This morning I was at one coffee shop, before coming to another to write about this, and I heard a nicely dressed gentleman joke about the world coming to an end in 2012. Hmmm? This of course is based on the ending of the Mayan Calendar. There is a growing contingent of people that are both captivated by such notions, and others who are scared bleepless. This led to the 2009 film by Columbia Pictures 2012 which I have not seen.

Anyway, how is this striking such a cord with the world? Or should I say the western world?

A Bad Moon’s Rising cause It’s the End of the World as We Know it!

As I was driving thinking about what the man said, an old Creedance Clearwater song came on the radio. Hearing the voice of John Fogerty brought me back to my early childhood and the song “Bad Moon Rising.” I remember listening to that song over and over in my dad’s 1976 Scotsdale Chevy. An 8 track remarkably only had 8 tracks, so… well you get it. Lets look at the lyrics:

I see the bad moon arising.
I see trouble on the way.
I see earthquakes and lightnin’.
I see bad times today.

Don’t go around tonight,
Well, it’s bound to take your life,
There’s a bad moon on the rise.

I hear hurricanes ablowing.
I know the end is coming soon.
I fear rivers over flowing.
I hear the voice of rage and ruin.

Hope you got your things together.
Hope you are quite prepared to die.
Looks like we’re in for nasty weather.
One eye is taken for an eye.

Written in 1969, Fogerty was inspired by the 1941 film The Devil and Daniel Webster. There is a scene of a hurricane in the movie and John wrote “about the apocalypse that was going to be visited upon us.” How does a song like this with its negative and destructive tone find such a place in the hearts of people? That year it reached # 2 on US charts and # 1 in the UK.

Another song that I really listened to was by the band REM, titled It’s the End of the World as We Know it (And I Feel Fine). It starts out with apocalyptic imagery:

That’s great it starts with an earthquake, birds and snakes, an aeroplane.

Then feeds into similarities with Fogerty, as Micheal Stipe sings of it being like “the eye of a hurricane, listen to yourself churn.” As it continues in its “happy go lucky feel” we reach the chorus:

It’s the end of the world as we know it, it’s the end of the world as we know it, it’s the end of the world as we know it, And I feel fine.

I do not know the writers’ hearts in these songs but I am trying to convey what seems to be a negative worldview. Most view the book of Revelation as a massively negative experience, from which some of these lyrics seemed to have been derived.

Where is the Future?

Why the tones? Why did these theses artist express themselves in this manner? I have my theories, but not to get too deep into Christian doctrine; I feel without the awesome relationship with Jesus, how can the world have hope? Wait a minute though, it seems most Christians preach  the same theology as these movies and songs convey.

Get SAVED! The world is about to END!

Where is the hope? Where is the light? Where is the Future? Why do we as Christians read the Bible in negativity and then preach the same? Why would anyone want to hear that? And when they do hear it, it warps their perception of the Father’s love and the way they relate to Him, handicapping the revelation of His love they are able to share with others.

The REM song was released in 1987. Although I was young, I have heard accounts of Christianity during that decade. Books were written about the end of Earth by Christian authors explaining that Jesus was coming back at any second.  As Kris Vallatton describes “it robbed us of our vision for the future.” He went on to explain that this generation of Christians had no vision to leave a legacy for their kids and their kid’s kid’s kids. They all thought that the “Rapture” could occur at any second and they would all be able to leave this wretched world.

Influence?

Could this have been an influence in the music of this era? I think so. What does this message tell the world? “Hey you sinners, you all suck! The Father doesn’t love you and to prove it He is going to come snatch out of hear while all of you suffer tribulation!”

Man, I feel the love on that one (as my sarcasm explodes).

In Romans, Paul states that “all of creation is groaning for the sons of God to be revealed.” It doesn’t say all creation longs for the sons of God to disappear. The world is waiting for the sons of God, those who have a relationship with Jesus to show them His love and power, so they too can be set free. The world needs us. If we change our perspective on the Bible to a positive one it will then change our perspective on life as well. We will develop a “victorious eschatology” of a loving Father sending His son to His sons and daughters that have filled the earth with His kingdom and glory. With this view, Revelation doesn’t read so dark, and we will have hope through the storms.

One of my favorite stories in the Bible is that of Elijah and Elisha. Elijah raised up Elisha to be the voice of God to the nation for the next generation. That’s how I want to live, with hope that the next generation will pick up where I leave off. The success of the future grows out or the vision we plant today for future generations.

Negative Vision of the Future

Could the 2012 phenomena be so intriguing because it is born out of what the Church sowed with its negative vision in the previous generation? If hope and life was being preached would something so disastrous be so popular? The Mayan Civilization ended 1000 years ago. Hello! If they were indeed right and were inadvertently prophesying the end of the world in 2012, don’t you think they would still be a “civilization.”

