The Epistles of John, Part 12: Taking Up Residence

The idea of residency is very much on John’s mind.  As a man approaching the end of his life he had undoubtedly occupied many dwelling places over the years.  And as an apostle of Jesus Christ with a mission of gospel growth, he had most likely not lived in any one particular place for a lengthy period of time.  So here in the latter days of his life I suspect the topic of a permanent home was very much on John’s mind.  He had seen houses come and go.  He had moved from here to there all over the Roman world.  The end of his life was spent confined to the island of Patmos in the Aegean Sea, as Revelation 1:9 tells us.  If he wasn’t already there when he wrote this letter his exile was probably close at hand.  As such, I think John’s mind, while fixed on “his little children” in the churches, was also pointed squarely at his permanent heavenly home that he would soon be traveling to.  And as one who had experienced the transitory nature of earthly dwelling places I think John was eager to point the eyes of his readers toward that eternal kingdom that awaited them.  He wanted to draw their attention away from the enticing but fleeting pleasures of this world and cast the eyes of their hearts toward the Lord Jesus.

I think all this is evident because of how much time John spends emphasizing a particular word: “meno”.  It is translated into English variously as lives, abides, or remained.  And while the word is not used in chapter 1 at all, starting in chapter 2 John uses “meno” an astonishing 18 times in four chapters.  We have already seen it in 2:6, 2:10, 2:14, 2:17, and 2:19.  Here in verses 24 to 29, as we come to the end of chapter 2, the idea of abiding or dwelling is in full view.  I believe these six verses break down nicely into three different categories of abiding.  First, in 24 and 25 we see the theme of abiding in love.  Then in verses 26 and 27 arises the need to abide in mission.  Finally, in verses 28 and 29 the need to abide in God becomes prominent.

So let’s begin with verse 24: As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning.  Right off the bat we need to think about what John is communicating here.  He wants us to abide in the love for others that was the mandate of the human race from the very beginning of creation (1^st Jn. 3:11).  We looked at this a few weeks ago.  But now let us consider what it means to abide in this love.  As mentioned earlier, the Greek “meno” is sometimes translated lives or remains in addition to abide.  It means to continue to be present somewhere, or even to be held or kept.  But more significantly, it usually carries with it an element of intentionality or choice.  Consider John 1:32-33: John testified saying, “I have seen the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven, and He remained upon Him.  I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, ‘He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.’”

What is going on here?  Jesus is being confirmed as the messiah and the Son of God to John the Baptist, the one who was tasked with preparing the way for the Christ.  And who was doing the confirmation?  Obviously, it is the Father in concert with the Spirit.  So we have God the Father making a deliberate decision to take up visible residence with God the Son through the anointing of God the Spirit so as to authenticate the Son’s life and ministry as being ordained of God.  This is quite possibly the most deliberately determinative choice of residence in all of history. 

Jesus Himself draws the point out further in John 14:10: “Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me?  The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works.”  The co-residency of Jesus the Son and God the Father was of such an intimate and intertwined nature that they could not even speak apart from each other.

So we are presented with a fully considered and intentioned deliberate decision on the part of the Father to abide with the Son.  This mutual residency is so unified and harmonious that when One speaks it is as if the Other is the One doing the talking.  And this is the landscape of “meno” that John is now telling us to enter into in regard to the commandment that was given at the very beginning; to love.

This element of abiding deeply, intensely, and consciously as a reflection of God’s own example is exactly why John writes the very next sentence in verse 24: If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father.  This really makes perfect sense doesn’t it?  The instruction that God gave His children was to love each other.  This is not a transitory or ephemeral love.  We have looked extensively at the depth of sacrificial love that is described in the New Testament with the word “agape”.  It is a love that is of such a comprehensive nature that in a very real sense the one practicing this love is swallowed up in it.  This is the love with which the Father loves the Son and the Son loves the Father.  So it is perfectly logical that if we expect to be able to ourselves abide in the Son and the Father we must necessarily share that same form of love.

To state the issue clearly and bluntly: if you do not love then you have no part with God.  It is impossible.  An absence of love is anathema to God because it is a violation of His nature.  It is like oil and water, the two cannot mix.  This is what Jesus was getting at in John 13:8 when He told Peter: “Unless I wash you, you have no part with Me.”  Christ was making a reference to the baptism of the Holy Spirit that His cousin John had pointed to years earlier.  If God’s own Spirit, the epitome of love as already demonstrated, does not take up residence within a person then that person remains cut off from God.

If you have been reading these commentaries for several weeks it may occur to you that this theme of love and communion with God is one that has been repeated several times.  And you would be correct.  The reason these issues keep coming up is because John keeps bringing them up in the text.  I think it goes without saying that the apostle has a good reason for doing so; probably because we need to repeatedly hear what he is saying because it cuts against the grain of our sin natures.

On a final note for verse 24, I think it is also important to notice the order of priority therein.  John says that we must abide in “that which we heard from the beginning”.  What we are to remain in and dwell with is what God has revealed through His chosen prophets.  We are not to rely on our own understanding (Pro. 3:5-7).  We are not to listen to the words of men (Acts 5:29).  Rather, we are like sheep to listen to the voice of the Shepherd Jesus, as in John 10:27-28: “My sheep heard My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.”  It is the words of God, given in sacred Scripture, which we are to give heed to and obey.  And as promised we will be given the gift of eternal life.

This is on John’s mind in verse 25: This is the promise which He Himself made to us: eternal life.  The way the verse is constructed is fascinating.  The word promise is the Greek “epaggelia” while made is “epaggello”.  Even without knowledge of Greek you can see the similarity between the two.  Indeed “epaggello” is the verbal form of the noun “epaggelia”.  So in a sense one could translate the verse as “This is the promise which He Himself promised us.”  And in fact, some translations render it just like that.

But digging a little deeper into the usage pattern of these words we can see some unique characteristics arise.  “Epaggelia” conveys not just any promise made, but rather a proclamation or an announcement.  Romans 4:13-14 is illustrative here: For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be the heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith.  For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified.  Paul is using “epaggelia” to refer to the covenant that God made with Abraham.  This was a very public and formal arrangement where God decreed that blessings would come to pass for Abraham and his descendants as a reward for Abraham’s faith. 

On the other hand, “epaggello” is more of a personal guarantee based on one’s own integrity.  Continuing the example from Romans chapter 4, verse 21 reflects this nuance: and being fully assured that what God had promised, He was able also to perform.  It is more than just God making a promise of covenantal blessings.  He personally guaranteed not just that the blessings would come but that He would personally cause them to appear as a testament to His faithfulness and trustworthiness.

So what we have in verse 25 is a promise that God has caused to come into being.  This really gets to the heart of the whole Bible.  The entirety of the interaction and relationship between God and man has been completely based upon the promise that God has sealed with His own reputation and blood.  In other words, if the promise fails then God is not faithful, we cannot trust Him, and He is not just.

And think about what a promise this is: eternal life!  I want to also pause on this for a few moments and ask a simple question.  What is life?  Noah Webster defined it this way: in animals, animation and vitality; and in man, that state of being in which the soul and body are united.  To state it another way, we could say that life is equal to energy plus motion (both of which animals possess) plus thought (which only man possesses).

