Category: Hear From the President

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Some years ago while visiting the British Museum, I was deeply impressed by a beautiful statuette (pictured below) made of gold, copper and shells. Archaeologists from the British Museum and the University of Pennsylvania uncovered a pair of these statuettes while working jointly on an excavation at the Royal Cemetery of Ur in southern Iraq. Supervising archaeologist, Sir Charles Leonard Woolley, named them Ram in a Thicket—a phrase taken from the Genesis 22 story about Abraham’s willingness to offer Isaac in sacrifice to God.

A story of faith

The Genesis 22 story is typically explained as God testing Abraham’s faith and obedience (with Isaac’s obedience also noted). Though there is disagreement on some of the details, it is a key story in the flow of the Bible. Both the apostle Paul and the author of Hebrews present Abraham as a model of faith, with Hebrews interpreting the Genesis 22 story as a type, prefiguring the atoning sacrifice of Jesus:

By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was offering up his only begotten son; it was he to whom it was said, “In Isaac your descendants shall be called.” He considered that God is able to raise people even from the dead, from which he also received him back as a type. (Hebrews 11:17-19 NASB)

Some skeptics and atheists see the Genesis 22 story as proof that God is a moral monster. But in drawing that conclusion, they are overlooking a key point in the story. Having taken Isaac and two of his servants with him on the trip to Mount Moriah, Abraham ordered his servants to wait behind while he and Isaac ascended the mountain. He told them, “We will worship and then we will come back to you” (Genesis 22:5, italics added). Note that Abraham said both he and Isaac would return. Abraham was not lying—he had faith God would intervene. Like Moses after him, Abraham knew that the Lord, rather than being a moral monster, is “the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness” (Exodus 34:6).

How did Abraham know this? He no doubt remembered what God had done several years before to make Isaac’s birth possible by intervening in the barren womb of Sarah. Knowing God’s love and faithfulness, Abraham trusted God to intervene once more. The story continues:

Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?” “Yes, my son?” Abraham replied. “The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” (Genesis 22:6-8)

Again, Abraham was not lying—he was trusting God to intervene and Abraham’s words no doubt encouraged Isaac’s obedience when the time came for him to be bound and placed on the altar of sacrifice.

Imagine Abraham’s thoughts at the climactic moment when he took the knife and began to raise it above his son’s body now prostrate on the altar… And then came a voice…

The angel of the Lord called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” [The angel] said, “Do not stretch out your hand against the lad, and do nothing to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.” (Genesis 22:11-12 NASB)

The faithful God

Looking up, Abraham saw a ram caught by its horns in a nearby thicket. The ram was provided by the Lord as a substitute for Isaac (Genesis 22:13). In response, and no doubt with gratitude, Abraham called the place “The Lord Will Provide” (Genesis 22:14). This amazing scene unfolded on Mount Moriah, a name meaning “seen by Yahweh.” Seeing our need as fallen humanity, God showed through this incident his faithfulness as the God who provides—the God who meets our need for salvation through “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). In Jesus, God has provided the only sacrifice needed for us to be in eternal, right relationship with him.

Through this amazing event on Mount Moriah (where Solomon later built the temple), God made it clear that he abhors human sacrifice, including the sacrifice of children (Deuteronomy 12:31; Jeremiah 7:31; Leviticus 20:2-5; Jeremiah 32:35; Ezekiel 20:26; Isaiah 57:4-5).

Though Abraham apparently did not understand the details of what God had planned concerning the sacrifice, we know he trusted God to preserve Isaac’s life. Though his faith was perhaps small, nevertheless Abraham acted in faith, trusting God to be faithful. As a result, Abraham’s story of faith was incorporated into the lessons God taught Israel—lessons passed down through the years to us. Predominant among those lessons is that the sacrifice God wants from us is that of the heart—a willingness to give up our distrust and unbelief and count on God to provide the way into fellowship and communion with him, even when we can’t see the way forward. Abraham taught us well, and that’s one reason he is called the father of the faithful.

