Martial Imagery: Isaiah’s Call

The sixth chapter of Isaiah is paradigmatic to the extent that it has been incorporated into the sanctus part of the liturgy for Lutherans, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Orthodox, and other churches.

Isaiah begins his account by noting the time - “in the year that King Uzziah died” - which alerts us to a notion of political instability: who would the new king be? And which policies would he enact?

Interestingly, Isaiah did not choose to begin his narrative with “in the year that King Ahaz took the throne.”

Judah faced political instability - much like a modern nation-state in an election year! - but Isaiah’s text pointedly then refers to God as ‘King.’ Isaiah is telling us that although it might be worth noting who the next king is, and what that king’s policies will be, it’s far more important to remember that God is King is a more profound and permanent sense.

The vision of Isaiah pictures God on a throne and having a garment with an excessively long train - both symbols of royal power.

The attending seraphim introduce a military image: seraphim are warrior-angels, perhaps pictured as flying flamethrowers. (‘Flamethrowers’ were terrifying weapons used primarily in the Pacific in WW2.)

The seraphim were ‘calling’ to one another, not singing - perhaps reminiscent of the marching cadences of soldiers. They identify God not simply as the ‘Lord,’ but rather as the ‘Lord of armies.’

In the face of this vision, Isaiah can only see himself as condemned and doomed. Isaiah is scared and terrified in the presence of an omnipotent and holy God.

An approaching angel, carrying a glowing coal, can only have increased Isaiah’s terror. He must have assumed that he would die within a few seconds.

How it must have amazed him to find that, not only did he not die, but rather that God had sent the angel to save him!

Note that Isaiah is utterly passive in this salvation event: God sends an angel, who touches the coal to Isaiah’s lips. Isaiah is merely present, motionless.

Isaiah moves from passivity to activity only after the salvation event: grateful for redemption, Isaiah says, “Here I am! Send me!”

2,500 years later, how does God sanctify us? Most 21st followers of Jesus, we may assume, have not been approached by a seraphim carrying glowing coals. But we have been made just as holy as Isaiah.

God’s purifying work is done through baptism, through the bread and wine and body and blood, through His written Word, and perhaps in other ways. God is at work saving and sanctifying us.

Like Isaiah, we should be somewhat scared when we contemplate the holiness of God.

And like Isaiah, we should be moved to action by our gratitude when we experience God’s saving love.

For this reason, we “fear, love, and trust” God.

‘Christian Community’ vs. ‘Church’

In a perfect world, Christian community and the church would be the same thing. But we live in a fallen world.

The two terms are not coextensive. In our churches, we have casual contact with people who may not actually be part of our lives on a regular basis. They’re not part of our Christian community, but for 60 or 90 minutes a week, they inhabit the same worship space as we do.

People whom we see more frequently may form our Christian community, even though they’re not part of our church. Coworkers, neighbors, teammates, club members, and others, if they are followers of Jesus, may share a quote from Scripture or support us in prayer.

Working side-by-side with a fellow believer for 40 or more hours a week, over years, might make that person more a part of your Christian community than a fellow church member whom you barely know.

Naturally, it would be nice if our church were our Christian community. We undertake efforts on a regular basis to strengthen our discipling relations within our congregation.

We must, however, beware the pitfalls of attempting to attain that ideal state in which ‘Christian community’ and ‘church’ are exactly synonymous.

When we fail to acknowledge and accept the fallenness of this world, we are tempted to engage in a utopian question for the perfect church, which would also be the perfect Christian community. Such a well-intentioned but misguided effort will not end well.

Some of the darkest chapters of history are the results of quixotic endeavors to construct consummate Christian community. Such ventures forget to reckon with the brokenness of the world.

Efforts to construct a perfect church in a world which is inherently imperfect are efforts which justify extreme means by citing the nobility of their goal. If perfection is attainable, then any measures are warranted in the pursuit thereof.

The actual results of such attempts are cults and dictatorships, often harsh ones, demanding unconditional loyalty and obedience.

God, on the other hand, is asking us to patiently endure life in an imperfect world - in which neither church nor Christian community will be ideal.

We can, and should, ask if there are things we can do to improve our fellowships. But looking for steps toward improvement is something quite different than a vision of perfect association. Such visions are dangerous.

God asks us to forbear, and persevere in our in communities, knowing that we, and the others in them, are all sinners. Churches and fellowships are imperfect.

Our communities are groups of sinners positioned around a sinless God, imperfect humans placed into contact with a perfect Messiah, finite people encountering an infinite Jesus.

Churches will never be perfect, and neither will Christian community. But God still uses them, and we should look for the good in them, and from time to time, we may be able to adjust them and make them a bit better than they are.

We must be patient and realistic, both about our fellowships, and about ourselves.