If creation is a universal stamp of God’s image then it is entirely appropriate to say that life is the quintessential element of creation that reflects God most accurately.  His very nature is life itself.  Apart from Him there is no livelihood.  Furthermore, His substance is the definition of eternity.  Apart from Him there is no eternality.  So in a sense the phrase eternal life is nothing less than a description of who God is.  And He is promising that to us!  He is inviting us to take on a part of His nature; to become in part like Him.

There are two ways we can take this; one heretical and the other biblical.  The heresy is to take the promise of eternal life to mean that we will become gods unto ourselves.  Does that sound shocking to you?  I hope so.  But be aware that even such a heinous doctrine as this is actively taught and preached by false teachers in the world today.  They would make the claim that God, in creating man in His image in Genesis 1:26-27, was following the pattern He had already established of creating things “after their kind”.  Thus by creating man in His own image God was essentially reproducing Himself “after His kind”.

This teaching is utterly absurd.  First of all, the very verse that is used to support it clearly states that God created “man” in His image, not a god in His image.  Secondly, nowhere does the Bible state that God made man after God’s kind.  In point of fact, God has no kind because He is completely unique.  Isaiah 46:9 instructs us to “Remember the former things long past, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me.”  And in Deuteronomy 32:39 we read that: “there is no god besides Me”.  This does not mean that other gods exist and God is superior to them all.  It means that no other gods exist in the first place.  Therefore there are none who can stand beside God.

The only truth from Scripture about other gods is that they are all false.  It is only man’s depravity that conjures up the notion of the existence of other deities.  And in response to this idolatrous lie God repeatedly proclaims the truth of who He is in contrast to the lie of who man would make Him out to be with their false gods.  Consider the following texts.  In Genesis 17:1 God says to Abram: “I am God Almighty; walk before Me, and be blameless.”  And in Genesis 21:33 we find that: Abraham planted a tamarisk tree at Beersheba, and there he called on the name of the Lord, the Everlasting God.  Why does the Bible need to clarify that God is almighty or that He is everlasting?  Shouldn’t the simple statement that He is God be enough for us?  The sad reality is that due to man’s ridiculous notions of godhood the only true and living God, in interacting with humanity, must clarify that He is the only One who is almighty or everlasting and therefore true.

So it is patently false to make the claim that Christians are all or will be all gods.  The truth is that in a manner that is honestly somewhat mysterious we become partakers of God’s divine nature through the indwelling of His own Spirit.  Without the presence of the Holy Spirit there would be no partaking or sharing of anything. 

John writes in 1^st John 3:2: Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be.  We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.  Here we see that the means of our partaking in the divine nature will be nothing more elaborate than a clear vision of God that is lacking in this present life. 

Paul writes in Colossians 3:3: For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.  Further trouncing the false doctrine of men as gods is the truth that it is not even our own lives that place us into communion with God.  Instead, it is Christ’s life that we get enfolded into. 

Peter writes in 2^nd Peter 1:4 that it is God’s own “precious and magnificent promises” that enable us to “become partakers of the divine nature.”  It is not that we obtain a god nature of our own.  We are given and will partake, which is the Greek “koinonia” or fellowship, of one.  The word divine in that verse is not a noun.  It is an adjective which is describing the type of nature we will partake of.  Namely, God’s own existent nature.

Clearly there is a mountain of theological significance bound up in the little phrase “eternal life”.  And just as clearly the eternal life promised to us is far more than just living forever in the same state that we are in now.  I think our small minds tend to picture eternal life as being simply an elongated period of our current existence.  Even if a Christian is not trying to consciously hang onto the things of this world I think the subconscious mind leans toward associating our understanding of the unfamiliar with what is familiar.  In that way our best attempt at grasping the significance of eternal life is often by way of relation to temporal life.

 

We should strive to correct our perception and realize that what God has in store for us is orders of magnitude greater than anything we can possibly imagine.  And we should recognize that the mandate to abide in love that we read here from John is not an optional exercise for super Christians.  It is not some sort of extra-curricular church activity.  It is the visible evidence and payoff of a history spanning covenantal promise of inclusion into the very nature of God Himself.

Moving on to verse 26 and what I am calling John’s admonition to abide in mission, we read the following: These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you.  Does this sound familiar?  It should.  The phrasing here in verse 26 mirrors the style John employed back in verses 12 to 14 of chapter 2.  It seems that John is leading by example with these repeated reminders that he is either currently writing or has written words of instruction.  It is as if he is calling attention to the fact that he has been faithful to the task assigned him by God.  Picture the aged apostle, seated behind a desk, boring holes right through us with his eyes and saying “I’ve done my part.  Now go and do yours.”  

This technique of John’s reminds me of Paul’s similar point to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20:26-27: “Therefore, I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men.  For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God.”

It is in this context, of personal responsibility to stay on task, that John calls our attention to the danger of deception and falsehood within the church.  He has already made it very clear in verses 18 to 23 that antichrists, or false Christs, will arise from among the body of Christ.  They will actively work against the agenda, reputation, and character of Christ by either claiming to be Him or pointing to others who they advertise as being Him.  And even if their efforts are not quite this blunt, merely preferring the things of the world over the things of heaven (which John has also specifically warned against in verses 15 to 17) amounts to the same thing.  With their actions and choices they proclaim the belief that the secular is preferable to the sacred.  God has clearly portrayed Himself as the choicest option in the universe.  So to go after other things is to imply that His claims are not true.

This is the umbrella model of behavior implicit in an antichrist or a deceiver; to attempt to subvert the truth claims of God and replace them with essentially the truth claims of Satan.  But what might the details be of how deceivers will go about this task?  I think John is pointing out with this sentence that it is precisely the teachings he has just covered that false teachers will try to corrupt.  They will call into question whether God has really said to abide in love.  They will oppose the idea of unity with the God-head that comes through modeling sacrificial behavior toward others.  And they will either downplay or outright deny the eternal life that John has just said God has promised to accomplish for us.

But consider how a savvy antichrist might approach the task of counteracting the truth claims of God.  What would be the most effective use of time spent?  Would it be to directly and bluntly contradict Scripture?  No, clearly the best lies are the ones containing mostly truth so as to make them seem plausible yet laced with just enough untruth to render them completely false.  The classic example of this is Genesis 3:1: Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made.  And he said to the woman, “Indeed, has God said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?”  

Satan did not initially claim that God had lied.  To be sure, in verse 3 he comes right out and says this.  But to begin with his approach was to call into question not God’s instructions, but rather Eve’s understanding of those instructions.  He questioned whether she had really heard what she thought she had.

Now consider the example of false teachers given above who heretically teach that all believers are little gods.  They are doing the exact same thing that their father the devil did before them.  They take a Scriptural truth, that we will become partakers of God’s divine nature.  Then they twist and distort so as to present the idea that we actually become divine in and of ourselves.  And the untrained or undiscerning human ear laps it up like a dog because such teaching is exactly what our pride and arrogance want to hear in the first place.

All of this deception in its various forms is precisely and specifically designed to distract Christians and take them off mission.  Our task is to love as Christ loved.  And John says that he is writing about this truth and its ramifications so as to counteract the efforts of the deceivers.  The implication is that they are attempting to deny this essential element of Christian experience.  Thus by attacking the core truth of abiding in God through abiding in love the antichrist is really maximizing his or her efforts by going after the very foundation of what it means to be a Christian.