A prophetic story

The story of Abraham and Isaac on Mount Moriah is prophetic, prefiguring God the Father sending his Son. In fulfillment of the sign of Abraham and Isaac, God the Father offered up his only Son in sacrifice for us, not withholding him. Then, adding a second twist to the Abraham-Isaac story, he brought Jesus back by raising him up from the dead. By giving himself to us in his Son, God provided himself as our One True Sacrifice—our One True Offering and restored us to right relationship and communion with himself. Jesus is God’s own total Provision for us all.

Trusting in the faithful God who provides,
Joseph Tkach

____________

PS: For GCI.org articles about the faith of Abraham, click here and here.

Dear Brothers and Sisters

Down through the centuries, the church has taught that God, being impassible, is not subject to suffering, pain, or the ebb and flow of involuntary passions. God is thus not controlled, conditioned, manipulated or otherwise affected by anything external to himself. The impassible God is constant and faithful, exercising sovereignty over all. His impassibility is an expression of his immutable (unchanging) eternal nature, character and purposes.

The church has also taught that the Eternal Son of God, through the incarnation, took on a real and complete human nature, becoming one of us. We humans are not impassible—we are affected by all kinds of things external to ourselves; we are not constant in our emotional states and in how we voluntarily carry out our wills, purposes and ends; we also change our minds with regularity and are not always faithful. We suffer in many ways, and eventually we die.

Explaining a conundrum

Together, these factors present us with a conundrum. Given that Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God, is both divine and human (two natures in one person), how is it possible for him to be both impassible (in his divine nature) and passible (in his human nature) at the same time? Furthermore, given that Scripture tells us that Jesus reveals what God is like (John 14:9), are we to conclude that the eternal God is passible? Can God suffer and be acted upon by external forces? Does he have emotions (like ours)? A related question is this: Can humans hurt God emotionally? For some, the answer to these questions is a resounding “No!” They insist that God is immutable (not subject to change). But seeing God as immutable tends to portray him as distant, untouchable, iron-fisted, and immovable (fixed)—more like Aristotle’s Unmoved Mover than the God revealed in Jesus Christ. This view of God seems to rule out the reality of the incarnation, suffering and death of the Son of God. But given the reality of what God has done, how do we explain the conundrum it seems to create? I suggest we do so the way some leading theologians have by accurately clarifying what we mean by impassible and passible.

Hints of God’s passibility

We begin by noting that the Bible is full of emotional language in reference to God. Narratives in Scripture show God responding emotionally to his creation—he is said to be grieved and angry, merciful, moved to pity and full of joy. God is even described as changing his mind (“repenting”). At the same time the biblical authors proclaim that God is not like human beings and cannot be compared to creatures made by God (thus avoiding idolatry). Nevertheless, these authors use what is referred to as anthropomorphisms—language borrowed from human creatures to speak of God. But most tellingly, as I’ve already noted, Scripture affirms that Jesus shows us who God is and what he is like (John 14:9). Indeed it is through the Son that we know the Father.

Throughout Christian history, there have always been theologians who, in faith, sought to understand what Jesus shows us about the eternal, sovereign, faithful and constant God. Three notable examples (pictured above) are Irenaeus and Origen (3rd century) and Calvin (16th century). Irenaeus wrote this:

The [Gnostics] endow God with human affections and emotions. However, if they had known the Scriptures, and had been taught by the truth, they would have known beyond doubt that God is not like men. His thoughts are not like the thoughts of men. For the Father of all is at a vast distance from those dispositions and passions that operate among men.

Origen seemed to have mixed feelings. On the one hand he argued that God is entirely without passion and destitute of all such emotions. On the other hand, he wrote this:

The Father himself and the God of the whole universe is “long-suffering, full of mercy and pity.” Must he not then, in some sense, be exposed to suffering?… The Father himself is not impassible.

