The themes in this section of the Gospel of John resonate well with the themes I am often addressing at this web site. Jesus calls his followers into a life of obedience — and promises the power and presence of the Holy Spirit to them.
In the Gospel of John, we see Jesus preparing his disciples for the days to come with a long discourse: it begins in Chapters 13 and runs through chapter 16, with a closing prayer added in chapter 17. The passage I’m discussing today is just a brief snippet from that longer discourse. This passage is memorable because in contains of the promise of the Holy Spirit. But, it is framed on either side by a challenge to keep Christ’s commandments.
“He will send from heaven and save me, he will put to shame those who trample on me. Selah. God will send forth his steadfast love and his faithfulness.” (NRSV.)
The next phrase (“he will put to shame those who trample on me”) points up one of my long-standing problems with the Psalms. When I first began to read the Psalms, as a young man, I was put off by the recurrent theme of “enemies.” Praying to God in the midst of confusion and need I could understand. Praying to God in times of distress and suffering I could understand. But, the frequent and recurrent theme of persecution by enemies was something with which I could not connect. Or, maybe I just didn’t want to connect with it.
“He will send from heaven and save me, he will put to shame those who trample on me. Selah. God will send forth his steadfast love and his faithfulness.” Psalm 57:3 (Hebrew: verse 4) (NRSV)
My first reading of this is: “God will send help from far away.” And, there is some basis for this reading. But, that’s not the whole story.
“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.” — John 3:16 (NRSV).
JOHN CALVIN COMMENTS (my responses have a white background):
John Calvin (1509-1564)
“’That whosoever believeth on him may not perish.’ It is a remarkable commendation of faith, that it frees us from everlasting destruction. For he intended expressly to state that, though we appear to have been born to death, undoubted deliverance is offered to us by the faith of Christ; and, therefore, that we ought not to fear death, which otherwise hangs over us. And he has employed the universal term whosoever, both to invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such is also the import of the term world, which he formerly used; for though nothing will be found in the world that is worthy of the favor of God, yet he shows himself to be reconciled to the whole world, when he invites all men without exception to the faith of Christ, which is nothing else than an entrance into life.”
Um. Okay. I think I’m with you there, brother John.
“Let us remember, on the other hand, that while life is promised universally to all who believe in Christ, still faith is not common to all. For Christ is made known and held out to the view of all, but the elect alone are they whose eyes God opens, that they may seek him by faith. Here, too, is displayed a wonderful effect of faith; for by it we receive Christ such as he is given to us by the Father — that is, as having freed us from the condemnation of eternal death, and made us heirs of eternal life, because, by the sacrifice of his death, he has atoned for our sins, that nothing may prevent God from acknowledging us as his sons. Since, therefore, faith embraces Christ, with the efficacy of his death and the fruit of his resurrection, we need not wonder if by it we obtain likewise the life of Christ.”
Whoa! What do you mean “on the other hand”? Umm… Now you seem to be dodging out of it all by appealing to a theology that is rooted in something else, John. Here you are clearly leaving exegesis behind and trying to reconcile the verse with a preconceived theology. How can ‘life’ be promised to those incapable of receiving it? It can’t. How can God ‘invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers’ (as you say) if God is choosing to withhold the ability to believe from some? You can’t have it both ways. I mean, I know you’re a logical guy, John. Isn’t it possible that Augustine was wrong in the Enchiridion — where this same logical inconsistency can be found?
“Still it is not yet very evident why and how faith bestows life upon us. Is it because Christ renews us by his Spirit, that the righteousness of God may live and be vigorous in us; or is it because, having been cleansed by his blood, we are accounted righteous before God by a free pardon? It is indeed certain, that these two things are always joined together; but as the certainty of salvation is the subject now in hand, we ought chiefly to hold by this reason, that we live, because God loves us freely by not imputing to us our sins. For this reason sacrifice is expressly mentioned, by which, together with sins, the curse and death are destroyed. I have already explained the object of these two clauses, which is, to inform us that in Christ we regain the possession of life, of which we are destitute in ourselves; for in this wretched condition of mankind, redemption, in the order of time, goes before salvation.”