And John’s point in response to this danger is to remind us that there is absolutely no good reason why we should be taken in by such falsehoods.  Verse 27 makes the case: As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him.

The reality is this.  We have been given a special anointing that mirrors Christ’s own (v. 20).  We have been baptized with the Holy Spirit and set apart for the mission of promoting the glory of God through the spread of the gospel of Jesus Christ.  We inherently understand the need to abide in God and the benefit derived from such.  We don’t need to be educated about the importance of love.  Nor do we really need anyone to tell us that lies are not equal to truth.  This is a universal principle that is as plain as the nose on our faces.  It is these foundational truths of anointing and abiding that we do not need (or should not need) teachers to tell us.

This should not be taken to mean that Bible teachers are unnecessary.  It would be rather odd for John, after having invested so much effort already in teaching and instructing, to turn around and make the claim that teachers are irrelevant.  No, what he is saying is this.  There is an implicit understanding of spiritual things already present within believers.  Because of this the teacher of Bible truths is not imparting knowledge to them that is completely outside the realm of their comprehension and experience. 

Furthermore, rather than contradicting the need for instruction, John’s reference to the anointing of the Holy Spirit actually lends authority to his teaching.  John Calvin puts it this way in reference to this verse:

He said this, that he might add more authority to his doctrine, while every one repeated in his heart an assent to it, engraven as it were by the finger of God.  But as every one had knowledge according to the measure of his faith, and as faith in some was small, in others stronger, and in none perfect, it hence follows, that no one knew so much, that there was no room for progress.

This is the great reassurance of the prospective Bible teacher as he or she contemplates how they can possibly provide meaningful instruction to those presumably more learned and/or more experienced than them in walking with the Lord.  The task of the teacher is not to impart wondrous new knowledge (although that sometimes does occur) to students that are already children of God.  Rather, it is to remind, reinforce, and exhort what is already known.

Verse 27 could be used to deny the need for Bible teaching.  It could even be used as a support for a doctrine of the church being unnecessary.  Certainly at first glance and taken by itself the verse might appear to make the case that we have no need for teachers.  But read in the context of the passage it resides in and considering the flow of thought of the author, it is perfectly obvious what John is really getting after. 

He wants us to stay on task and not be distracted by deceptive philosophies and teachings.  We have been anointed for a special mission.  And we need to be about that job constantly and continually.  We need not be led astray by obviously false teachings.  We need to submit to sound doctrine and the teaching of the word of God so as to gain the ability to spot misleading truth claims wherever they may appear.

And in so doing we will ultimately be fulfilling the great purpose of human existence; the reason we were created; to abide in God Himself.  Verse 28 reads: Now, little children, abide in Him, so that when He appears, we may have confidence and not shrink away from Him in shame at His coming.  I think the question that may arise in people’s minds in reference to this verse is simply: how?  How in the world can I possibly face God with confidence?  John has spent considerable effort already in telling me that I am going to sin.  In fact, he has said that if I try to proactively and confidently assert that I am free from sin that I am in fact a liar.  And to top it all off I am so guilty of sin that I need an advocate to argue my case before the judge.  And my own guilt that hangs about my shoulders like a millstone confirm all of this if I’m really honest with myself.  So how in the face of all this can I possibly approach God when He appears with anything less than abject shame and misery?

The answer is that we are His children.  1^st John 3:1: See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called children of God; and such we are.  The answer is that when God forgives an offense it is sent away as if it no longer exists.  1^st John 1:9: If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 

We need to retrain our brains on the issue of forgiveness.  When God declares us not guilty of our sin through the covering of the blood of His Son, the sin is wiped away from the record books as if it never happened.  We need to make war against our memory fueled doubt that would cause us to question God’s promise of forgiveness.

And as someone who delights in God’s law, as the Psalmist in Psalm 1:1-2, we should feel excitement and anticipation rather than fear and trepidation at the prospect of seeing God.  The passage reads: How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, nor stand in the path of sinners, nor sit in the seat of scoffers!  But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and in His law he meditates day and night.

So here is an important question for you to answer.  Do you feel ashamed of yourself before God right now?  If you do then I believe there are only two possible reasons:

1. Either you are sinfully not abiding in Him, as you have been commanded in this very letter.
2. Or you are sinfully holding onto the guilt of past offenses thereby implying that you do not believe God’s promise of forgiveness, as you have been taught against in this very letter.

Here is an example.  Assuming a healthy and godly relationship, a child should have a certain level of fear and reverence for their father.  But that does not stop them from being giddy with excitement at the prospect of daddy coming home from work.  The only reasons the child should have to dread their father’s arrival is if they know they are guilty of disobeying an instruction they were given for the day or they don’t believe he has truly forgiven them for a broken window yesterday.  Assuming the father has previously demonstrated a willingness to truly forgive infractions then the child is implying with their nervousness that they don’t believe what their father says.  Is that how we are treating our heavenly Father with our trepidation at the thought of meeting Him face to face?

In an effort to decimate any lingering doubts John gives us verse 29: If you know that He is righteous, you know that everyone also who practices righteousness is born of Him.  Honestly, this is sort of the “Duh!” moment of the chapter.  It is another of the logic sequences that John favors.  And it runs parallel to the test of salvation we looked at in verse 6 so many weeks ago.  If you want to know if you are saved then examine whether you are walking as Christ walked.  And if you want to know if you are a child of God then examine whether you are practicing righteousness.

Notice the active role here.  The text tells us to practice righteousness.  This is to do it.  It is to be intentional and deliberate with our efforts.  Living righteously is not something that just happens to fall into our laps one day out of a clear blue sky.  There is an implicit expectation in John’s text that we are studiously applying ourselves to the work of living holy and blameless before the Lord.

With that in mind, what exactly is practicing righteousness?  John has already told us.  To abide in love and to abide in our mission is to abide in God.  Since God defines what is righteous or unrighteous by what is similar or dissimilar to Himself, abiding in Him is equal to practicing righteousness.  Practicing righteousness proves that we are children born of God.  And our status as children is what enables us to stand before Him with confidence when He appears. 

There is a certain beauty and symmetry to the teaching that John gives us.  One point flows to another with grace and precision.  And these concepts are not difficult to understand.  As John has already pointed out, we instinctively know the truth of what he is saying.  Now may God grant us the grace to go and live it out on a daily basis.

The Epistles of John, Part 11: True or False

Apostasy.  Lexically defined it is an abandonment of what one has professed; a total desertion or departure from one’s faith or religion.  For a Christian this word has an ominous tone.  Even saying it seems to cast a pall over the room.  It exudes ugliness and horror.  I knew a man once who was on fire for the Lord.  He was active in teaching and preaching the word of God.  He was pursuing further education in theological studies.  He was counseling and discipling people.  By all accounts he was a dynamite Christian who truly loved God and was genuinely born again.  Then he left his wife and family, turned his back on the church, and effectively disappeared.  It was a textbook case of apostasy.  Understandably, this was a terrible shock to those who knew him.  It left people feeling perplexed and discouraged.  It prompted questions for which there were and are no easy answers.