Now, I know there are still ancestors of these people, and I am not painting them in a negative light, but they are an empire that once was, but is now in ruins. Also the Gregorian calendar may not coincide with the years of the Mayan calendar, making the date unsure.  Remember too that we do not have Mayans explaining to us what this calendar meant, science is trying to piece it together.

Hollywood I am sure will continue to make a “profit.”

Join us this week as Steve Bremner interviews Shaun Wissmann, a fellow missionary to Chorrillos, Peru. In this first part of Shaun’s story, he shares his childhood and adolescence, and the lifestyle of drugs and alcohol and spending time in in-patient treatment, all by the age of 17. God has done a radical work in Shaun’s life, and we encourage you to give this a listen and not miss the conclusion next week.

Shaun and Amanda’s site: CalledtoPeru.org. Visit this post in particular for more of a write-up of some of what Shaun shared in these podcasts.

Shaun’s posts on Theology21.com.

Get a free audio book at audibletrial.com/Fireonyourhead

If you’d like to subscribe to the Fire On Your Head Podcast, visit our directory in iTunes, or visit FireOnYourHead.com for more subscription options.

Recently one of my ex-professors posted a blog about a church worship leader who at some casual hangout event dropped the f-bomb.  If this wasn’t shocking enough, there was alcohol involved in the incident.  My ex-professor presented a tactful call for holiness, particularly in leadership.  Following the post were literally hundreds of comments calling for the worship leader to step down, or questioning his ability to do anything good or godly with such compromise in his life.

I restrained myself from commenting.  I knew I would not add to the conversation, positively or negatively.

I believe that the fundamental issue was not about behavior modification, or the use of culturally unacceptable words or actions that we associate as sin.

I think we have the whole equation wrong.

The traditional argument has worked like this.  God made man.  Man made himself God.  Man committed sin.  Sin leads to death.  Jesus lived without sin.  Jesus died in the place of sinful man.  Men and women that accepted this mental construct and surrendered their right to rule their life to a list of prescribed behaviors were no longer bound to pay for their sin.

The problem with this theory is that it is puts all the focus on power of sin as the negative force within the equation.  Humanity has spent centuries analyzing behavior to determine what meets a standard of being bad enough to be called sin.  Man also fundamentally defined holiness as the absence of sin.  Thus the pressure to understand what constitutes sin, and how to remove it from our life has been a prominent focus within Christianity.   Furthermore, in periods of great evil, hate, racism, greed, abuse, and murder have been masqueraded as acts of making the community more holy (by removing the source of sin from our midst).

If we journey back to Adam and Eve, it is clear that prior to the moment of consuming fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that humanity had the ability to choose to fundamentally obey or disobey God.   Choice to obey or disobey was not the product of sin.  Rather, we see that the motive in the garden was to “be like God”.  The immediate response to consuming the fruit was that Adam and Eve hid, used their skills to hide what they were ashamed of within themselves, and shifted blame when they were confronted by God later.

Guilt, deception, shame, and the use of the skills and materials from the world around them (clothing made of fig leaves in this case) replaced the security they had known by learning of the world and themselves under the shadow of the love of God.  Their sense of identity forever shifted from listening to God and the world He gave them, to listening to a fearful voice within themselves that spoke of shame, guilt, and the need to control and use the world to hide their insecurity.

I believe that this is sin.  Sin is the state of being that all men and women find themselves in where we are compelled by a voice inside that speaks of fear, guilt, inadequacy, and shame.  We reach out to the world around us, and like Adam and Eve, we make clothing out of wealth, food, possessions, friends, religious posturing, social attainment, and so much more.  Sin was the displacement of God from the defining role of our world and life, not the choice to disobey.

In the centuries since, we have become experts in classifying sin.  We are adept at comparing our normal behaviors and best intentions to the failures of others.  We freely grade others on a scale of our own creation, and assign shame liberally to elevate ourselves above our neighbors.  We freely greet sinners with more shame, and somehow believe this will lead the world to salvation.  We have claimed to run houses of healing, when secretly we carried the sick and wounded out to the shed and put them down for the sake of maintaining the perception of health in the community (or the sick learned to apply makeup and act like they weren’t sick for the sake of being a part of our spiritual community).

If we see sin as a state of being, then acts of sin are merely a reflection of where we have not yet silenced the internal voice of shame.  Redemption is then not primarily about controlling behavior, but is about restoring humanity’s broken sense of identity.

I also believe holiness is not then about the absence of sin.  Rather it is a characteristic unique to God and would be better defined as the fullness of all that is good.  Scripture instructs us to be holy as God is holy.  So either we are asked to chase some attainable goal for the sheer misery of being constantly reminded how sinful we are, or we are being invited to a place of a restored identity, a new state of being.  It is a whimsical kiss to invite us to find new hope and believe there is something more than the constant drone of judgment and shame.

