The Presence

At that eventful moment when Jesus was arrested, tried and crucified, the men who had been closest to him in life were ... hiding. Whereas the women, as my wife has observed in her reflection below, were out and about, heading to the tomb in an effort to do something good even at that point.

The men hid. Was it simple fear? Men are inclined to be of the moment. To accomplish something and move on to the next thing. To live in the moment. Women are inclined to treasure what they've seen, known and done. So what had life before then been? To be with Jesus on earth was to be in the presence of Jesus' Father. That is why Jesus said, if you've seen me, you've seen the Father. They had a glorious three and a half years in a transcendent experience of Father's presence that they did not fully understand or appreciate until later.

And then, to their great dismay, Jesus was taken and killed and so Jesus' presence was stripped from them, and with it, their experience of life in Father's presence. They were left with nothing but ashes. Fear may have motivated them to hide, but despair kept them there.

Yet the women remembered and the women persevered. So it was to the women that Jesus first appeared. It was to the women that he first spoke. And it was the women he sent to alert the hiding, cowering men. He could have greeted the women and then headed off to the men but he did not. He honored the women by giving them the joy of first proclaiming the good news.

But Jesus did not return to pick up the threads of his prior life. Instead, he prepared them for the next big step, the moment in which the Presence would be theirs, directly and forever. That changed everything.

Here is Dorothy's meditation.

Why Women First?

Jesus must have been gentle with the disciples as He

Gently chided them

For their lack of faith,
For their stubborn refusal to believe
Those who had already seen Him and told them.

Mary had told them,

Mary, the mother of James had told them,

Joanna, Saloma and other women had told them.

ALL women.

And the disciples had not believed these women!

So why did Jesus come to women first?

They weren’t in hiding.
They were out looking for Him,

Wanting to care for His body,
Wanting to be close to Him,
Hoping for Him,
Seeking joy for their grief.

P.S. We may well wonder why the gospels, sourced by these same disciples, include so many accounts of the disciples' failure. Perhaps they finally understood that all the issues that troubled them during their time with Jesus on earth were nothing compared with the overarching goal of knowing Jesus -- really knowing him -- through a life in the Spirit. The accounts of these flawed men help us to look beyond the now and into the eternal Now where true life begins.

Deceitful moral modals

"I should pray a lot."
"I need to read the Bible more consistently."
"I ought to be kinder to people and try to help others more."

What do these have in common? In philosophy they're called "moral modals": words that denote a moral obligation.So where does this obligation come from? Usually, it is a generalized sense of obligation, encouraged by exhortations from some godly people to read the Bible more, to have a consistent quiet time, to do well and be an example to others, and so forth.

All these objectives are good. But a moral modal becomes something deceitful when the authority behind it is unclear and we don't know when we've done enough or when the fulfillment of the obligation becomes sheer will power: an act of the flesh. Moral modals of this sort ensnare and trap us into obligations that can never be fulfilled. I suspect, in fact, that the enemy of our souls encourages us in these things, which have the appearance of godliness, with the aim of a distracted self-effort that takes us away from fellowship with God.

How can we tell if we're tagged by a dangerous moral modal? All such moral obligations are sourced in an authority outside of our Heavenly Father. Can you say, "God has said to me that I should pray more than I do"? If so, be obedient. If not, that's a trap, a moral modal that sounds Godly but is more of the shoulds, oughts, and musts that lead to self-defeat. When we're under the weight of a deceiving moral modal we are hindered in our relationship with God and with other believers.

Here is an exercise you can try. For the next week, avoid completely any of these terms. Instead of saying, "I should pray a lot",  try rephrasing it. Say, something like, "I don't believe I'm praying the way God wants me to." That transforms a statement of helplessness into one that can lead you to action and practical repentance.The next time you hear a moral modal used in a sermon (they're sometimes surprisingly frequent), see if you can rephrase it for yourself, to make the authority clear.

How can you get free of these dangerous moral modals? In the way we get free of other traps: call out to Father for help and ask him for more of his Spirit. Ask him to help you listen to his Words and not the lies of the enemy. Do you have a wise friend that understands this? Ask that person to help you and pray for you.

John Grisham and the accidental convert

Update: Corrected misspelling of John Grisham's last name.