Unfortunately, this was not an isolated incident.  The reality of Christians walking away from the faith is all too common.  But that doesn’t make it any easier to deal with.  When it happens close to us it feels like a betrayal.  Everything we thought we knew about someone is turned upside down in an instant.  We wonder what to believe, if anything, any more.  And from a human perspective it looks like nothing less than a loss of salvation.  But honestly we should know better.  We have been specifically warned in Scripture that apostasy will occur.  The Bible tells us exactly how it happens and what it means for the salvation of the person who has apostatized.

In our passage of 1^st John this week the apostle gives what is perhaps the clearest and most comprehensive teaching in the Bible regarding apostasy.  A clear understanding of biblical truth on this issue will work to keep us from falling victim to bewilderment, frustration, and doubt.  So we would do well to pay careful attention to what John has to tell us.

He begins in verse 18 of chapter 2 by setting the stage and describing the conditions under which apostasy occurs: Children, it is the last hour.  Right off the bat we are faced with a question.  What does John mean by the phrase “the last hour”?  A number of interpretations have been offered over the years from various Bible scholars.  I think they can be trimmed down to two essential possibilities.  It seems to me that all the other views are variations of these main themes.  The first is that John actually believed the end was near in the mid-90s A.D.  Therefore when he says last hour, he is literally meaning that the return of Christ is imminent, things are drawing to a close, and his audience needed to be prepared for the culmination of the Father’s master plan for creation.  The second possibility that I want to address is that John may have been referring to the whole of the church age.  In other words, the last hour from John’s point of view began sometime in the first century after the establishment of the church and would continue until God brings about a change in the established order and operation of the world.

In support of the first argument, there are three indicators we can examine.  The first is the connecting statement in verse 17: the world is passing away.  John almost immediately follows that statement up with: children, it is the last hour.  From a cursory glance it certainly would appear that John is saying exactly what it sounds like he is saying.  And remember that the literal interpretation of Scripture requires us to go with the plain meaning whenever possible.

In addition to this, we know from Scripture that the early church traditionally did hold the belief that the return of Christ, ushering in the end of the age, was close.  In James 5:7-8 the Lord’s brother writes: Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord.  The farmer waits for the precious produce of the soil, being patient about it, until it gets the early and late rains.  You too be patient; strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near.  Similarly, Peter writes: The end of all things is at hand; therefore be serious and watchful in your prayers in 1^st Peter 4:7.

In spite of John’s tone in verse 17 and the evidence from his contemporaries, I believe there is a serious problem with the view that “the last hour” means that the Lord was literally about to come back when John penned the words.  Simply put, it didn’t happen.  Although these writers were merely men and most certainly fallible, they were writing under the supernatural enablement of the Holy Spirit, and He is definitely not capable of being wrong. 

Even if these men did think, in their humanity, that Christ would return in their lifetimes, I think the fullness of biblical revelation here is that of an attitude rather than a certainty.  What I mean by this is that what I think God intended to convey through these men, whether they completely understood it or not, was the mindset Christians need to maintain continually.  Namely, that Christ “could” return at any moment.  Therefore we need to be ready every hour of the day.  This was the Lord Jesus’s point in the parable of the ten virgins in Matthew chapter 25.  He closes this parable in verse 13 with the statement: Be on the alert then, for you do not know the day nor the hour.  In fact, in the previous chapter Jesus stated emphatically in verse 36: “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone”.  And then in verse 42 He says “Therefore be on the alert, for you do not know which day your Lord is coming.”

Furthermore, if we examine the ways in which the Greek “hora” (hour in English) is used in Scripture it reveals something interesting.  Namely, “hora” was sometimes used to refer to a specific moment in time.  But at other times it was used to refer to a period of time.  In John 1:39 we read: and they stayed with Him that day, for it was about the tenth hour.  This is obviously a literal use of the word.  Yet in chapter 2 verse 4 Jesus says: “Woman, what does that have to do with us?  My hour has not yet come.”  He is clearly not referring to the time of day here.  He is instead talking about the timeframe in which His glory would be manifested and His power revealed.  The examples are many throughout the Gospel of John.  In chapter 4 verse 6 we read: It was about the sixth hour.  Then in verse 21: Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father.”  And again in verse 23: But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth.

Thus I believe the following.  John in his humanity may very well have been under the impression that his master was coming back any day.  And in believing this it is incorrect to state that he was wrong because that is precisely the attitude that Christ taught and expected His disciples to adhere to.  But in the larger scheme of things, because God does not err and because “hora” has a multiplicity of uses I believe that “the last hour” is referring to the final age of God’s ongoing revelation to His creation and the last act of His timeless plan of redemption, salvation, and justice.

This understanding of “last hour” flows smoothly into the next phrase of our passage: and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.  There are three elements we need to look at here.  But first it’s important to define antichrist.  Fortunately, that task is very simple.  It means exactly what it sounds like.  Antichrist is a compound word in Greek, consisting of “anti” combined with “christos”.  Anti means against or opposed to.  Christos means messiah or anointed one and is generally understood as a direct reference to Jesus.  So what we have in the word antichrist is someone who is opposed to Jesus.  This is a person who actively works to subvert His glory privately and/or publicly. 

Note that John is not talking about the traditional apocalyptic Antichrist that we normally associate with the book of Revelation.  The word “antichristos” doesn’t actually appear in Revelation at all.  But the church has always understood the great deceiver described there to be the ultimate expression of this idea of antichrist.  And so over time he came to be known by that term.  But here in 1^st John, as we will see, John is talking about the more general sense of an antichrist.  And in that context many people will fit the mold.

John says that we have heard that these antichrists were coming.  What is he referring to?  The most likely candidate is the Olivet Discourse that Jesus gave in Matthew 24 and Mark 13.  Jesus revealed that many would come in His name claiming to be Him, thus misleading many.  They will even perform great signs and wonders.  He adds that not only will people claim the title of Christ for themselves, but others will also advertise them as the Christ, expressly for the purpose of misleading even the elect, the chosen people of God.  All of this is the very definition of antichrist; working against the purpose and truth of Christ by falsely proclaiming themselves to be Him.

Continuing to read we find that many antichrists have appeared by the time of John’s writing.  Remember, this is the mid-90s A.D.  This means that Christ was crucified only about 60 years previously.  So within half a century or less of the Messiah having departed the church was already beset with distortions, confrontations, and false teachers.  In a sense, almost as soon as God the Son was incarnated He was being defamed by men.  Now, this is obvious from even a cursory glance at the gospels.  Jesus faced extreme opposition from many of His own countrymen.  This much is clear.  But consider that these antichrists John is referring to arose from within the church itself.  These were people who, at least initially, had professed to be Christians.  We will see this in a moment from the next verse.  But for now I think it’s important to recognize that with this statement John is lending support to the doctrine of the complete and utter depraved state of mankind.  Human beings, apart from the work of God in Christ, are incapable of standing in support of the truth.  Romans 8:7 makes this clear: the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so.

John concludes verse 18 with the statement that the presence of antichrists proves this is the last hour.  He is continuing to build upon what the Lord told them at the temple about the end times.  The previous references I mentioned about false Christs were all specifically in reference to signs given to the apostles to signify the end of the age.  This is actually an additional evidence for the interpretation of the last hour being analogous to the church age, although the reasoning is a little bit convoluted.