So back to the story of the controversial worship leader:  I think you could debate that our treatment of language and alcohol is more cultural than biblical.  But that is not the argument I think that needs to be made.  I think the most tragic thing was not that young man’s actions but the wave of superiority and the dose of shame that hundreds lined up to add to the judgment of this man.  Not worthy.  Not worthy.  You have not right to worship, to lead, to hear the voice of God, to speak on behalf of God.  Not worthy.  You have not mastered your behaviors yet.  We still see your sin.  Not worthy.

I can only imagine the same shame and judgment rumbling in their own hearts and minds.  The greater tragedy is that many have become so deafened by the voice of spiritual judgment, that they associate it with the voice of God, and believe that in sharing it they are doing the work of God.

We all bear the stain.  We all carry the disease.  We all need to be restored, redeemed, and made holy.  We need the fullness of good, not the absence of bad.  We need love, not guilt disguised as love.  We need security, not shame-motivated self-discipline.  We need the kiss of hope, not the stain of judgment.

Yes, we need holiness.  Oh how we need holiness, but the fullness of good will never be ours by eliminating the bad (as we cannot brighten a room by sucking out the darkness).  We will be made holy as we see Him bit-by-bit and find ourselves surrendering to his voice of love more than our voice of shame.

Our response to sinful acts is just as much a sign of the sickness as the acts themselves.  None of it brings life, hope, or restoration.  We will judge as we have always judged if we are changed/motivated by our internal voice of shame.  We will love differently if we have been changed by His love.

Because we mis-diagnose the source of our calamity, we attempt to treat a shame-fueled behavior with shamed-fueled spiritual judgment and no one is redeemed, no love is fostered, the sting of the our self-judging voice continues to dominate and set the tone for how we see ourselves, our neighbors, and God.

Josh Burton works for his state government supporting the community development and neighborhood revitalization efforts of local nonprofits across his state. He carries a deep-seated belief in God’s capacity to lovingly restore and redeem. Visit his personal blog at: Sacred Salvage

Sadly, when most Christians hear the phrase “religious” they immediately think of it in a negative way. One of the local churches around my town actually advertises itself as “nonreligious.” I myself would almost take offense when people would say I was religious because of my faith in Christ. I would quickly jump to the defense and explain why it is not about religion but a relationship. Many of us have this mentality. This paradigm that we are to be in a relationship with Jesus, yet not be religious. Because after all, being religious is frowned upon by “spiritual” people right?

We prefer “relationship.” I mean, doesn’t Jesus himself hate religion? Well, Jesus’ little bro wrote a letter to believers we know as the letter of James. In this power packed letter on what it looks like to live out our faith James says some stuff about religion and being religious. As I have been studying this letter, I find myself saying “Lord, help me to be more religious” WOW, talk about a paradigm shift!  One minute I refuse to be called “religious” and now I want to be more religious than ever. By now, some of you may already know the passage I am referring to in particular but for those who do not. It reads as follows:

If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless. Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world. (James 1:26-27 ESV)

So What Are You Saying?

So according to the Bible being religious is being someone that bridles their tongue (watches what they say and how they say it) visits orphans and widows in their affliction (caring for people in need, not merely in words only but action), and to keep oneself unstained by the world (not allowing the godless fallen system that surrounds them to contaminate their character and way of life). Hmmm…that sounds like someone I want to be.How about you? That is not the way the word “religious” is defined by most today, but it is the way the Bible defines it and I prefer to agree with the Bible. Being religious is pure and undefiled living according to James. It is not religion that Jesus hates, its hypocrisy which is empty religion (see Matthew 23). Paul spoke on this issue to Timothy:

For [although] they hold a form of piety (true religion), they deny and reject and are strangers to the power of it [their conduct belies the genuineness of their profession]. Avoid [all] such people [turn away from them]. (2 Tim.3:5 Amplified Bible)

So it is claiming to be religious without living out what we profess that Jesus and Scripture in general warns against. It is putting the rules and traditions of man above the Word of God and even claiming it as God’s rules and regulations (see Mk.7:6-13).

I would like to take a few moments to focus on the first issue that James brings up in regards to religious living. That is the bridling of the tongue. In the third chapter of James we see he expounds on this issue of bridling the tongue and the importance of it. He starts off warning those who desire the position of a teacher in the Church. He warns us that teachers are judged more strictly than others. It is clear throughout Scripture why this is so true. Teachers are not just accountable before God for their own lives and spiritual well being but for others as well (the shepherds lead the flock). Jesus said ‘to whom much is given much is required” and that is the case of teachers.

The writer of Hebrews says that teachers keep watch over the souls of others and must give an account for it (Heb.13:17). For this reason those who teach are told by Paul to keep a close watch on themselves and their teaching (1Tim.4:16). He tells Timothy that by doing this he will save both himself and his hearers. James goes on in his letter to say that we all stumble in many ways and especially in what we say. It is for this reason that he warns teachers first because of how much they use their tongue…obviously a huge part of teaching.

