Living in the Light of Eternity

Two sermons I’ve heard recently have struck a chord with me. There’s nothing new or spectacular about either one, but taken together, they remind me of some basic truth about living for Christ. I have borrowed the title of this article from last weekend’s message at the church we attend here at home. Using the first few verses of 1 Thessalonians, the pastor reminded us that our love and faith and hope are predicated on our belief that our lives on earth are only the prelude to the real life we will spend in eternity. We can spend ourselves in selfless love for others because we believe the Word that assures us of a certain hope for eternity.

Nothing new there. But I was reminded of the message we heard from the church our daughter and son-in-law attend back in Michigan. (We are Internet “members.”) The pastor, Joel, has been teaching from 1 Corinthians and is now in the fifteenth chapter—the chapter where Paul makes his strongest case for the literal, bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. Paul told the Corinthians that denial of the bodily resurrection of Jesus puts the lie to everything else about their beliefs. “But if Christ has not been raised,” Paul says, “then our preaching is in vain, and your faith is in vain.” The Greek word for vain means empty, without effect or result, useless.

So, because the Corinthians faith is useless without the resurrection of Jesus, their hope is therefore false hope. Paul continues, “If we have put our hope in Christ in this life only, we are of all people most pitiable.” Indeed, what a pity if we are denying ourselves earthly pleasures in order to follow the tenets of a faith that is emptied of all power. Paul continues his argument: “If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” The resurrection of Jesus not only validated His Messiahship, but it also guaranteed the resurrection of all His followers.

Paul again: “But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep.” Pastor Joel made a connection that I had not considered before. The concept of first fruits comes from the Old Testament commandment to offer the first of your crop to God. The Festival of First Fruits was held on the first Sunday after the Sabbath of Passover week. Oh my! What a coincidence! Jesus was sacrificed during the week of Passover and rose on the day of First Fruits. Pastor Joel called Jesus’ resurrection the ticket to our resurrection. He paid the fare. The only reason we have the right to ride the Heavenly Train is because the resurrection of Jesus made it possible.

In the eighth chapter of Romans – my favorite chapter in Paul’s most important letter – Paul says that believers “groan” with all creation waiting for the revelation of the sons of God. “For we know that the whole creation groans together and suffers agony together until now. Not only this, but we ourselves also, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves while we await eagerly our adoption, the redemption of our body.” That “adoption,” that “redemption of our body” is another way of talking about our resurrection. We are destined for a bodily resurrection onto the new Earth to spend eternity in the presence of God.

I will admit (shamefully), I often live as if this life was of primary importance. Is my Social Security benefit secure? Can I keep up with my bills? Will my old cars keep running? How long before my roof starts to leak? What’s on TV tonight? What’s for supper? I spend a substantial amount of my waking hours thinking about such things. That’s natural, right? Then I remember that believers aren’t supposed to be natural; we are supposed to be supernatural, spirit led, God-trusters.

The minute I start to worry about things of earth, I have fallen into sin. Shocked? Worry is sin because it betrays a lack of faith, and anything done without faith is sin. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said to “seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be added unto you.” What “things” was He referring to? Earthly things: food, clothing, shelter. The Father knows you need those things, and He’s got you covered.

Seeking God’s kingdom and His righteousness is just another way of saying what Paul said to the Colossians: set your mind on things above (eternal things)… where your life is hidden with Christ in God” I’ve heard it said that some people are so heavenly minded that they are no earthly good. I doubt there are many people who really have that problem; most of us suffer from just the opposite: we are so earthly minded we are no heavenly good. We need to live every moment in the light of eternity because if you are a believer, you already have one foot planted in eternity. Which foot are you going to put your weight on?

Related Posts: Why Heaven Matters

For the Love of Cats – Again!

Several years ago, I wrote a piece called “For the Love of Cats.” What I am about to say will make more sense if you read that before you continue with this. If you haven’t the time to follow the link, I will summarize by saying that I realized back then that God loves His entire creation – even cats – so if I am going to be more like Him, I should love cats too.

A couple years after I wrote “For the Love of Cats,” the cat for whom I had begun my transformation left us. I say that quite literally because she was fifteen years old and had been unwell for some time. As cats often will, she wandered into the desert by our campsite one day and did not return. I searched the area for three days but never found a trace of her. Obviously, Karen mourned her passing, but she and I concluded that it was her time, and in her cat-like independence, she chose when and how to leave. In that time and place I wrote the following poem:

I Heard the Coyotes Sing

I heard the coyotes sing this morning

Somewhere far away up the slope

That rises to the eight-thousand-foot ridge

Where the sun made its entrance an hour before.

 

It’s an eerie sound that coyotes make

When the pack joins in chorus at night.

In the daylight it has a mournful tune

Not as frightening as the black night cry.

 

The river far below my cliff perch

Laughed at me with sparkling eyes

as it wound its way around the ox bows

Thick with sedge grass and oasis greens.

 

I laughed back at the shining river

When the resident frogs began arguing

On the muddy bank warmed by the early sun

Waiting for the next free-range cattle-fed fly.