Briefly, in the Olivet Discourse Jesus mentions something called the “Abomination of Desolation”.  To understand what He is talking about we have to go back to Daniel chapter 9.  The prophet is given a vision in which the future of Israel is foretold.  Remember that Daniel was in exile in Babylon and Persia for most of his life.  He is told that a decree will be given for the Jews to return to their homeland and rebuild Jerusalem.  Furthermore, from the issuing of this edict until the advent of the Messiah there would be a period of 483 years.  After this time there will be an additional 7 years in which a strong ruler will arise and put a stop to grain offerings and sacrifices.  On top of that, Daniel’s vision foretells that on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate.

Taking that information and going back to Jesus’s own prophecy, He tells the apostles that this Abomination of Desolation will be standing in “the holy place”, a reference to the temple in Jerusalem.  It is this event which will truly signal the imminent end of the age and culmination of all things.  So, what exactly is the Abomination of Desolation and how will we recognize it?

In 168 B.C. Antiochus Epiphanes reigned as the king of the Seleucid Empire.  This kingdom was one of the remnants of Alexander the Great’s massive empire.  Antiochus had a particular hatred for Jews.  During his reign he oppressed them bitterly.  He even went so far as to raid the Jerusalem temple, steal its treasures, set up an altar to Zeus, and sacrifice pigs on the holy altar.  Then he proceeded to slaughter many Jewish people and sell others into slavery.

All of this brutality and pagan disregard for Judaism led the Jews to revolt under Judas Maccabeus.  Eventually Antiochus, weakened by other conflicts within his kingdom, was forced to withdraw from Israel.  The Jews had won their freedom back, for a time.  But the point as it relates to our passage in 1^st John is that the desecrations of Epiphanes in the temple are a foreshadowing of Daniel’s abomination of desolation that Jesus was referring to.  At some unknown point in the future, a man will rise up and become a great world leader.  He will perpetrate crimes against Israel including some sort of heinous sacrilegious desecration of the temple.  And because this obviously has not happened yet (in fact the temple has not even been rebuilt at this point) we know that we are still in what Jesus described as the beginning of birth pangs in His prophecy.

Thus the presence of antichrists within the church serves as the proof of the last hour being here on two fronts.  One, because they fit exactly into the mold of false proclamations of Christ that Jesus described as preceding the end.  And two, because antichrists are present yet the great Antichrist of Revelation has not yet appeared.

Now then, with full apologies for that extensive rabbit trail, let us proceed to verse 19: They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.  As I alluded to earlier, this is in my opinion the single clearest teaching in all of Scripture that explains how Christians can apostatize yet believers cannot lose their salvation.

These false Christians left the church because they were not authentic in the first place.  The leaving proves they never belonged to God at all.  Paul describes this as their belief being in vain in 1^st Corinthians 15:1-2: Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.

In contrast to this vain, or futile, expression of faith, we read in Philippians 1:6 that God completing His work in us is an absolute certainty: For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.  He will do this because He has predestined it to be so as revealed in Romans chapter 8.  And in that same chapter combined with the understanding we gained from 1^st John 2:5 we find that there is nothing in the entire created order that can possibly separate us from God’s love being brought to completion in us.

I trust that at this point you need no further proof of the accuracy of what the Bible teaches on this subject.  But in case there are any doubts still lingering cast your mind back to what we learned several weeks ago from 1^st John 2:1: If anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.  Christ is our perfect legal counsel, prepared to defend us indefinitely.  Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them (Hebrews 7:25).

All that being said, it is important to keep in mind that a timeline for apostasy is not black and white.  In other words, Christians can most definitely still sin.  John has already established that powerfully in 1^st John 1:8 and 1:10.  So at what point does a Christian’s sin indicate a false profession of faith?  Our frail minds, prone to the desire for immediate gratification, long for a clear cut answer to this question.  But God in His wisdom chose not to give it.  Instead we find passages such as 1^st John 3:4: Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness and 3:6: No one who abides in Him sins.  The Bible does not say how long one has to sin before it is considered a practice.  We are not given an exact time sequence to determine the veracity of a fellow Christian’s confession of faith.  But it is a certainty that if someone is a true child of God they are not capable of continuing to sin indefinitely.  The Holy Spirit will prevent such a thing from happening.  And this should serve as a great reassurance to us because it is God who keeps us with Him, not we who keep ourselves close.

Continuing to verses 20 and 21 we read: But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know.  I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it, and because no lie is of the truth.  Again we find the loving heart of John building us up in the midst of the terrible darkness of antichrists who are opposed to the truth in every way.  He reminds us of our anointing from God.  What does John mean by this?  The word he chose is “chrisma”.  It only appears here in the New Testament so it is difficult to get a contextual definition of it.  However, the root word “chrio” appears in several places.

The first is Luke 4:18, referring to Jesus: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor.  He has sent Me to proclaim release to the captives, and recovery of sight to the blind, to set free those who are oppressed, to proclaim the favorable year of the Lord.”  The strong definition of “chrio” as a special setting apart of someone for a particular task can be seen here.  There is no more exclusive job in all of history than the one given to Jesus for the redemption of sins.  It was not only a mission that Jesus was given, but He was equipped for the task, as Peter makes clear in Acts 10:38: You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power.

Now, in light of that, consider the glorious truth that in some mysterious way we who are Christians have been enfolded into that high calling.  2^nd Corinthians 1:21-22 tells the tale: Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge.  Do you even realize, Christian reading this, how special you are because God has made you special in Christ?  Do you understand the great lengths He went to in order to secure your bride price for His Son?

If you do then you should have no problem recognizing that through Christ you have all the tools you need in order to discern truth from lie.  This is John’s point in verse 21.  He did not write this letter to us because we are ignorant fools who can’t manage to put two and two together.  He is writing to us precisely because we, along with Him, are the anointed ones of God.  We are capable, with the Spirit’s enablement, of ascertaining error.

It may very well be difficult to come to terms with the apostasy of a dearly loved brother or sister in Christ.  But we have all the evidence we need from Scripture of exactly what the truth of the situation is.  We have no excuse for avoiding the issue or casting a blind eye to the reality of what is going on.  We are instructed here by God through His vessel John the apostle, to stand up and face the truth rather than running from it.

To say it another way, because we possess the truth we ought to recognize the lie.  What is the lie that John is implying here?  The context reveals it as the false confession given by these antichrists who in their heart of hearts are opposed to Jesus.  Let’s be blunt.  If someone claims to be in Christ, yet their actions prove conclusively that they are not, what else would we call them but liars?  If that feels uncomfortable to say about a friend it doesn’t change the reality of what they are.

And to drive the point home and hopefully erase any further hesitation on our part, John proceeds in verses 22 and 23 to complete dismantle any remaining objection we may have to facing the facts: Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.  Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.

Let’s think about John’s train of thought here.  He says that the antichrist is defined by a denial of Christ.  Because the Son is equal to the Father, a denial of the Son also indicates a denial of the Father.  Now comes the critical question for life and practice.  What exactly does it mean to deny the Son?  I mean, obviously if someone says “No, Jesus of Nazareth was not the Son of God and the promised Messiah of Israel” then that is a blatant denial of the Son.  But although that may be the most direct and blunt way to do it, it is possible to deny the Son through implication without coming right out and saying it.