“I Will Put My Words In Your Mouth”

I would like to look at three individuals in Scripture that when God called them, they felt unqualified for no other reason than their mouth of all things (perhaps they did not feel “religious’?). The first is Jeremiah who was called to be a prophet to the nations (Jer.1:4-9). Upon his calling he says to the Lord “I don’t know how to speak.”  God then encourages him that he would speak for God and by God. The Lord touches his mouth and says “I have put my words in your mouth.”

The second individual is Isaiah. He has an encounter with Jesus and immediately cries out about his unclean lips and that he lives in the midst of people with unclean lips (Isa.6:1-7). As with Jeremiah, the Lord touches his mouth. He is then encouraged and strengthened to speak for the Lord as was Jeremiah after his lips were “touched by the Lord.”

The third individual is Moses, and his response is the most profound to me. We have all probably heard that Moses had a speech impediment or stutter. I don’t know how true this is to Scripture. We do read that Moses said he was not eloquent and that he was slow of speech and of tongue (see Ex.4:10). I believe he simply did not feel that he had the wits and sharpness, if you will, to respond and converse with someone like a pharaoh. In the New Testament, Stephen says that Moses was mighty in words and power (Acts 7:22).

Are Your Lips Circumcised? 

Whether or not Moses stuttered is not even my concern. What I find interesting and would like to share with you is his response both times to the Lord when God tells him to speak to pharaoh. Each time Moses says “I have uncircumcised lips” (Ex.6:12,30)

Hmmm…uncircumcised lips?

Some Bible versions translate the phrase “I am unskilled in speech,” “I have faltering lips,” and even “I am a clumsy speaker.” I believe it is important to keep this phrase literal as the ESV does.  Why do I feel this way? Why is it important to read about uncircumcised lips? Well, I believe it is important because of what circumcision and uncircumcision represent in Scripture and the fact that Moses was aware of this concept and chose to say he had “uncircumcised lips” is no accident. This idea of having lips that have been “circumcised” will be seen more clearly and explained as we see what Scripture teaches about the tongue and how we use it as believers in the following article. However, we will look at what I consider a profound concept of uncircumcised lips:  according to Scripture, circumcision was a sign of the covenant people of God (Gen.17).

Circumcision was not merely external but internal. In both the Old and New Testament we see that an uncircumcised heart is a stubborn heart to the things of God (Deut.10:16) and that uncircumcised ears are deaf and unreceptive to God’s Word (Jer.6:10; Acts 7:51). So in light of this, I believe Moses was not merely saying he was not a good speaker.

So then, what was Moses saying? Without being dogmatic I will share some thoughts on the issue. Could it be that uncircumcised lips speak of unfit or “unclean” lips not in covenant with God (similar to what Isaiah said) just as uncircumcised ears and hearts are not in covenant with the Lord, according to Scripture? Perhaps Moses felt not only physically inadequate but also personally unfit or “unclean” to fulfill the task. Moses, who was raised in the house of Pharaoh may have felt uncomfortable speaking on behalf of the Israelites because he did not feel entirely part of the Israelite community. The lips that he would have to use to address Pharaoh were not, in his opinion, fully part of the covenantal community he would be representing. We know Paul taught spiritual circumcision in coming to Christ and the cutting away of what is not of God in our lives (Col.2:11) and in light of this I think to myself…”Are my lips circumcised? Do I have a “religious” mouth and speak as one in covenant with God? My prayer is that the Church will so speak and act as those in covenants with the Lord, that we will have pure and undefiled religion in the sight of God. When our lips are circumcised, we are to no longer communicate with an uncircumcised (irreligious) tongue. In regards to our lips, Paul says the following

Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving. (Eph.5:4 ESV)

James tells us to be quick to hear and slow to speak (Jas.1:19). Although I believe there are a few practical interpretations of this Scripture. First and foremost, I want to be one that is quick to hear (from the Lord) and then slowly (cautiously) speak under his guidance and wisdom. May we be a religious people in its most purest and undefiled form. A people that bridle their tongue for his glory.