What Does Jesus Mean by ‘One’? (John 17:11)

Unity among the followers of Jesus is not an option. But what is ‘unity’? The locus classicus for such discussion is in His high priestly prayer:

And I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one.

The unity for which Jesus prays is a unity of purpose: that His followers be united in their striving for one goal.

Jesus is not asking that His followers be all the same. ‘Unity’ is not ‘uniformity.’ Unity is not conformity.

To the contrary, Paul writes in his letters to the Corinthians that there is a diversity of spiritual gifts. There is a diversity of roles which individuals play when the followers of Jesus gather.

The ‘unity’ which Jesus gives to His people is a supernatural unity which the world cannot give. Jesus gives a unity amidst the diversity of His followers.

In Luke’s account of the early church, he records that a diversity was acknowledged: those followers of Jesus who came from gentile backgrounds were asked to do one set of tasks, while those from Jewish backgrounds were asked to do another set of tasks (Acts 15:28).

God Wants You To Use Your Brain

Jesus saved you, and He saved your mind along with you. After all, the Scripture mentions ‘mind’ over a hundred times.

Of course, translation comes into play. The Hebrew word translated as ‘mind’ is often nefesh, which could be translated as ‘soul.’ The Hebrew noun lavav, usually rendered as ‘heart,’ is also glossed as ‘mind.’

Functionally, the text mentions the activity of ‘reasoning’ - ‘reason’ in the sense of ‘ratiocinate,’ not ‘reason’ in the sense of ‘cause’ - most famously in Isaiah 1:18, but also in Leviticus 19:17, Daniel 4:34 and 4:36, Luke 9:47, and Acts 17:2, 17:17,18:4,18:19, 19:8, 19:9, and 24:25. (Cf. I Corinthians 13:11, Philippians 4:5 and James 3:17).

Depending on translation, these are also rendered as ‘thought’ or ‘understanding.’

The strongest arguments for God’s endorsement of human rationality are indirect. Consider Proverbs 22:3 as an example of reason in action:

The prudent sees danger and hides himself,
but the simple go on and suffer for it.

The ‘prudent’ or ‘wise’ man is not operating under some supernatural knowledge or divine revelation, but rather using common sense. God expects this of His people as a matter of stewardship: He has entrusted us with brains, and it would be disrespectful not to make appropriate use of those brains.

Likewise, Proverbs 19:3 sees that human suffering is sometimes (but not always!) the result of failing to use reason:

When a man's folly brings his way to ruin,
his heart rages against the Lord.

God, therefore, encourages us to use our minds to avoid certain problems. Some suffering is unavoidable and necessary. But some misery is simply the result of ignoring the mental capacity which God has given us.

Therefore, God does not despise or denigrate human reason. Rather, He created it and gave it to us as a gift, and expects us to use it wisely.

Misconceptions about the Early Church: What the Text Does Not Say

Certain passages from Scripture have been, and continue to be, the topic of seemingly endless commentary. While selections like Proverbs 26:1-11 receive little attention, texts like Acts 2:42-47 are regularly featured in preaching, teaching, and writing.

With countless pages having already been written on such a passage, one wonders if there is anything left to be said about this paragraph in Luke’s account of the early church.

Perhaps, however, a few words are appropriate about what Luke did not write.

When he writes that the believers “were together,” the reader should not automatically conclude that this was a form of communal living. To the contrary, Luke tells us that they often met each other “in their homes” - note the plural!

The members of the early church had their own houses, and often invited each other for prayer, fellowship, and study. But it was not a kibbutz.

Likewise, when they met “in the temple courts,” the text is not telling us that they were there all day long. Certainly these early followers of Jesus spent much of their time in secular employment - farming, bricklaying, weaving, cobbling, smithing, etc.

There is a certain tension between meeting together “every day” in the temple courts and breaking “bread in their homes and” eating “together.” How to resolve this puzzle?

If these early believers spent large segments of time plying their trades and crafts, and were also obliged to attend to the usual daily business in the marketplace, then they would have scarcely had time to both attend long meetings in the temple courts and enjoy extended fellowship at home.

One must imagine this daily meeting in the temple courts as a type of brief devotional service - perhaps similar to a daily chapel service on a college campus, or to early morning chapel services as they are often held in large cities for businessmen hard-pressed for time.

Having completed their work, and having concluded whatever business was necessary in the marketplace, these followers of Jesus stopped by the Temple for brief moment of reflection, perhaps a few hymns, prayers, and Scripture readings. Some scholars translate this as “attending the temple.”

It is conceivable, and perhaps even probable, that what these Jesus followers attended were the usual temple services as they’d been conducted for centuries, and not some new Messianic innovation. The Jewish rituals would not have been superseded in the minds of the early church, but rather simply imbued with a new layer of meaning.

It would be fitting and reasonable, then, that after attending end-of-day prayers at the temple, that one might invite another home for supper, there to enjoy fellowship.