As already stated, the Son is the incarnate God.  He is the visible image of the fullness of God dwelling bodily in human form (Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3).  God is the perfection and purity of all good that exists (Psalm 106:1; Mark 10:18).  He is the absolute best for us (Psalm 135:3).  Therefore, if we reject His lordship over our lives we are rejecting His claim that He is the best.  Consequently, we are denying His nature.  Long story short, if God is not the central figure in our lives and we instead choose to invest our time, energy, and passion into the things of the world (1^st John 2:15) then we are by implication denying His nature and therefore denying the Son who shares His nature.

Let me illustrate this another way, with a simple example.  Let’s suppose a friend and I go out to get some ice cream.  The restaurant has two flavors: chocolate and strawberry.  My friend indicates to me that strawberry is their best flavor.  However, I decide to get chocolate instead.  What am I implying about my friend’s claim?  Without saying a word I have just conveyed my opinion that their opinion is incorrect.

In the same way, if God makes a claim in the Bible that He is the absolute best thing in the universe.  And if we then choose to go after something else with our affections then we are implicitly saying that God’s truth claim is not correct.

This is exactly what the antichrists have done.  They have taken the glory of God and exchanged it for a lie.  They have worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.  And they are engaged in actively suppressing the truth about God in unrighteousness.  Therefore, His wrath is revealed from heaven against them (Romans chapter 1).

And John’s point is that this is what we are up against.  We who are authentic disciples of Jesus have confessed the Son therefore we also have the Father.  But those people who were among us as brothers and sisters but then apostatize and walk away do not have either the Son or the Father.  And in spite of how much it may pain us we have to recognize that those who were formerly among us are not any longer. 

This is not to say we should be rude or cruel to such people.  This would be in violation of our clear mission as ministers of reconciliation.  2^nd Corinthians 5:18-19 tells us that God: gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.  Although it may seem like we have been betrayed by those who have deserted the church the reality is that they were never in the church at all.  Therefore they are no different from any other person in the world who needs to be restored to a right relationship with Jesus.  It is our calling to seek such a resolution with all of our energy.

Despising the Spotlight

You may be familiar with the name Martyn Lloyd-Jones.  He was the pastor of Westminster Chapel in London for 30 years.  He was one of the men during the 20^th century who brought back to prominence the expository method of preaching where a book of the Bible is taught through verse by verse and line by line.  Over 50 years ago Dr. Lloyd-Jones preached a sermon on spiritual depression.  In it he said the following:

“Have you realized that most of your unhappiness in life is due to the fact that you are listening to yourself instead of talking to yourself? Take those thoughts that come to you the moment you wake up in the morning. You have not originated them, but they start talking to you, they bring back the problems of yesterday, etc.  Somebody is talking. Who is talking? Your self is talking to you.”

His point was that we often tend to talk negatively to ourselves and we ought instead to speak the word of God into our own hearts and minds.  This has been popularized by other men in recent decades with the phrase “preach to yourself.”  In other words, the very first person who needs to be spiritually impacted by a sermon is the one delivering it.  But this idea did not start with Lloyd-Jones in the middle of the 20^th century or with John Calvin four centuries earlier or with any other man.  It existed long before in Scriptures such as Psalm 42:5, which was Lloyd-Jones’s text for that Sunday morning half a century ago.  The verse reads: Why are you cast down, O my soul, and why are you in turmoil within me?  Hope in God; for I shall again praise Him, my salvation and my God.  The Psalmist is frustrated.  He knows perfectly well the tremendous grounds he has for joyful living.  He is fully aware of the fact that he ought to be placing his hope firmly in God.  Yet he finds himself downcast.  He finds himself sad and depressed and unsettled.  So he essentially yells at himself, saying “Stop it!”  This is the idea of “preach to yourself.”

I think it is an entirely biblical principle that any time someone teaches or preaches the Bible, they ought to be preaching first to themselves.  But today, the text I’ve selected has done a particularly thorough job of skewering me with its confrontation of my own sin.  So, perhaps more than usual, I am very much preaching to myself with this topic.  Maybe by the time I’m done you will feel that I’m preaching to you as well.

This is the text I am focusing on today, verses 12 through 14 of the fourteenth chapter of Luke.  It reads as follows:

He said also to the man who had invited him, “When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return and you be repaid.  But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you.  For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.

This chapter of the gospel of Luke is all about a dinner party.  We read in verse 1: One Sabbath, when he went to dine at the house of a ruler of the Pharisees, they were watching him carefully.  Let’s consider for a moment a little harmony of the gospels and see what that might reveal to us about Jesus’s mindset here. 

The setting is just after the Jewish Feast of Dedication.  This holiday is known in modern times as Hanukkah and it is typically celebrated in the month of December.  Jesus is only a short time away from His betrayal, arrest, and crucifixion which would have been in March or April of the following year.  It is literally just a few weeks after the confrontation with the Jews in the Temple in John chapter 8. 

Why is this significant?  Because Jesus had explicitly claimed His deity in John 8:58: Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”  Make no mistake about this.  He was very intentional with how He chose His words here.  He had been speaking of Abraham in the past tense, but then oddly He switches to the present tense mid-sentence.  Why would He do this?  Because it exactly mirrored God’s description of Himself to Moses in Exodus 3:14: God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” 

The Jews knew exactly what He was claiming and they were not going to tolerate it.  Verse 59 of John 8 shows their response: So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple.  This was blasphemy.  A man claiming to be God.  It was a capital offense under the Jewish code of laws, the Torah.  What Jesus did here was absolutely and completely unacceptable to the unbelieving Jews.

And here’s the point.  Jesus, after being on the brink of arrest and possible punishment or execution, turns around just a few weeks later and goes into the house of one of the very men who was seeking to kill Him.  Verse 1 says they were watching Him closely.  Jesus was no idiot.  He obviously knew how volatile and dangerous the situation was, yet He walked right into it anyhow and deliberately placed His head in the wolf’s jaws.

Now someone might say that because Christ knew the future He knew that His time of sacrifice had not come yet and therefore it diminishes His courage here.  To that I would point to Jeremiah 17:10: “I the Lord search the heart and test the mind, to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds.”  It’s the fruit that is rewarded.  God obviously knows the thoughts and intentions of every man’s heart and He will judge men based on that.  But He will also reward people based on their deeds. 

And don’t we operate the same way?  Suppose a three story building is on fire on the third floor.  The fire has just started and it’s going to be several minutes before it spreads far enough to threaten anyone below.  A young girl is standing in a hallway on the first floor.  The little one could walk out at any time and escape the danger.  But she is frightened by the noise and the panic stricken people around her.  So she stays where she is, frozen in terror, crying for someone to help her.  A fireman hears her cries, immediately rushes into the building, and brings the little girl out.  He was never in the slightest bit of danger because the fire was very far away from him.

Do we qualify our praise of this brave man because he knew that there was nothing to fear?  Of course not.  We honor him because he rescued a little girl.  It doesn’t matter how far away the fire was.  She needed help and he gave it to her.  It is the fireman’s fruits, or actions that we focus on.  So it should also be in our consideration of Jesus’s actions here in Luke 14.  He is a hero for how He confronted danger and evil.  And not only did He walk in to this Sabbath dinner courageously and without hesitation, but He proceeded to preach to everyone there right in the middle of it. 