….and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. – The Apostle Paul, 1 Corinthians 2:4-5, ESV

I have been reading the Gospels lately in my daily devotions.   While reading to keep my mind occupied during long treks across Lima, Peru’s public transportation, I noticed one line I’d never noticed before.  I should back up and phrase that differently–it’s not that I’ve never noticed it before, because I had.  But I had never thought about it before.  Jesus stated of some of these cities he’d gone and preached and performed miracles;

 ²⁰ Then he began to denounce the cities where most of his mighty works had been done, because they did not repent. ²¹ ”Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. ²² But I tell you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for Tyre and Sidon than for you. ²³And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You will be brought down to Hades. For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. ²⁴ But I tell you that it will be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for you.” (Matthew 11:20-24, ESV)

The specific point of reference Jesus uses for what would have provoked Sodom, Gomorrah who were the cities destroyed by fire and brimstone for their wickedness.  Leonard Ravenhill has a book titled “Sodom had no Bible”, and though I’ve never read it, the title alone is provokative enough to realize, they were judged on the basis of wickedness, not on their knowledge of the holy.  When angels came to rescue Lot and his family, the sons in law–probably engaged, but not married, for the text goes on to state his daughters were virgins–scoffed and weren’t interested in leaving.  In fact, when the people were pounding on the door to Lot’s house demanding that the men who had come be given over to them that they may have sex with them, Lot offered his daughters instead, so they could do as they please (what a nice father!).  At any rate, I say all that to point out it was a pretty twisted and wicked culture, from what we already know in the Genesis account.

Yet, Jesus doesn’t say “if my preaching were preached in those cities, they would have repented”.  But if his mighty works were done in them they would have repented.  Think about that for a moment.  Acts 10:38 says

 how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.

If Jesus had done these things in their midst, Sodom, Tyre and Sidon would still be around in that day.  Clearly, signs, wonders, miracles, healings, deliverances and the supernature of God are important parts of the Gospel.  Paul understood this and that’s why he didn’t orate good speeches alone, but demonstrated the power of Christ as well.

When you see someone miraculously get out of a wheel chair, or a preacher of the Gospel “read your mail” and share the secrets of your heart, it makes it all the more compelling and impossible to ignore that God is real, and if you are an enemy of His, miracles confront you you with the reality of this.  True miracles are going to cause a conviction that forces man to make a decision–either repent and turn from his sins, or walk away and deny this and continue in his sin, which will result in death and separation from God.  

Mere preaching and good argumentation alone does not have nearly the effect of laying hands on an atheist and supernaturally destroying the cancer ravaging their body, and replacing it with the life flow of the love of God.  Paul knew this, and sought to ground people in the power of God, not the power of good sounding reasoning.

Steve Bremner is a missionary to Peru, called to raise up disciples who flow in the power of the Holy Spirit. He is general editor of Fire Press, and also produces & co-hosts its podcast called Fire On Your Head. Visit his personal site at http://stevebremner.com 

This post is not necessarily a follow up to my previous ones in this series on Occupying The Church, but more of a continuation of thoughts I’ve begun there.  Someone had posted the picture on my Facebook wall (or now, timeline) of an individual dressed like Jesus at one of the Occupy protests with the sign saying he threw the moneylenders out for a reason.  I understand the humor in it, since people resonate with that.

However, I was thinking of how some more liberal leaning Christians interpret events going on with Occupy Wall Street and think Jesus followers should be in solidarity with this movement as well because of some misconstrued idea Jesus would do this.  In reality, and historical context, for one thing, Jesus did not just walk into the public square one day and throw a hissy fit that people were making money and others, such as the poor, were getting ripped off.  Or let me rephrase that–that’s not exclusively why He did what he did.  I somehow don’t believe what he did overthrowing the money lender’s tables was exactly the same thing as what’s going on today.  Not by a long shot.

Here are just a few reasons why, and my thoughts along with them.

1) Scriptural Context

We need to remember Jesus did it at the temple.  It would be more akin to him doing this in the foyer of the largest mega church in the United States. It wasn’t the financial sector, but the religious center point of his culture.  This would be similar to the public square of Bible days, yes, but in reality, He didn’t walk to the largest bank in town and get indignant that rich people are rich and poor people are poor.  This is an example of what liberals do with the teachings of Jesus, but I’m not here today to point that out.

Jeremiah mentioned a den of robbers centuries before Jesus flipped some tables over and set some pigeons free;

9 Will you steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely,make offerings to Baal, and go after other gods that you have not known, 10and then come and stand before me in this house, which is called by my name, and say, ‘We are delivered!’—only to go on doing all these abominations? 11 Has this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers in your eyes? Behold, I myself have seen it, declares the LORD. (Jeremiah 7:9-11)

A den of robbers, in Israel, was originally a cave or a place where thieves, robbers or any other type of fugitive would take refuge and hide.  Jeremiah was calling out ancient Israel on their sin, and basically saying that the temple of the Lord has become a place where such individuals hide instead of in actual caves.  Something was gravely wrong if the Lord’s temple, a house of prayer could become such a den for robbers.  Yes, sinners need to be able to come to the church for help and change, but not as a place to hide from the consequences of their theft or murders.

Jesus was taking action against the same type of thing centuries later when he entered Jerusalem.  He was making a statement, and demonstration, if you will, in holy jealousy for the true purpose of the temple in its day–a house of prayer, which leads to the next point.