What! Now you seem to be having problems with your earlier statement that [faith] ‘frees us from everlasting destruction.’ Do you mean: ‘faith bestows life upon us’ (as you said earlier) or: ‘life’ (through grace) bestows faith upon us? Now you are saying that redemption precedes salvation, because the ability to believe is itself the result of that salvation. If the ability to believe is wholly the decision of God, then it is God who has determined the issues of life and death. It is your theology that has dictated that: “redemption, in the order of time, goes before salvation” — not the text itself. I agree that part of the message of this verse is ‘that in Christ we regain the possession of life, of which we are destitute in ourselves’ but it is also a universal offer of eternal life (thus, it says: “whoever”) — a possibility your theology does not seem to allow for! In my opinion, making sense of this verse requires a concept of Prevenient Grace, which allows fallen humans to respond with faith to the offer of life. Otherwise, from your point of view, the verse should read either:
“For God so loved the elect that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who belongs to the elect and, thus, has faith, may therefore believe in him unto eternal life.”
or more simply:
“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who has eternal life may believe in him.”
But, surely you see, don’t you, it doesn’t say either of those things. You’ve turned it around backwards. This is no longer the Scripture with which you began.
(Start gathering the wood again, boys, I think there’s another heretic in town.)
QUESTION: Where is the Pre-Tribulational Rapture of the Church taught in the Bible.
ANSWER: It is not taught in the Bible. It is the implication of a theory of interpretation of the Bible known as Dispensationalism.
I’m old enough to remember the Larry Norman song “I Wish We’d All Been Ready” (used extensively in evangelism). It was part of a a fear-evangelism tactic used to scare people (especially young people) into accepting Jesus as Savior before it was too late. Here are some of the lyrics:
A man and wife asleep in bed She hears a noise and turns her head he’s gone I wish wed all been ready Two men walking up a hill One disappears and ones left standing still I wish wed all been ready
[Chorus] There’s no time to change your mind The son has come and you’ve been left behind
Many years after all that, I also remember the brief furor that was caused by a booklet that gave 88 reasons why Jesus was returning in 1988. Then after that, Harold Camping predicted Jesus’ return on May 21, 2011. Over the years, many of the predictions of end-times prophecy teachers have failed — some quite spectacularly — but, this is quickly forgotten when a new round of predictions starts up again.
The doctrine of the Rapture has been a staple of American fear-evangelism for a long time. In this teaching, Jesus will return secretly to remove all true Christian believers from the world — then a time of horrible Tribulation will ensue. And, it is still commonly taught by certain well-known “prophetic” teachers.
Evangelical and conservative Christians pride themselves on their devotion to the Bible. Yet, there are certain common features of conservative Christian teaching about the return of Christ which have little or no backing from the Scriptures. Specifically, the teaching that Christ will come silently and secretly to take believers out of the world, seven years before he returns in glory, is a teaching the lacks Biblical support.
“I cry to God Most High, to God who fulfills his purpose for me.” (NRSV)
As I said last time: this expresses the intention to pray. The initial cry for help, is followed by a statement of intent: a general statement telling us why the Psalmist cries out to God. It’s not just a momentary thing: it’s a way of life.
What I want to point out is the brevity of that final phrase:
Human nature being what it is: there is no prayer more basic to our experience. It may not be the ideal prayer. But, it’s the most common one. There isn’t a person living who hasn’t at some time in their life cried out: “God help me” — even if they weren’t certain whether there was Anyone or anything to whom to cry.
But, the prayer in verse 1 is not just general, it is also very personal and intimate: “…for in you my soul takes refuge; in the shadow of your wings I will take refuge….” This is followed by a statement of intent. In a sense, this statement implies a rationale for prayer. Verse 2 (Hebrew, verse 3):
“I will cry to God Most High, To God who accomplishes all things for me.” (NASB).
Why do we pray? Why is it even possible or appropriate to bring our personal requests and needs to God? Because God accomplishes things for us, in answer to our requests.
Prayer operates on a hypothesis. As it says in Hebrews 11:6: “…for whoever would approach [God] must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.”
As we walk with God, and find our faith confirmed in experience, our trust grows stronger and deeper. We say to ourselves: “God has not failed me in the past. God will not fail me now.” So, it is in this instance. Experience has produced confidence. God is the One who brings things to pass.
It seems strange at first glance that the initial cry of mercy is followed by a declaration of intent:
“I will cry to God Most High, To God who accomplishes all things for me.”
The idea here is that at all times — and especially in times of need and stress — the psalmist intends to call upon God.
Think about it. Prayer is often a last resort for us. When all other sources of help have been exhausted, then we seek out the place of prayer — and request the prayers of others. This verse says it should be more of a first resort.
Sometimes a church gets involved in a visioning process. Sometimes this is fruitful and sometimes it isn’t. But, for a lot of people this process is frustrating — even maddening. It’s a process of reflection and prayer. It will be fruitful only as people seek God and God’s will. But, it’s hard. Our impulse is to do, to go get ideas from somewhere, to make a plan, etc. — sadly, our first impulse is not the impulse to pray. Sometimes we are in the waiting time.