Never one to shrink from proclaiming truth even when it made His audience uncomfortable, the Lord spares no one at this banquet from the piercing power of His teaching.  In verses 2 through 6 He blatantly defies the Pharisaical legalism that was infecting Israel by healing a man.  This was an act strictly forbidden by the extra Jewish laws that had been added onto the guidelines given by God through Moses.  The Jewish religious leaders had taken the purity and simplicity of God’s design for the Sabbath, to honor Him and to rest from labors, and had dressed it up with unnecessary pomp and circumstance, rules and regulations.  So Jesus condemns them for their hypocrisy.  He points out that when the situation suits them they would happily break their own laws in order to save a loved one or a valuable possession.

Then, addressing the whole assembly He chastises them for trying to seize preferential places of honor at the table in verses 7 through 11.  This is really the same message He had to preach to His own disciples repeatedly.  They jockeyed for position amongst themselves several times, even making each other angry with their attempts at one-upmanship.  In response Jesus told them “So the last will be first, and the first last.”

And now, beginning in verse 12, our Lord turns His attention to the host for the evening.  This man was a chief, or a ruler of the Pharisees.  This means that he was probably a member of the Sanhedrin.  He was probably in on the internal plots and discussions to kill Jesus.  And more than likely he had invited Christ into his home specifically for the purpose of trying to catch Him in some word or deed that they could use against Him.  Jesus of course knows all this and gives the man a little dose of his own self-righteous medicine.  His teaching echoes across time to us today and I believe it’s going to nail us right to the wall.

Let’s look closely at what the Lord says here.  Jesus was a master at using concrete examples and relevant images.  He spun word pictures in the air that fired the imagination and spoke deeply into the heart of His audience.  That’s exactly what He does here.  He is at a dinner party.  He wants to communicate a truth to this man.  So He does it in the most clear and unmistakable manner possible; He phrases His teaching around the concept of a social gathering. 

Verse 12 describes His method: He said also to the man who had invited him, “When you give a dinner or a banquet”.  The two words used here can really run the gamut of definitions pertaining to meals.  Placed together like this they can mean anything from a casual and informal breakfast to a fancy banquet with guests and everything in between.  The point is that by using the words He did Jesus covered every possible permutation of the act of consuming food.

And the Lord is not done with this pattern of covering all the bases.  He goes on to say: “do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors”.  Notice how precise Jesus is with His categories of people.  First He mentions friends.  These are not casual acquaintances.  They are dearly loved ones.  The word used is “philos”.  This is one of the Greek expressions of love.  It is a mutual affection and pleasure enjoyed in someone’s presence. 

This word could be applied to family members given the right type of relationship.  But I don’t think that is what Jesus has in view here.  I think He is specifically talking about really good friends.  The reason is the very next word; “adelphos”, translated here as brothers.  This is the word for a biological brother or perhaps a fellow countryman.  But not just any brother or countryman; a very close one.  So because Jesus covers dear brothers with “adelphos” I think He specifically intended “philos” to refer to non-biological friends.

But He’s not done covering His bases.  The next group is “suggenes”.  These are also brothers or countrymen.  But unlike “adelphos”, “suggenes” describes people who are not very close to you.  Do you see how almost ridiculously specific Christ is being with this?  Yet He is still not done.  The final group is “plousios geiton”.  This is literally wealthy or rich neighbors.  Why is the Lord so painstakingly precise and inclusive here?

I think it’s because Jesus knew perfectly well the tendency of man to obfuscate and avoid responsibility.  So He wanted to ensure there were no logical loopholes people could squirm through in order to avoid His teaching.  They could deny His authority and ignore what He is saying, but they could not and cannot pretend that He doesn’t cover their particular situation.

What about us?  Are we prepared as a local church in 21^st century America to listen to what God says and allow it to penetrate our hearts?  Are we willing to be pierced through by the word of God, even to the division of joints and marrow, soul and spirit?  We’ll come back to that question in a few minutes.  But for now just think about how much attention you are paying right now wherever you are to what Christ is teaching you.

Moving back to our text, what is it that Jesus has to say about inviting these groups of people to dinner?  Why does He not want us to have these people over for supper?  Because, He says, “lest they also invite you in return and you be repaid.”  It doesn’t matter what time of day it is.  It is irrelevant which meal you’re eating.  It makes no difference how much money you spend.  God doesn’t care about the potential for food to go to waste.  He states emphatically, don’t you ever invite anyone that might possibly have even the slightest, most remote chance, of paying you back with a return invite.

Instead Jesus says: “But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind.”  In other words, bring in the people who are the least capable, in point of fact completely incapable, of rewarding your gracious dinner hosting.  Christ’s list here is just as comprehensive as the first one.  He mentions the poor.  These are the homeless.  They are probably unwashed, carrying a stench of body odor with them as they come into your home.  He includes the crippled.  Think of someone who has been badly burned to such an extent that their face is disfigured and it is difficult to meet their eyes.  He covers the lame.  In our culture it might be someone handicapped and bound to a wheelchair.  And he finishes up with the blind.  This is not just physically blind.  It also has a connotation of mental blindness; in other words psychologically unstable or even insane.

Why?  Why is Jesus instructing us to open our homes to people that if we are honest about it we probably find distasteful?  Wouldn’t it be much more comfortable to stick to our approved list of friends, neighbors, and relatives?  Aren’t we much safer to invite fellow church members to dinner?  Perhaps in the short term, but Christ’s focus is never the temporal.  He doesn’t care for the material benefits of this life.  Instead He is always, without exception, focused like a laser beam upon the eternal rewards to be found in His Father’s kingdom.  And so He says if we follow His advice “you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you.  For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” 

And this reveals the point.  In considering the first group of invitees it must be acknowledged that they have the potential to offer repayment upon earth.  In contrast, the second bunch of guests offer us no possibility of repayment on earth.  Instead, by demonstrating our status as adopted children of God by emulating the example His Son gives here we confirm the certainty, the absolute rock solid assurance, and the concrete grounds of repayment in heaven.

You see, Jesus is not really talking about a dinner party here.  Now to be sure, I think His teaching can and should be taken literally.  We very much should be investing ourselves in reaching out to the poor, the downtrodden, the castoffs, the lost, and the marginalized members of our society.  We ought to be inviting them into our houses and showing the love of Christ in a very personal manner.  Consider 1 Corinthians 1:27: But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong.  And remember James 1:27: 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.  If we have any hesitation about being open and inclusive with the sanctity of our homes we need to get over it. 

But at the same time, I do not take this passage to mean that Jesus is condemning all social gatherings of friends or relatives.  I don’t believe He is displeased with activities such as supper clubs at Daniels Bible Church.  This is borne out by the model of the early church.  Acts 2:42 records their practices under the specific authority of the Apostles and therefore implicitly correct: And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.

No, I think that underneath the literal details of the social activities Jesus is describing there is a foundational truth of far greater power and far more terrible insidiousness.  And we need to uncover this deeper meaning if we are to be fully transformed as Christ intends.  In order to get at this the following question needs to be asked.  What is the principle, or the timeless truth, that Jesus is teaching?  The issue is being repaid on earth rather than in heaven.  Why is this important?  Because of our short sighted obsession with our present physical circumstances and our temporal fixation upon the creature rather than the Creator.