 

Cheerful birdcalls rose from the valley

As crows rode the updraft above the cliff

And called me names I didn’t understand

With raspy, insubordinate undertones.

 

Behind me in the silent mesquite and sage

I thought I heard the soft mewing of Sadie

Our dear old feline friend who yesterday

Slipped into the desert for her final catnap.

 

I heard the coyotes sing this morning

And I stopped to listen to the sound,

Telling in its way how vast and varied

Is the circle of God’s creation.

 

For the last few years of Sadie’s time with us, I had been saying that when she was gone, our cat owning days were over. It seemed only fair to me. For nearly fifty years I had put up with cats. Surely my wife could live without a feline resident in deference to my desires. She agreed, but mournfully. There were occasional hints, and there was the picture of Sadie as her I-phone wallpaper. I finally realized that she would never not want another cat.

 After three cat-less years, I relented. I did ask that we look for the most hypo-allergenic breed available. The trouble with that was the cost. Russian Blues and Cornish Rexes and such were going to cost upwards of $1,000. Oh, drat and phooey! Let’s just rescue a kitten and be done with it. So we did. Introducing Mademoiselle Arabella Minette – Bella for short.

I am not telling this tale of a cat for self-aggrandizement. After all, this blog is why heaven matters most. Besides my aforementioned discovery that I am required to love cats, I want to emphasize the nature of love – for cats and people. If you love someone (particularly a human someone), there will be times when you must go out of your way to show that love; love without action is not true love after all. Just as faith requires action to prove it is genuine, love that does not act is meaningless.

Imagine John 3:16 ending with “God loved the world.” Without “that He gave His one and only Son,” it wouldn’t have much power to convince us of His love. And remember that He loved us “while we were still sinners.” God didn’t show His love because we were so loveable – quite the opposite. He loves us unconditionally meaning no matter what condition we are in. If you truly love someone, you must love in deed. That’s love indeed!

 

For God’s Sake

There is a kind of soft profanity that people often use without thinking – even Christians do it. One expression is so popular that it even has a texting version: OMG. I am quite certain that when people use the name of God in that profane way, they are not calling on God as their provider and protector. When I was younger, another expression was often heard when someone reached a state of frustration: for God’s sake. It was sometimes softened to for Pete’s sake, which I assume was a reference to Saint Peter. In either case, God was probably the farthest thing from the speaker’s mind.

Like so many of our flippant remarks, for God’s sake has a significant meaning. I was reading chapter 36 of Ezekiel when I came across this statement: “Therefore say to the house of Israel, ‘Thus says the Lord God, “It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for My holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you went. I will vindicate the holiness of My great name which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst. Then the nations will know that I am the Lord,” declares the Lord God, “when I prove Myself holy among you in their sight.”

This passage is found in the larger context of God’s promise to give Israel release from her Babylonian captivity and eventually seat His Servant, David, on her throne forever. We know certainly that God was referring to the Messiah who was to come. We also know that the “Israel” God spoke of is the New Testament church that was bought and paid for by Christ on the cross. In his letter to the Romans, the Apostle Paul refers to the church as branches grafted onto the tree that God planted centuries before. Paul notes that the Israelites who spurned their Messiah were branches that had been cut off the original tree while the New Testament believers were grafted in.

What seems most important to me in this metaphor is that there is only one tree. If we carry the metaphor back to the earlier chapters of the Roman letter, we could say that the tree is the tree of faith that began with Abraham. According to Paul, Abraham believed God (put his faith in Him), and it was counted as righteousness before God. Paul stresses the fact that Abraham’s faith preceded the law by many, many years. His point was clearly that faith is what brings a person into right relationship with God, not the law given later to the nation of Israel. God’s tree is the tree of faith.

It has always been something of a mystery to me why God kept rescuing Israel when they repeatedly left Him behind. The answer is in that verse from Ezekiel: He did it for His sake. For God’s sake! Not theirs. I think the application for today is clear. God’s people, the faithful, are still prone to wander from His prescribed ways. I have no doubt that Jesus knew exactly what was going to happen to His church when He delivered His parting words: “I am with you always.” He is the same God who promised, “I will never leave you or forsake you.” He knew we would fail sometimes, but He promised to be there anyway.

I have written previously that the Cross of Calvary is the ultimate demonstration of God’s covenant love for His people.  As I said then, “The ugliness and horror of the Cross of Calvary demonstrates how much God hates sin. [That is] judgment. The gift of grace for believers demonstrates the culmination of the long-running pursuit by God to redeem His creation. [That is] love.” This is true, but there is more to it. God had a plan when He created Adam and Eve and placed them in His perfectly created world. Adam and Eve blew the original plan, but God did not give up. He still intends to populate a perfect creation with perfected creatures. The way to that perfection is through the cross.

If God is still working with His people (no ifs about it), it is for His sake, not ours. He has a bigger plan, and He is playing on a much bigger field than we can imagine. As I wrote in “It’s Not All About You,” “Redemption is about God getting back what is rightfully His as creator. Redemption is not primarily about you; it is about a cosmic battle between forces that operate at a level far above your pay grade.” That does not mean we have no part to play; we are called to show God’s righteousness to a lost and dying world – just like ancient Israel was supposed to do. When they failed, He rescued them for His sake so that, “The nations will know that I am the Lord,” as He told Ezekiel.