On the other hand, it is possible that this brief prayer service was early in the morning, before the commerce of the day began.

While eschewing communal living, the first followers of Jesus engaged in a type of economic communism, having possessions “in common.” But this was not an inward-oriented sharing. Rather, they gave to “anyone who had need,” i.e., not merely giving to each other, but rather giving to whole town, even to, and perhaps especially to, those who were not followers of Jesus.

This is, and was, true Christlike love: giving “to all, as any had need.” The text does not limit the distribution only to the believers.

Not only did the followers of Jesus generously give to those around them, but they engaged socially. It is for this reason that they enjoyed “the favor of all the people.”

The text is clear: the Jesus followers had “favor with all the people.” The townspeople who were not followers of Jesus nonetheless held the early church in favor. This was because of the friendly engagement which these Christians showed toward their neighbors.

This image which emerges from the second chapter of Acts is, then, that the early church consisted of people who lived in their own houses, not communally, attended a brief chapel service daily, and often enjoyed meals and fellowship at each other’s houses. They were not separatists, but rather gregarious, and thereby earned a reputation for friendliness even among those who were not followers of Jesus.

Categories of Blessedness: Psalm 1

The word ‘bless’ is used frequently in Scripture, and in other texts. It is the first word in the first Psalm, both in the original Hebrew and in various common English translations.

The most common Hebrew word for ‘bless’ is baruch, which has a broad semantic field. Roughly, it means to ‘have a positive regard for’ someone.

In the usage of Scripture, God blesses humans, humans bless God, and humans bless each other. Sometimes it means to speak well of someone; other times it means to speak well to someone. In some situations, it is not about speaking, but rather about giving gifts or assistance.

Several other words are rendered as ‘bless’ in English. Psalm One commences, not with baruch, but rather with ashre.

The verb ashre denotes the subjective experience of being blessed. The Psalmist uses a noun form, ‘blessedness,’ to indicate the emotional and psychological state of one to whom God has given the Torah: the happiness of one who receives God’s instruction.

For this reason, several common German translations begin with Wohl dem! and not with the expected Gesegnet sei! The Geneva translation uses the word glücklich.

Psalm One starts, then, not with the objective event of blessing, but rather with the subjective experience of being blessed. Of course, the two often coincide.

The text continues with a systematic listing of iconographic postures. In Scripture, walking, standing, and sitting each have certain patterns of usage. Sitting, e.g., can be used to show that one has issued a verdict, or more broadly, that one considers a matter to be settled or a task to be completed.

The exhaustive and comprehensive listing of these postures indicates the thoroughness with which God’s Torah – God’s instructions – blesses various aspects of human life.

Unlike human civil laws, which are reactive and punitive, God’s Torah is guidance, proactive and nurturing.

For this reason, the rendering of ‘law’ or Gesetz in the second couplet of the Psalm is ambiguous.

That the reader should consider ‘law’ here as guidance and instruction, and not as regulation and statute, is clear from the ‘joy’ and ‘meditation’ associated with this ‘law.’

Indeed, Hebrew has a separate noun which more narrowly means ‘regulation’ or ‘statute’ and has a series of nouns for bylaws, legislations, and decrees. The use of Torah is saved for kindly counsel, given generously by God to people for their benefit.

When God gives his guidance, the result is growth. The image of the fruit tree is introduced by the Psalmist for this purpose. Water is also a common image for God’s instruction.

God’s affectionate instruction is like water to a tree. Trees cannot grow without water, and generally do grow when someone waters them.

Paul picks up this image in his letter to the Galatians, when he speaks of the ‘fruit’ of the Spirit. Receiving Torah from God and receiving the Holy Spirit are closely related.

It is the Spirit which enables us to read, hear, and understand the written Word. The written Word, and the preaching of it, contains the Torah. The Word is a means by which the Spirit comes to us.

There is a continuous and, in the best cases, an accelerating cycle at work here. The Spirt empowers us to learn the Word; by learning the Word, we receive the Spirit.

For this reason, Paul’s encouragement, in his letter to the Ephesians, to ‘be filled with the Spirit,’ uses a progressive verb form: “be continuously in the state of being filled” or “continuously receive an ongoing filling.”

Among the ‘fruit’ of the Spirit is joy: if one is continuously receiving the Holy Spirit, then joy will be a result.

Life, as Scripture tells us, contains moments of mourning and weeping. Therefore, ‘happiness’ is not a fruit of the Spirit. By using ‘joy’ instead of ‘happiness,’ Paul is indicating something deeper, something steadier. One cannot have happiness while grieving. One can have joy even while grieving. This is the power of the Holy Spirit.

This, then, is the joy indicated by the first word of Psalm One: the joy of one onto whom God has poured His Torah and thereby poured His Holy Spirit:

Oh, the joy of the man
who walks not in the counsel of the wicked,
nor stands in the way of sinners,
nor sits in the seat of scoffers;

but his delight is in the instruction of Yahweh,
and on his guidance he meditates day and night.