But, it is those who wait upon the Lord who find strength. But, someone who says: “I will cry to God Most High, To God who accomplishes all things for me” is someone who resorts to God in all circumstances.
This is someone who has the intention to pray. If I have the intent to pray, I will rise in the morning and seek God. If I have the intent to pray, I will find times during the day to seek God. I will be bold enough to ask — for myself and for others. I will look expectantly for answers.
A PRAYER.
Lord God we praise you for your steadfast love and mercy.
We have learned from experience to trust You. We have found You to be faithful. We have found in You a continual source of hope and life.
Keep us in the place of prayer.
In uncertain times, keep us in prayer. In times of joy and fulfillment, keep us in prayer.
We seek You now. It is our intent to seek you always. Our God who may always to be found in Jesus Christ. Amen.
Recently I posted: John Wesley and Spiritual Gifts. There I attempted to show that while Wesley was open to both extraordinary spiritual gifts and miracles, he did not insist on them as proof of the Holy Spirit’s presence.
Now let me say something about the distinctive pentecostal and charismatic teaching about Baptism with the Holy Spirit. There is a relationship between early Methodist teachings and the later development of Pentecostal teachings. In fact, a direct line can be traced from the teaching of the early Methodists to the teaching of the early Pentecostals.
Wesley’s preaching about the Christian life — and what he called Christian Perfection — gave rise to the holiness movement. The holiness movement, in turn, provided the seedbed from which the early Pentecostal movement would arise. Once people’s thinking about Christian experience begins to go down a particular road, certain directions become inevitable.
To the leader: Do Not Destroy. Of David. A Miktam, when he fled from Saul, in the cave.
ON SCRIBAL NOTES IN THE PSALMS, IN GENERAL.
It’s hard to know what to think about the scribal notes at the beginning of the Psalms. I often ignore them. Our modern translations, which set them apart from the rest of the Psalm — printing them in italics or in smaller type — encourage this attitude.
It’s also true that in the English (as distinguished from the Hebrew) text they are not actually numbered with the rest of the Psalm. In English, the scribal note at the beginning is labeled (if anything) verse 0. Easily ignored. Because I read along in Hebrew (well, let’s not overstate this — I’m using an interlinear text), I often start reading the scribal note before I realize it. In Hebrew, it is verse 1.
While I usually skip these — and I don’t really know what to make of them for sure — I can still see three distinct stages in my attitude toward them. (1) I first took them seriously as part of the inspired text. If it said it was “by David” or “by Moses” or “by Asaph” that’s what it meant. Sometimes they gave me background information about the circumstances in which the Psalm was written. (2) As time went on however, (and being a somewhat skeptical person) these scribal notes became more and more mystifying to me. Sometimes the circumstances mentioned in the note didn’t seem to fit very well with the content of the Psalm. And, I began to wonder what something as vague as לְדָוִ֣ד really meant. Was that “written by David” or “after the manner of David” or “Davidic” in some other sense? The commentaries I read often seemed mystified by some of these scribal notes as well. This was the period of time when I was most likely to ignore these scribal notes. I tended to think they weren’t part of the inspired text. (3) Then, at some point I started to see them as commentary. The scribes who kept this collection also wanted to position them (so to speak) within the Biblical history. Some of them may be historical. I can’t think of any real reason (except the habit of excessive skepticism) to doubt that David did write many of the Psalms. But, even with those which might seem doubtful, the לְדָוִ֣ד still can have meaning. It invites us into another level of reflection: having thought about the meaning of the words, reflect on it again in terms of the history of David. The scribal notes allow us to see the Psalm from the perspective of those who cherished and collected and re-copied these songs from ancient times. The scribes gave the Psalms a place within the Bible’s overarching story.
So it is here. The scribal note is mostly mysterious. What’s “Do Not Destroy”? It’s the tune, I guess. (Can you hum a few bars? I don’t think I know that tune.) What’s a “Miktam“? Don’t know.
But, the scribal note is still an invitation. It invites us to see this prayer against the history of David. Specifically, David hiding for his life in a cave, while Saul the King is searching for him.
Be merciful to me, O God, be merciful to me,for in you my soul takes refuge;in the shadow of your wings I will take refuge,until the destroying storms pass by.
In a single word, the Psalm captures what is probably the most basic prayer in all human experience: חָנֵּ֤נִי “have mercy!”