2) Prayer

Jesus took his time, looked around first, then came back the next day…after having prayed and spent time in the presence of His father.  We have credible Scriptural examples through out the Gospels to portray the habit that Jesus did little to nothing publicly without having bathed his decisions in prayer–such as when he chose the 12 to be his disciples, he had prayed the night before.  This is important to note.

In Mark’s Gospel account, we note in the eleventh chapter that when he first rode into Jerusalem, he came on a donkey and everybody threw their cloaks (coats) on the ground, made a pathway for him and everybody knows that part of the story.  But verse 11 states:

And he entered Jerusalem and went into the temple. And when he had looked around at everything, as it was already late, he went out to Bethany with the twelve.

Jesus saw the temple, and had an opportunity to look around, assess what was going on, and process it, likely through prayer, as he prayed often early in the mornings.  He didn’t just react at what he saw, but his righteous indignation was after prayer, not a spur of the moment fit of rage.  He slept on it before taking any action. Luke’s account of the events places his weeping over Jerusalem immediately before driving out the money changers.  Have you ever wept in intercession at the corporate greed?  Or what goes on in the pulpits through out the Western world?

It’s also interesting to note that in the verses following, at least in Mark’s account, it says that the following day he came upon the fig tree expecting fruit, and not finding any, cursed the tree (v 12-14).  Also note, as I teach elsewhere with regard to faith and healing1 , that they didn’t immediately notice any outward visible difference on the tree when he cursed it but did later when they passed by it the next day after that (v. 20-24).  Sometimes the things we do don’t show any immediate results or consequences, but by faith we can trust the seed has been planted and effect has been caused.

3) Jesus Took Deliberate Action

¹⁵And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. ¹⁶And he told those who sold the pigeons, ”Take these things away; do not make my Father’s house a house of trade.” ¹⁷His disciples remembered that it was written, ”Zeal for your house will consume me.” (John 2: 15-17)

Jesus made a whip.  This was a deliberate, carefully thought-out action, not a hissy fit or a spontaneous temper tantrum.  I don’t know if you’ve ever made a whip, but I haven’t.  I’m assuming taking a bunch of cords and fastening them together into a whip and then using it is clearly going to take a few moments, which again, underscores this was not a spontaneous thing.  As verse 17 of John’s account of this states, it was zeal FOR something that led him to do this–it was pure motives for God’s house that drove him to do something with the perverting and counterfeiting of it that had happened.  It doesn’t appear Jesus was motivated exclusively out of frustration and launching a reactionary tirade in public.

4) The Sick Rushed In As A Result

In Matthew’s Gospel, the following is recorded immediately following the cleansing of the temple:

¹⁴ And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple, and he healed them. ¹⁵ But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying out in the temple, ”Hosanna to the Son of David!” they were indignant,  (Matthew 21: 14-15)

Jesus’ cleansing of the temple wasn’t about just causing a commotion for the sake of commotion.  He wasn’t even just trashing the old system, under which the blind and lame could not previously enter the temple like they just did now that it had been cleansed.

Make no mistake about it–when the system is destroyed and comes crashing down, the sick will rush in and be able to finally experience an outflowing of the power and grace of the Holy Spirit and the religious leaders will get mad, because such display of the power of God shows how bankrupt the religious leaders and their message are.  They will label the prophetic prodigies ‘heretics’ and other such names.  But the blind seeing and the deaf hearing will cause that to not matter by that point.

Using Jesus For Politics

What Jesus did and what Occupy Wall Street is doing,  along with what they stand for are not comparable at all, in this case.   It makes me wonder if the people creating imagery and propaganda for the OWS movement even know Jesus personally, or if they even understand Scriptures they take out of context to put on their posters.  But at any rate, what happened to Jesus will happen to his true radical followers.  Those who upset the applecart will be silenced by those in control–or at least they will attempt to silence, but even the rocks will cry out of people won’t.  When you’re prophesying, dreaming dreams, healing the sick and casting out devils, nothing the religious status quo says or tries to do will matter.  Your fruit will speak for itself and draw people, like Jesus did when the temple was cleansed.

Oh how the Body of Christ, the temple, needs a cleansing today.  It’s high time we flipped over the merchandizing tables, ruffled some feathers, and brought the sick and lame into our midst and have them leave walking and throwing their crutches away.

Occupy the Church!

1. See my post “Speaking To Mountains” which goes into way more depth regarding speaking to the mountains and casting them into the sea

“For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.” 1 Corinthians 13:12

I had been thinking of some of the thoughts in today’s post when I wrote my last one over at my blog, about if it’s possible to be effective at making disciples online.  Effective relationship involves being able to interact in person.  If two people are sitting in front of a computer screen, talking to each other through Skype, iChat or Google+ Hangouts or whatever else, this is a great form of communication between people who can be in different countries, but it’s limited in nature and scope.  The Internet serves as a buffer or a filter, causing a few aspects of normal face to face interaction to be lost as a result.  You cannot live life together over the Internet.