God still wishes to redeem His creation. Jesus reaffirmed that when He said, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.” I have no doubt that Jesus knew the difficulty His followers would face, yet He said, “You are the light of the world.” We need to be that blameless bride, that royal priesthood that reveals God’s love and grace to the world. The church cannot do that if she is not proclaiming the whole Word of God without exceptions or excuses. Israel thought she had a special relationship with God that made her immune from judgment. Wrong! The church is falling into the same pit. God will preserve a remnant. He always has. For His sake. Make sure you are among the remnant.

Related posts: The God of Demonstrations; It’s Not All About You; Rolling Thunder; Bringing the Kingdom

The Vulture Has Landed

On July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong announced, “The Eagle has landed.” As a newly minted high school graduate just a week past my eighteenth birthday, I was enthralled with the Moon landing as were millions of other fascinated people who watched on television. NASA had accomplished what John F. Kennedy had promised back in 1961: we put a man on the Moon. It seemed appropriate to call the lunar lander the Eagle given the symbolic connection to American ingenuity and power that had made the project possible. Everywhere you look, the eagle is emblazoned on American icons.

If the Israelis had put their man on the moon, they might have heard their astronaut say, “The Vulture Has Landed.” They might have if they had been channeling the symbolism of their ancestors from the days of the prophets. According to one Bible dictionary, in Old Testament Israel, “The vulture was appreciated for its size, flying ability, and cleanliness, so biblical references to vultures do not carry the same negative connotations as in modern Western culture. Actually, the griffon vulture can still be found in northern Israel and in the Negev Desert in southern Israel, so the idea isn’t as crazy as it sounds.

Who cares? I want to make a point about Bible translation as it relates to Bible study. Any time you try to take a thought from one language and transfer it to another language, problems arise. Word-for-word literal translation doesn’t always work. Translators face this issue constantly. For example, when they wanted to translate Isaiah 1:18 for a tribal language in Africa, the phrase, “white like snow,” was meaningless. The tribes’ people had never seen snow. They had seen hail occasionally, but the connection with frozenness was linked to negative ideas. They were familiar with chalk which is also white; however, chalk is used in some pagan ceremonies, so it too carries unwanted connotations.

I have written previously about the difficulties involved with taking the Bible literally. (See below) The examples here, vultures and snow, are two of thousands of translation issues. To get the clearest picture of what the original author was trying to say, we must get into the historical and literary context. When I wrote “The Best Version of the Bible,” I explained that all versions of the Bible reside on a gradual scale from stiffly literal, word-for-word translation toward a more relaxed rendering known as a paraphrase. It is not safe to say that the most “literal” is the best version. As I illustrated with snow in the Isaiah passage, a literal word-for-word translation may miss the mark completely. The trouble with the opposite end of the scale is that we must rely on the opinion of the translator as to what the message of the passage should be.

Because I have a fair knowledge of Koine Greek, and I am comfortable with the linguistic tools used to interpret Hebrew, I prefer to study as close to the original text as I can. When I do read an English translation, I prefer to sit somewhere on the border between the word-for-word and the thought-for-thought with a modern version that takes advantage of all the latest textual resources. But I did not begin this piece to recommend a Bible; I did that in “The Best Version of the Bible.” What I wanted to say here is that we cannot just read Bible words and apply our own connotations to them. We need context. For example, most translators have done this for us by translating the Hebrew nesher in Ezekiel 17 as eagle rather than vulture to accommodate our modern sensibilities.

There are countless examples of Bible teachers innocently building a theology on a misinterpretation of Scripture. This happens regularly with people using the King James Version without cross-checking the four-hundred-year-old English to see if it means what they think it means. The Elizabethan English of the KJV is almost a foreign language compared to twenty-first century usage. A misunderstanding is almost guaranteed if you don't clarify the centuries-old meaning of the word in question.

Bible study is not the only place where a misunderstanding can warp the interpretation of language. The American founding documents, though not Elizabethan, are ancient enough to present interpretive challenges. When Jefferson mentioned “pursuit of happiness” in the Declaration of Independence, his generation understood him to mean fortuitous circumstances, not levity. If we don’t know the literary and historical context of the written words, our assumptions may be way off base.

The best option for Bible study is to choose a reliable translation and find one that comes as a study Bible. That way you can take advantage of the scholarship necessary to understand the context of any debatable passages. But I want to end this by saying what I said previously: the best version of the Bible is the one the Holy Spirit illuminates for you individually as you read and pray for understanding. This underscores the necessity of praying for guidance before you read. Ask for an entrance into God’s Word revealed by God Himself. He promised He would do that. Why wouldn’t you want that? Maybe you will see a vulture land.

Related posts: Take the Bible Literally; Taking the Bible Literally, Part 2; Understanding the Bible as Literature; Six Day Creation; Why Am I Here?