You see, we humans have a problem.  We tend to live by the law of reciprocity.  That is, “the practice of exchanging things with others for mutual benefit.”  In other words, I give you a gift at Christmas and I expect one in return.  Now this in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing.  But our sinful natures take it, corrupt it, twist it, and turn reciprocity into an opportunity to over value the things of this earth and under value the things of heaven.  Allow me to explain with some examples.

• Have you ever given someone a gift, received no thanks for it, and felt disgruntled? 
• Have you ever done work for someone, received no acknowledgement for it, and thought to yourself that that’s the last time you’ll help them out? 
• Have you ever let someone out in traffic, given them a friendly hand wave, received no corresponding wave in return, and thought nasty thoughts toward the other person? 
• Let’s get real personal for the church attenders reading this.  Have you ever worked yourself to the bone at church and then felt bitter at those who seem to only show up for 1 ½ hours on Sunday morning and don’t seem to contribute to the church’s ministry the rest of the time?

If any of these or other similar examples describe you then you’re living by the law of reciprocity.  In your judgment you are not given your just reward, right now, for services rendered, effort invested, and/or time spent.  Then you take that conviction and allow it to turn to evil thoughts in your mind.  Even if your thoughts don’t turn to evil, just the fact that you are fixated upon being rewarded in this life reveals the problem that Jesus is confronting.  It is a focus upon earthly things rather than heavenly things.

In His admonition to the Pharisee hosting the dinner party Christ skewers this type of thinking.  He cuts through the surface of our denials, hollows out the insides of our defenses, and exposes our true heart for what it really is.  And those of us who are followers of Christ must ask ourselves the question: why in the world do we engage in this sort of behavior?  For unbelievers it at least makes sense.  Temporal honor and glory, in this life, is all they’ve got.  But we of all people, Christians who have been bought with a price and promised an eternal inheritance of undefiled and imperishable glory and honor.  We should know better than to stake our hopes and dreams on earthly reward and significance and acknowledgement.

So, what should we make of Jesus’s teaching here in Luke chapter 14?  I think there is an over-riding outlook we need to adopt and then at least three actions we can take in order to support that outlook.  The outlook is that of despising the spotlight.  What do I mean by that?  Well, a spotlight is a focused beam of light typically directed at a specific object for the purpose of calling attention to it.  It is designed to promote whatever is under its fluorescent glare.  It is intended for acknowledgement and perhaps glory and honor.  We typically think of a spotlight in terms of a stage production such as a play or a talent show.  In that context the audience is intended to clearly see the one who is performing.  And then, after the performance is over it is customary for the audience to give the entertainer immediate gratification in the form of applause or cheering.  Usually the artist on stage is hungry for that affirmation from the crowd.  They feed on it and draw energy from it.  They may even go so far as to lust after that glory and use the quest to continually seek it as the driving ambition for the continuance of their career.  To ensure that this comes about the performer will plan, train, and invest everything they have in the pursuit of continued success.

In opposition to this man centered outlook on life Jesus says “No!  Do not seek after repayment or reward here on earth.  Instead look to the heavenly rewards that God has promised to those who seek after Him with all their heart.  And this teaching moment in Luke 14 is not an isolated incident. 

Earlier I mentioned Christ’s teaching to His disciples about the least and the greatest.  One of the descriptions of this can be found in Mark 10:42-44: And Jesus called them to him and said to them, “You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them.  But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. 

The point was that the world focuses on instant rewards, in the here and now.  But for Christ’s disciples it was not to be this way.  They were to focus on service, reckoning their reward as being found in heaven with God rather than on earth with the world.  In Matthew 5:3 and 5:5 Jesus praised those who are poor in spirit and those who are meek.  He promised that their reward will be the greatest of all, even unto the kingdom of heaven and the inheritance of the earth.

With Christ’s instructions in mind, what should be our response when the spotlight of life begins to shine our way?  Should we avoid it?  Perhaps, but I don’t think that carries a heavy enough weight of intensity.  Avoid sounds to me like a casual side stepping action and I don’t think that is good enough for what is being taught.  How about fleeing the spotlight?  Well, that is a little better.  There is definitely more effort invested in the idea of running away from fame and glory.  But I think both of these are insufficient.  When we stop to contemplate the fullness of God’s glory and our mandate to worship Him it should become evident that this seeking after God is an all or nothing endeavor.  If we further realize that when we seek after temporal rewards in this life and our focus narrows down to that level we are implicitly devaluing God’s worth in our minds.  Then, if we stop to consider that any distraction away from God and any lowering of His perceived value is a sin, there becomes only one appropriate response.  We must despise the spotlight. 

In Matthew 12:30 Jesus taught: “Whoever is not with me is against Me.”  Perhaps you throw up the defense that you’re not in opposition to Jesus, you’re just enjoying what the world has to offer for a season.  In 1^st John 2:15 the apostle wrote: If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.  Is this a big deal to you, being unable to love God and having His love for you absent from your life?

These truths must drive us to hate anything that pre-occupies our attention and draws us away from God who is the most beautiful and excellent object of praise we can possibly gaze upon.  We must be violent and ruthless with our own sinful tendencies to grasp after fame, glory, and honor.  As Paul said in Romans 8:13: If by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.  Make war upon your sin church.  Become the enemy of your own tendency to prioritize reward and repayment on earth.

But how do we do this?  First we need to recognize and admit that we have a problem.  In John 12:43 the author is describing the reason that some of the authorities refused to believe in the Messiah: for they loved the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God.  Does that line describe you as well?  Do you orbit around the desire for affirmation and reassurance from the people around you?  I suspect it describes every one of us at least some of the time.  We need to see that tendency in ourselves for what it is; a complete and utter abomination of God’s glory.

Secondly, we need to think long term.  We need to set our eyes on the eternal rather than the temporal.  Don’t be like Peter in Mark 9:5, who after being unimaginably privileged to witness the transfiguration of Christ, could think of nothing except the here and now: And Peter said to Jesus, “Rabbi, it is good that we are here.  Let us make three tents, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah.”

Finally, we need to plan for change.  Jesus is giving this teaching in the context of the dinner party He is at.  And He says that when the host invites people he should adopt a different strategy.  This is a reasoned and careful process of taking time and effort to think ahead about what our intentions are.  Christ wants us to spend time in forethought and consideration of the ramifications of our actions.  This is the point of the parable in Matthew 7 of the man who built his house on sand versus the man who built his house on rock.

Now, how will we respond to our Lord’s instructions today?  Will we carefully assess our own hearts and take stock of our focus in life, making changes where necessary in order to fall in line with His example?  Or will we be like the one who was reclining at the table in the Pharisee’s house?  This man apparently had his head firmly in the clouds.  He completely missed the point that Jesus was teaching.  It seems that all he bothered to listen to was the last sentence; “For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.”  For, his response in verse 15 is devoid of any hint of conviction or repentance: “Blessed is everyone who will eat bread in the kingdom of God!”

Will you be like that man today?  Will you sit there with your fingers firmly stuck in your ears until you hear something you like?  Then will you proclaim joyfully “It sure is good to be a Christian in America!”  And all the while you completely miss the sin staring you right in the face.