One time, during a short-lived romantic relationship I was in, we would both video chat over Skype since we lived in different locations over one thousand miles apart.  We lamented the idea of not being able to interact in person, and though we had a previous in-person friendship and history years earlier in which we were building on, we realized needed to meet in person again to see if the chemistry was the same in person as it was through emailing, and video chatting.  When we did, ultimately, she felt it was not, and the relationship never went anywhere as a result.  But I mention that experience only to say, in my humble opinion, nobody in their right mind is happy to only have a form of communication over the Internet when they want to be close to someone and know them better.

I have three mentor-like figures in my life I talk exclusively over Skype with, because I’m in Peru and two of them are both in America, and the other New Zealand.  The use of technology for us to communicate helps bridge a gap that’s caused by a physical distance, but does not substitute for the ideal in-person interaction.  I’m able to record about 80% of the Fire On Your Head podcasts using Skype, where I’m on one computer and my guest or co-host is usually in another country.

Media – A Filter

BusinessDictionary.com defines media as;

1. Communication channels through which news, entertainment, education, data, or promotional messages are disseminated. Media includes every broadcasting and narrowcasting medium such as newspapers, magazines, TV, radio, billboards, direct mail, telephone, fax, and internet.

In Latin, it refers to a layer, an intervening means or instrument.  It comes from the word “medium”, and literally implies something in between one thing and another.  We use the word “intermediate” to describe something that’s between basic and advanced, or beginning and end –we notice that a pause during a movie is called an intermission, for example.  Jesus Christ, is our mediator, between God and man;

For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,  who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time. ( 1 Timothy 2:5-6)

He came from the heavens, as God, and became a man and lived amongst us, and nobody else can effectively take the place of an advocate for man before God, the Father.  He is effectively made the most perfect human who can approach God sinlessly, and provides a way for God to physically have entered the human race.  Jesus Christ is the only Person who of whom it can be said He was the second Adam (1 Cor 15:45).  Scripture tells us that Jesus Christ is the embodiment of God in the flesh (Col 2:9), and that anybody who has seen Him, has in effect, seen the Father (John 6:46, 14:9).  Nobody else can take this place for us between God and man, no human priest or pastor, contrary to whatever “spiritual covering” doctrine you may have been taught.

God Wants Immediate Access To Us–Nothing Else In The Way

We understand media in the sense that news or websites take information, and disseminate it for us and give it to us. It will be biased based on the media providing this information, and what version of this information they’ve purposed for us to receive.  Immediate basically means with nothing else between two things.  The God-Man Jesus Christ, brought heaven to earth, but filtered it perfectly for our understanding. The Holy Spirit comes and lives in the believer and communicates the mysteries of heaven and God to our spirits as we pray in the Spirit and read the written Word we’ve been provided.

Jesus also didn’t disciple through video conferencing.  He showed the twelve and dwelled among them and with them, more ‘immediately’ than with the rest of the population of His day.  Not only that, but He comes and lives inside us.  You can’t get any more immediate than that.

This might sound blasphemous to some, but even the written Bible, is a type of media–a type of filter.  It’s the written form of prophecies, history, letters, written by man.  I’m not disparaging that the text is inspired, but it’s also meant to serve as an aid.  An aid to what?  Face to face communication with God and man.  It gives us the boundaries of what God is like and Who He is and what He has done.  But the real Word of God is the Man Christ Jesus.

If you’re not a subscriber of the Fire On Your Head podcast, I highly recommend subscribing, as in the weeks to come we’re going to post a two-part series with Brian Parkman on “the more excellent way” and what is being talked about with ‘face to face’ here in 1 Corinthians 13.

Steve Bremner is a missionary to Peru, called to raise up disciples who flow in the power of the Holy Spirit. He is general editor of Fire Press, and also produces & co-hosts its podcast called Fire On Your Head. Visit his personal site at http://stevebremner.com 

 Now there was a certain man from Ramathaim-zophim from the hill country of Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah…He had two wives: the name of one was Hannah and the name of the other Peninnah; and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children.

In this day and culture, the woman found her identity and dignity in the bearing of children. A main part of her role was to give children to her husband. The greatest of which was a son. The fruitfulness of a woman’s womb was the culture’s language of success. The pattern of thinking of this culture and time required the women to produce for the man, especially a son.

Elkanah’s wife Penninah had a fruitful womb. She was “productive” in the relationship. Her life testified to the world that she was a successful wife. Her dignity and identity was awarded the relief and praise of having bore children. The pressure of the system of thinking in this culture was off her shoulders. Her identity was established because she had productivity. Her fruitfulness spoke for her and stood at her side as a prideful witness that she has proven herself in the language of culture and time.