I don’t suppose there is a person living who hasn’t at some time in their life cried out “God help me” — even if they weren’t certain whether there was anyone or anything to whom to cry. Sure, we aim at something higher in our prayers. We seek to be God-focused. We seek to be less selfish. But, the truth is that some of us never pray until they are desperate. Until we are in need. Until we have no where else to turn. This is when our prayers have gained depth: in times of trial and uncertainty and confusion and grief and need. To go on living we need to know that somewhere there is mercy. Like an infant crying out, all we know is that we need something — and we need for there to be someone who hears. In this case, it is purely a cry for mercy, too. At this point there is no claim to faithfulness, no argument that says: “Hey, Lord, I’ve kept your Law, after all.” There is no claim to worthiness. It’s a bit like the classic “Jesus Prayer”:
“Lord Jesus, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.”
Not that the Psalms don’t connect the ideas of “faithfulness” and “blessing.” Because they do. This theme is clearly in place from the very beginning of the book: “for the Lord watches over the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish.” (Psalm 1:6 NIV). But, there are times when our righteousness seems, even to us, pretty feeble. We feel we have no worthiness to plead. and, in that moment we cast ourselves upon the mercy of God. “Be merciful to me, O God, be merciful to me….” Actually, these first few words seem to me like an Alcoholics Anonymous-appropriate prayer: a pure appeal for mercy. There is no attempt to plead the covenant with Israel. It is a call to God in a generic sense: אֱלֹהִ֨ים literally: “gods” (Elohim) — the Divine Realm; whoever is “up there” — the Higher Power.
“…for in you my soul takes refuge; in the shadow of your wings I will take refuge….”
God is like the protecting mother hen, to whom David flees for refuge. In Ruth 2:12 Boaz says to Ruth: “May the Lord reward you for your deeds, and may you have a full reward from the Lord, the God of Israel, under whose wings you have come for refuge!” (NRSV).
The Bible does not hesitate to use this female imagery to symbolize our relationship with God. It is common. In the Gospels, Jesus himself does not hesitate to use it either. “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often have I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing!” (Matthew 23:37 NRSV). From this point of view, God is an enclosing presence. And, as we are surrounded in God’s presence, we find safety.
עַ֗ד יַעֲבֹ֥ר הַוּֽוֹת
…until destruction passes by.”
Here is an allusion to the urgent need that called forth the prayer. It is a prayer for desperate times. Destruction has come. The prayer is an urgent cry: ‘May my life be preserved through this time of destruction.’
According to John 16:33, Jesus told his disciples: “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.” (NIV). Times of trouble come. There is no exemption. In fact, people sometimes suffer for doing right. “It is better, if it is God’s will, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil.” (1 Peter 3:17 NIV).
The Biblical history stresses that that was the case for David. The image of the cave in which David hid from Saul resonates well with the Psalm. David is hiding in God until the storm of Saul’s fury exhausts itself.
The storm of destruction will not be forever. God does not turn away from us simply because it is our own desperate situations that call forth our most fervent prayer. For most of us — all of us? — it is the times of desperate need that have served to draw us closest to God.
A PRAYER:
Lord God, known to us through the sacred remembrances of Israel and the story of Jesus Christ, have mercy.
Grant that today when I call out into what appears to be darkness I might find the sheltering presence of God.
Preserve my life and my hope through the hard times encourage me when faithfulness itself has brought me hard times remind me that the times of destruction will pass; and keep me faithful to You: the One who knows me and has redeemed me. In the name of the One who “died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous.” Amen.
What would have been John Wesley’s attitude toward the modern doctrine and practice of Speaking in Tongues? Pentecostal churches teach that this is a necessary initial sign of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit (a empowerment experience subsequent to Christian conversion). Other churches teach that spiritual gifts and miracles were signs that ceased after the age of the apostles. Where would Wesley have stood on these issues?
The evangelistic ministry and teaching John Wesley provided the impetus for the development of the Methodist & Holiness movements. The holiness movement, in turn, provided the seedbed for the emergence of early Pentecostalism. The original Azusa Street Pentecostalism in turn provided the impetus for the development of the modern Pentecostal & Charismatic movements — which have (somewhat ironically) often lost or even explicitly denied the Holiness / Sanctification themes in Wesley’s teachings.
That is a rather complicated schema. Is there any evidence of this later unfolding that is already present in Wesley teachings? Wesley distinguished between “extraordinary gifts” and “ordinary” graces of the Spirit. Speaking in Tongues would fall into the category of “extraordinary gifts.” Thus, he did not see the gift of Tongues as part of the abiding significance of the Pentecost event.