I like John Grisham's legal thrillers and picked up a copy of The Testament for 25¢ at a used book store. It turned out to be a long, languorous story about ... a lawyer who becomes a Christian. (No jokes please about how many lawyers go to heaven :-)

That's it. That's the story. Oh, there's legal stuff, a contested will, nasty heirs, trips to the Amazon ... But it's all just filler for the real story. Remarkable really.

The four horsemen of Revelation: God's general provision of grace and mercy

Much has been written of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse from Revelation 6. As I reflected on it recently, the main thing I became aware of is that the world without God would be a place of complete chaos.

When the first couple sinned, all of creation came at that time under the power of sin. Chaos and death reigned, held back only by God's grace and mercy that he pours out on everyone everywhere. Suppose that he were to lift that provision. What would we see? Wars of conquest. No peace anywhere, people killing each other for whatever selfish reason. Failed crops, famine and plague. Unconstrained parasites and viruses infecting everywhere. The Black Plague of Europe was a foretaste but one held back by God.

As each of the riders of Revelation is sent out, God's global provision of grace and mercy is drawn back step by step. For the first on the white horse, the result is wars everywhere. For the second on the red horse, personal chaos and violence. For the third one on the black horse, failure of the economic system and catastrophic inflation. For the fourth one on the pale horse, unrestrained wild animals, famine, plague and military violence. The effect of the fall is now realized in full.

Perhaps the events of the last century and this are a foretaste of what it will be like when these things happen. We are protected, every day and everywhere, by God grace and mercy to hold back the corruption that is in the earth. What we see is bad enough; it could be much worse and in the Lord's Day, it will be. In the meantime, I give thanks that his hand of restraint protects us.

Incidentally, those of us who follow Jesus will continue to have the grace that is special for us. We will be affected by the effects of a lifting of general grace--many of us will suffer and be killed--but we ourselves will still have access to love, joy, peace, patience and all the other fruits of the Spirit.

Notes on Daniel

What can we learn from Daniel and his story? It's a topic I keep coming back to. Here are some things that have impressed me lately.

Why did Daniel refuse the royal food? Perhaps it violated Jewish food rules, perhaps it had been offered first as a sacrifice to a Babylonian god. Or perhaps it was simpler than that. Maybe Daniel recognized the King's board as a place of greedy appetite, something he didn't want to engage. Of course, he could have eaten there but with restraint. But his abstemiousness would have made him a center of attention. To avoid that, he asked for food that would not be a temptation to indulgence and that by its nature would be served privately. This took him and his companions out of the public eye.

God initiated every important event in Daniel's life. Daniel did not set out to be a "witness" or to evangelize the pagans. It was God's initiative that he was taken to Babylon, that he became a wise man, that visions and dreams came and that he interpreted them, that his life was spared when threatened. By his wisdom and conscientious attention to his duty, he became a trusted adviser to the most powerful rulers in the world.

Daniel and his friends learned thoroughly the Babylonian literature. Rather than being repulsed, God gave them each special ability to understand the pagan literature and learning (Dan 1: 17).  And Daniel received a special ability to understand visions and dreams, a skill that was particularly valued among the Babylonians. When they had their matriculation exam with the king, they passed easily. They not only had linguistic skill in the Babylonian language, they also understood how the people around them thought and what was important to them. They could not be dismissed as cranks because they were so much better at it then those who were native born.

Daniel was responsible for the pagan temple worship. Daniel was made ruler over the entire province of Babylon and was in charge of the wise men (Dan 2). That means he was in charge of making sure everything ran according to the king's wishes, including the temple worship. He would have been in charge of making sure the priests had what they needed for their rituals and sacrifices. There's no indication he tried to abolish the pagan worship or even to influence it.

Daniel bore witness openly and quietly. Before interpreting Nebuchadnezzar's dream in Dan 2, he makes a point of rescuing the wise men of Babylon. He could have rejoiced that now God had vindicated him and his competition was now eliminated, but he did not. Rather, he went out of his way to save them. He prefaces the interpretation with an acknowledgement of God as the source but makes no attempt to "close the deal". And as we see in Dan 6, he worshiped privately but in plain view of everyone.