Hannah on the other hand had the pressure of the culture and time endlessly pressing on her shoulders. Her identity and dignity were in question, in the eyes of her peers. She was barren. She had no fruit. She had nothing to show for herself and the provocative testimony of Penninah was an internally vexing, degrading and humiliating thing fueled by the weighty cultural demand upon the her shoulders. This was such an emotional pressure and humiliation to her that she was sick to her stomach and could not eat. She would cry deeply and sorrow would pour out of her face. She was distraught and oppressed by Penninah, who was very fruitful. But Penninah’s power over her was not Penniah herself, but rather the power was the pattern of thinking in the culture of man. It was the world’s view of what success looked like. So ultimately, Hannah is oppressed by a voice that is behind Penninah’s provoking words, it is the voice of human demand of the culture of man and the system of the world. It is the voice of a success that is based on what was perceived to be fruitful, successful and productive.

Are you depressed and frustrated in your ministry because you are judging your ministry’s success by numbers of salvations, healings or any other perceivable quantity or lack thereof?

But when Hannah comes to her husband, he says the greatest portrayal of the heart and person of Jesus Christ that there could ever be, “Am I not more to you than 10 sons?” Ten is a great number because it represents completion. And as earlier stated, sons are the greatest fruit a woman can have. As Elkanah said to his oppressed wife, Jesus says to you, “Am I not more to you than all the fruit in the world?”

Are you not fulfilled in me?

Am I not enough?

Am I not all sufficient?

Am I not I AM?

Do you need something more than me to be happy, satisfied or delighted?

Hannah approached by such a shocking love from her husband; a love that is outside of the system of thinking of man; A love that finds value in her without a demand for fruitfulness as the culture may see it; A love that wants her to be only satisfied with him. He is after a love that needs nothing more than each other.

Different Reason For Tears

She found her appetite again and she communes with her husband at the table. And though she returns to tears again for fruitfulness in the next verse, her cry is different this time. It is for a son, the best fruit, now for a totally different reason. Her first cry was from the painful weight of the system of man that wrapped her identity and dignity up in her productivity and her fruitfulness, while her second was to have fruit to be able to give to God. She wanted good fruit to be able to offer at the feet of God Himself. No longer bound by the thinking of her own face and the testimony of her life being in accordance with the system of the culture and time, speaking man’s language of success, she is free to find all her joy in her husband, not worried if he will leave her because she is unable to produce, she now cries to God for the right reason. She now lifts up her tears in purity. She now weeps bitterly out of selflessness. She wants fruit to give to God.

But one may say, “the Scripture earlier stated that “God had closed her womb. So her fruitlessness was because of God.” And to this I say, “exactly!”  Sometimes, God prevents us from seeing the fruit that we want to see so that he can look dead into our eyes and say, “Am I not more to you than ten sons?” Preacher, who is looking for more signs and wonders; Pastor, who wants a building; Evangelist who desires to see more numbers; Teacher who wants more committed students. In your frustration, listen to the heart of your Bridegroom, “Am I not enough for you? Am I not more to you than a building? Am I not more to you than miracles? Am I not more to you than souls being saved? Am I not more to you than fruit?”

This issue must be settled first if we are to ever cry out with a pure cry. If we are ever to find purity enough to simply desire to lay fruit at His feet. This issue of being satisfied with God alone, will open up the heart to a real burden that is focused upon offering to Jesus a wonderful gift. Hannah says, “I will give him to you all the days of his life.” This fruit is not for my name, no one will even see me with him. This fruit is not to remove my disgrace and shame or for me to find dignity or identity…it is all for you and only you. We will be forever set free from the oppressive production demand when we settle in our hearts that Jesus alone in my life and daily experience is enough to satisfy everything that I could ever desire. He is enough!

Where Do You Find Your Identity?

Brothers and sisters, we have got to return to first love. Love that is solely set upon Him alone and satisfied with Him alone, so that fruit can be exactly what it is supposed to be, an offering to God for Him to keep. May we never fall into the trap of finding our identity and dignity in how much we have done and can do for the Lord, or how much God has used us. Because the real issue is this, if He Himself is not enough not only will your fruit be tainted because it was not brought out of the purity of satisfaction with God alone – He Himself being your identity, but you will never birth a Samuel into the world. Penninah’s kids were just regular kids that you never hear any thing about. But Samuel was a loyal prophet and burning priest with God unlike any other. There is no other prophet priest, like Samuel, but Jesus Himself. And in Hebrews the writer says, “…Samuel and the prophets…” indicating Samuel stood out in all the records of time.

Such fruit is born only after the question is settled and we can say with all our hearts, “You yourself are more to me than all the fruit and success in the world. If I have everything and I don’t have you, I have nothing. But If I have You and nothing else in the world, I have everything.”

Say this with me, “Jesus, you are more than enough for me, and my desire for fruit is only to have an offering to lay at your feet.”