The blaspheme that caused the tear

In the gospel according to Matthew (26:57-68), we are told that when Jesus was brought before the religious leaders being falsely accused, he did not address any of the charges. Finally, the high priest “adjures Jesus by the living God” whether he was the Messiah, the son of God. At this, Jesus finally responds but in a way that seems somewhat cryptic, in that when he has finished speaking the high priest tears his robe calling Jesus’ comments blaspheme. What is so blasphemous about his claim?

Jesus said,

“You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

This answer is a quote from the seventh chapter of Daniel, where the prophet sees a vision where,

“behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.”

Let us make a few observations before we tie this strange claim to the charge of blaspheme. Notice first that the “coming on the clouds” is not to earth but “to the Ancient of Days.” This is an ascension trip. Notice too that the son of man receives “dominion, glory, and a kingdom” that is “everlasting, shall not pass away, nor be destroyed.” This is ultimate kingly status. For the Hebrews, there is only One Creator and only One ultimate King, and this One does not share His glory with another. And yet, this son of man is receiving “glory” and a “kingdom.” In addition, this giving of a kingdom is so “that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him.” This later phrase, “serve him” is sometimes translated “worship.” Either way, the son of man here is receiving what only belongs to YHWH, to the One God alone.

Going back to Jesus’ claim to be the Messiah (you have said so), and to his claim that he is the son of man that Daniel is referencing seems to indicate that he was YHWH, about to receive glory and service that belong to the One God alone. The high priest made the connection that we so often overlook. Hence the tearing of the robe and the charge of blaspheme.

What must I do to be accepted?

According to Acts 10:34 the answer is to fear God and do righteousness.

Consider this portion of the puritan Matthew Henry’s words on this matter:

Acceptance cannot be obtained on any other ground than that of the covenant of mercy, through the atonement of Christ; but wherever true religion is found, God will accept it without regarding names or sects. The fear of God and works of righteousness are the substance of true religion, the effects of special grace. Though these are not the cause of a man’s acceptance, yet they show it; and whatever may be wanting in knowledge or faith, will in due time be given by Him who has begun it…

Where does this leave the inclusive / exclusive debate concerning those outside the Christian faith? Are the saved by grace as a result of Jesus’ righteousness apart from their lack of knowledge of his name or work? Thinking it through.

On the nature of fruit…spiritual and otherwise

Recently, as I was struggling with the notion of the evidence of God’s work in a person’s life when the reality of life rhythms struck me. You can tell a tree by its fruit. But fruit only comes around for a little while each year. The little that I know concerning botany is that a fruit/vegetable bearing tree/plant does not bear fruit all of the time. There are seasons where the fruit-source is dormant, hidden in the potentially sap-filled branches. Flowers appear and eventually give way to the juicy meat of vegetation flesh. For some reason, I had never taken the analogy over to the spiritual realm and considered that the fulness of spiritual fruit may not always be hanging heavy and low on a stocked full branch. There may be seasons where the fruit is being prepared. If the analogy could be taken a step further, it would be a bad thing if the tree did not produce fruit, year after year, but if there was a dry period, it may be wise to wait and see if the tree produces fruit after a bit of cultivation and pruning. All in all, the notion of not having non-stop fruit is of encouragement to this particular tree.

Cleaning up or making more mess?

There once was a naïve and spoiled young man who was given the laborious task of cleaning the family pool. Yes, this family had their very own oasis right in their back yard. The pool had become green and was slowly fading to black. Each week, the young man’s father modeled methodically how to swipe the sides and bottom of this pool but in these last days had transferred the task to his son, who happed to be board a lot. A few times the young man had gone out and attempted to do his duty. He set up the cleaning hose and extended the pole. He began to run the vacuum down one side of the far wall and noticed that all he was accomplishing was stirring up the water so that he could no longer see the bottom of his pole. And so he stopped. The young man figured that he was doing more harm than good and so put away the cleaning gear, and left the pool to its doomed stagnant place in this world.

p.s. – not about my boys

Pulsating with the Life of the Spirit

Once and a while, even Berkhof has some great things to say ; )

“They who are united to Christ by faith become partakers of His Spirit, and thus become one body with Him, pulsating with the life of the Spirit. They share in the life of Christ, and because He live they live also. It is impossible that they should again be removed from the body, thus frustrating the divine ideal. The union is permanent, since it originates in a permanent and unchangeable cause, the free and eternal love of God.”

He goes on to quote Dabney on the work of the Spirit, of which I like particularly the following phraseology,

“It is a low and unworthy estimate of the wisdom of the Holy Spirit and of His work in the heart to suppose that He will begin the work now, and presently desert it; that the vital spark of heavenly birth is an ignis fatuus, burning for a short season, and then expiring in utter darkness; that the spiritual life communicated in the new birth, is a sort of spasmodic or galvanic vitality, giving the outward appearance of life in the dead soul, and then dying.”

A Christological view of the Creationism debate

In the context of handling the sticky wicket of divorce and marriage, as was his custom, Jesus taught them. But he taught more than they asked for, and indeed he offers to us today teaching on contemporary debates beyond the context of his original discussion.

Mark 10.1-9 And he left there and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan, and crowds gathered to him again. And again, as was his custom, he taught them.

And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce and to send her away.” And Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

Notice that Jesus didn’t say, “But from the beginning of the creation of mankind…” “but from the beginning of creation…” The former qualifier is actually nonsensical and not to be assumed unless one has an agenda for desiring it to be placed there. Apparently, for Jesus, the Adam and Woman account happened “in the beginning of creation.”

Where does that leave the young earth / old earth / evolutionary discussion and the authority of Scripture? It seems that if you affirm the later, it will lead you to more of young earth position. Just a thought.

Importance of the Gatekeepers

According to Exodus 38:8 and 1 Samuel 2:22, it was women who served / ministered at the entrance to the Tabernacle. It is interesting to note that while the Tabernacle was a copy of heaven, the very throne room of God, this holy place had only one entrance: a curtain approximately 30 ft long at the center of a 75 ft long wall of curtains, always located on the East side of the Tabernacle. This one entrance, it can be figured, points to the one and only entrance to the Father, our Lord Jesus Christ.

So then, what is the symbolism of having women ministering, guarding even, the Christ, the way to God? This is a sincere question for all who would like to respond.

One observation I could throw out is that it was women who first observe and testified to the risen Christ.

Is the symbolism of the women ministering at the gate a picture of the ministering women around Jesus during his earthly work? (Lk 8:2-3)