Daniel didn't play office politics. When Darius took power, he kept Daniel on as an administrator. When his peers tried to find a way to impeach him and could not, they prompted Darius to make Daniel's worship illegal (Dan 6). Daniel apparently took no particular notice of this. He didn't engage it, protest to the king, or try to cut down his opponents. Nor did he try to hide his worship routine. It was, of course, God who rescued him from the den of lions into which he was subsequently committed.

Daniel was in Babylonian government service through several administrations. He was such a gifted administrator and had such an ability to interpret visions and dreams that he served Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, Darius and Cyrus.

This was the first time that a non-Jewish nation had been called to God. Daniel's involvement with Nebuchadnezzar involved a series of power encounters.

1. Nebuchadnezzar has a dream of a statue (Dan 2). God gives Daniel the dream and the interpretation. Daniel reports both to the king, noting that it was from the true God about the future. Nebuchadnezzar responds with worship to Daniel and a strong statement about God.
2. Nebuchadnezzar sets up a statue, orders worship, and consigns Daniel's friends to the furnace of fire (Dan 3). The friends give an honest and irenic response and in apparent complete repose are consigned to the flames. When the come out unharmed, Nebuchadnezzar gives praise to their god and decreed that only this god was to be worshiped.
3. Nebuchadnezzar has a dream of a tree (Dan 4). Daniel tells him that he will live like a wild animal for seven years. This came to pass a year later, and after seven years he was restored. He sent a letter to his empire, praising God and giving testimony to his works.

From the time of Moses onward we see non-Jewish individuals brought in from time to time (Rahab, Ruth, and others) but never an entire nation. This is the first.

Simple Things Made Complicated: "In Jesus Name"

Many of us end our prayers with "In Jesus' name ...." It is (or can be) something of a formula, just a way to say "I'm done now." It's origin is probably in Jesus' statement, "I will do whatever you ask in my name" in John 14:13. But asking in Jesus' name is more than just tacking a phrase onto the end of a prayer.

Suppose you know Sally from PTA meetings. One day Sally knocks at your door wearing a City of Mayberry police uniform. This is not Sally the mom coming by for a cup of tea but Sally coming "in the name of the City of Mayberry." She is an agent of the city, who has specific responsibilities and powers. She might identify herself as an agent by presenting a badge. Having done so, she does not have to keep saying "in the name of the City of Mayberry". Doing so would be odd: is there some question as to her authenticity so that she has to keep emphasizing this?

So we, when we pray "in Jesus' name" do not need to keep repeating the phrase; assuming of course that we are indeed speaking as a agent of Jesus, someone to whom Jesus has given a specific duty that we are executing. What is it that Jesus has given you or me to do? In those areas we may indeed pray "in Jesus' name" and expect him to do it because there we are acting as his agent.

Why I'm not a materialist

I'm a programmer. Years ago someone asked me, "what is a program?" I gave the conventional answer, that it's a set of instructions for a computer to do something. But even then I knew that it wasn't a very good answer. Is it the deck of cards in my hand (this was a long time ago)? Is the the source that I edit? The translated executable? The state of the memory of the computer when the program is running?

And if I copy the deck of cards, do I have two programs now? No, only one; just two copies of the same program. So a program is not a tangible, material thing. It is an idea. It is super-material, something I can recognize it when I see it as a material instance but not the instance itself. What would a materialist say? It's epiphenomenal: a by product of brain states. Now that's a kludge if I've every seen one.

You can say the same things about a book, by the way. Paperback and hardback editions are copies of the same book. There's only one book though lots of copies. So am I an idealist in the philosophic sense? Probably not. There are problems with that too. Rather, there's a mystery in the relationship between mind and body that we will probably never understand; and so there is a mystery in body, soul and spirit, in the three persons of the trinity, in the unity of a woman with a man in marriage, in friendship bonds that span decades, in the love of a mother for her children. It is something that somehow involves relationship: I am made in the image of God and fundamentally God is the One who relates. Another mystery.

At any rate, I'm not a materialist who believes that what's we can see and touch is all there is. We live in a world of mystery and walk through it as though we understand it. Yet in the end we never can and must yield ourselves to this reality and embrace it.