won for them by Christ Jesus at the cross.
Paul’s perspective, when writing to the demoralised church in Corinth, weighed down with troubles, was to remind them of the truth and start from there. As Jesus said: ‘If you are my disciples you will continue in My word and know the truth and the truth will set you free’.
It was a painful time for the church in Corinth. As it is for us when we act in carnal or fleshly ways: when we rely on our own thinking, or our emotions, or our determination to get from A to B and forget that we, as children of God, are ‘led by the Spirit’ not by the flesh. Learning to walk by the Spirit is not sanctification, as if the ‘old man’ has to diminish and let the ‘new man’ gradually take over but it is the eternal working out of the sanctification that is true for us in Christ as the Holy Spirit takes the word and ‘implants the word in humble hearts’ James 1 v 21. It’s the ‘entrance’ of the word that gives light not its existence!
Under the terms of the New Covenant, or New Testament, our hearts of stone are replaced with hearts of flesh. We are given a new spirit. AND the Holy Spirit is given to us Who sets about writing the law of God on our hearts so that we are enabled to walk in His ways (See Jeremiah 31 v 31 and Ezekiel 36 v 26f)
To conclude: things are not always as they seem. The Corinthians’ problem was attempting to live the Christian life as ‘carnal’ or ‘fleshly’ believers relying on their own resources. It had, inevitably, led them astray and they had filled their lives with division and sexual wrong-doing. It was the accumulation of the ‘plants in the car’ to use the above analogy, that had reached Paul’s ears so he writes to them reminding them what was won for them in Christ Jesus and calling then back to the truth:
‘To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those already sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints…grace to you…’
We need to stand on both legs of the gospel and see ourselves as the fruit of the sufferings of Christ on the cross which was substitutionary and inclusive.
Once we ‘get it’ our vocabulary will change; we will no longer be bale to say ‘I am a sinner saved by grace’ we will, not boastfully but humbly, have accepted that we were included in His death and therefore we can say ‘Thank you Lord, now I am a saint, I have been sanctified, set apart as your son in Christ’ and grow into spiritual maturity from that point.
***
Additional note: for a future post but the inclusive nature of the death of Christ on the cross irons out the apparent wrinkle in Romans 8v30 where Paul makes another mistake and puts ‘glorification’ alongside other attributes in the past tense: ‘Those He called He also justified and those He justified, these He also glorified.’ Well, no. Paul made no mistake the mistake is seeing glorification as a future-only event.
Things are not as they seem
This post is copied from my FB page and really is an introduction to re-thinking sanctification (holiness and sainthood). A fuller version to come.
This post is copied from my FB page and really is an introduction to re-thinking sanctification (holiness and sainthood). A fuller version to come.
I want to make a serious point but here’s a very serious point to start with…England, despite their curious loss to Scotland in the rugby, will wake up this morning, I suggest, bolder, brighter, better than the out-and-out favourites Scotland, who barely got off the starting blocks and squeaked home.
It’s the same in the New Testament. Surprising apparent optical illusions are at work. Take Paul’s letter to the Corinthians. Here was a church riven with divisions (groups following their favourite apostle or preachers) and really difficult pastoral problems surrounding cases of sexual immorality.
And how does Paul start his epistle?
‘To the church of God at Corinth to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints….grace to you…’
Either Paul was delusional or we need to re-think sanctification, holiness, and sainthood.
(You’ll probably see that in most translations the translators have injected in italics ‘called TO BE saints’. Delete TO BE and that’s what Paul wrote)
So…I’ll leave you to work out whether Paul was delusional about the Corinthians and/or I’m delusional about England Rugby XV