He is like a tree planted
by streams of water
that yields its fruit in its season,
and its leaf does not wither.

In all that he does, he prospers.

The scansion of these lines is somewhat ambiguous, but the divisions as shown above are at least plausible. The Psalmist has maintained the usual Hebrew pattern of couplets for the first ten lines. The first and second couplets have been arranged into a quatrain, as have the fourth and fifth couplets. By allowing the eleventh line to stand alone, the Psalmist has introduced a stop into the flow of the verse.

The text resumes in the next line, clearly introducing a different tone. The standalone line is the final line of the first part of the Psalm. The demarcation is clear.

The Fate of John the Baptist: What Is the Kingdom of Heaven?

The New Testament regularly uses the phrases ‘Kingdom of Heaven’ and ‘Kingdom of God.’ The two are synonymous. The phrase ‘Kingdom of Heaven’ is more Jewish: it is a pious circumlocution, avoiding the word ‘God.’

These phrases refer to the presence and activity of God on earth, here and now. He acts often by means of His people, so these phrases refer also to them.

The ‘Kingdom of Heaven’ correlates roughly therefore to the Jesus followers living in this world. A passage from Matthew illustrates. Jesus says:

Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist. Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

What is Jesus saying here? John the Baptist is not part of the ‘Kingdom of Heaven’! That seems counterintuitive. John was, after all, a prophet, and Jesus calls him “more than a prophet.”

John the Baptist is a person whom God chose to do important tasks, and John accomplished those tasks. Why then would John not be reckoned as part of the ‘Kingdom of Heaven’?

To clarify: this text does not mean that John was denied access to the afterlife. Jesus is not telling us that John didn’t get into Heaven. Jesus is not asserting that John failed to receive eternal life.

Rather, Jesus is pointing out that John was part of a preliminary operation on God’s part. John was “preparing the way,” as he often used that phrase from Isaiah.

John’s movement, that large crowd of people from the city who visited him in the desert, was preparatory for the ‘Kingdom of God,’ but it was of itself not that kingdom.

Likewise, those who are not being used as God’s instruments on earth are not included in Kingdom of Heaven. Paul writes in his first letter to Corinth:

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

If one spends one’s time murdering and thieving, then one is not spending one’s time being used by God: then one is not reckoned as part of the ‘Kingdom of God.’ This is not to say, however, that one will fail to receive eternal life, or that one will not be pulled into Paradise.

Parallel texts in Luke and Matthew show that ‘Kingdom of God’ and ‘Kingdom of Heaven’ are indeed synonymous and interchangeable. Otherwise identical passages vary only in this one regard.

That the Kingdom of Heaven is a matter of God’s activity in this world, and not of our future presence in the afterlife, is seen in Mark 1:15, where Jesus says that the Kingdom of God “has come near” or “is at hand.”

In John’s Revelation, a vision of a primordial exile of Satan from God’s presence is given. In it, John hears the announcement:

I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, “Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come.”

Revelation is telling the reader that the Kingdom of God and its ancillaries “have come,” i.e., is already a matter of this world and not of the next world.

Both in the Gospels - so many of parables are about the Kingdom - and in the epistles, texts about the Kingdom are about the present and not about the future. The verb forms reflect this: “the kingdom is like …” not “the kingdom will be like …”

To be sure, there is a connection between being a Jesus follower in this world, and spending eternity in Paradise with God. But the two are not identical.

Peter, while indicating this linkage, encourages virtue, not as a key to the afterlife, but rather as the key to making one’s self the most efficient instrument - as the key to placing one’s self at God’s disposal: making one’s self available as an instrument to be used by God:

For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. For whoever lacks these qualities is so nearsighted that he is blind, having forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins. Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. For in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Note that Peter tells us that virtues ‘confirm’ our status, but they do not create it. Practicing virtues verifies what is already the case - that we will spend eternity with Jesus and in His presence.

Yet, despite the inefficacy of the virtues to work salvation, there is some connection between virtue and salvation: note Peter’s use of the word ‘eternal’ in the text above.

Peter tells us that the virtues have this effect, that instead of merely entering the Kingdom, we will enter ‘richly’ and ‘abundantly.’

Note also that Peter stresses the ‘eternal’ Kingdom. What is begun in this world continues into the next. One can speak of the Kingdom in this world, i.e., what God is doing by means of His people here and now. Most of the citations in the New Testament speak of the Kingdom in this way.

But Peter adds the adjective ‘eternal’ - he lets the reader know that he’s going to reveal a new aspect of the Kingdom - that it has some connection with the afterlife. This ‘eternal’ Kingdom is somehow connected to the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven, to God’s activity here and now using His people as instruments.