John Calvin followed suit by writing that “God does not have blood, does not suffer, cannot be touched with hands.” It seems that most theologians prior to the 19th century believed and taught that God does not suffer as we do (and thus is impassible). But it’s important to note that in doing so they regularly distinguished between passions and affections. Affections, they stated, come from correct reasoning and are active and voluntary, while passions are passive and involuntary, often associated with sinful inclination. While humans are subject to being overcome by passions (and thus swept into sin) God, being perfect, does not have that type of emotion. His nature is perfect love, which cannot be diminished or lessened. In other words, God’s love is changeless. His emotional life is thus not identical to ours as humans. If God were subject to involuntary passions (as they define that word), he would be a God of misery—the unhappiest being in the universe.

In saying that God is impassible (not subject to passions), these theologians were not saying that God is indifferent or apathetic. Though transcendent, God is also immanent and present—not merely interested in the world he created, but involved in it through his plan of redemption. God is so dynamically active in his Triune life that he cannot change to become more active or dynamic than he already is. However, God’s immutability does not mean he is a motionless, “unmoved mover.” Rather God is always relational, active and dynamic. In that sense, we can say that God truly does have affections—God can chose to be affected by what he has created and loves. It’s vital that we keep this in mind when we talk about God as impassible. It is true that God does not suffer as we suffer. But there is another side to his impassibility, and understanding it is part of what makes the gospel truly good news.

God is for us and with us

It is true that God, being uncreated and unchanging is not in the same mess we are in. Although he (ontologically) is outside our mess, he is intimately involved with us, at work to permanently clean up our mess—God is freely responsive to us and our needs. Our ultimate consolation is that from the beginning, Father, Son and Holy Spirit are in perfect agreement with their plan to redeem humanity. A central part of that plan was for the Son of God to become incarnate, and in doing so lay aside his immunity to pain and suffering so that as one of us, he might suffer for us and with us.

Modern theologians have seen a need to bring out the truth of God’s kind of suffering in and through the incarnate Son. Karl Barth spoke of God‘s own heart suffering on the cross. Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote that “our God is a suffering God.” Jürgen Moltmann wrote that on Good Friday the Father suffered the loss of his Son. He also noted that the revelation that God weeps with those who weep is one of the answers to the problem of pain. Our Triune God of love can be fully with us in our sorrows and comfort us in our griefs. In order to bear witness to the total truth of God as revealed in Jesus Christ, T. F. Torrance recognized the need to speak paradoxically when addressing God’s impassibility and passibility:

On the one hand the notion of divine passibility would appear to call in question the steadfastness or immutability of God in face of the pressure of outside forces upon him as if he could be moved by what is other than God. On the other hand the notion of divine impassibility would evidently exclude the possibility of any real movement of God in a loving and vicarious self-identification with us in the incarnation and redemption which would posit a deep gulf between God as he is in himself and God as he is towards us. On the other hand, therefore, we cannot but hold that God is impassible in the sense that he remains eternally and changelessly the same, but on the other hand, we cannot but hold that God is passible in that what he is not by nature he became in taking upon himself “the form of a servant.” He became one of us and one with us in Jesus Christ within the conditions and limits of our creaturely human existence and experience in space and time, although without in any way ceasing to be God who is transcendent over all space and time. That is surely how we must think of the passibility and impassibility of God: their conjunction is as incomprehensible as the mode of the union of God and man in Christ. Just as in creation and incarnation God acted in entirely new ways while remaining unchanged in his divine nature, just as he became man without ceasing to be God and became creature without ceasing to be creator, so he became passible without ceasing to be impassible. (The Christian Doctrine of God: One God, Three Persons, pp. 250-251)

The passibility of the impassible triune God

On the cross of Christ, the one whole God suffered. Yet God was not suffering involuntary pain or a change in his nature, character or ultimate purpose. While the Son, in his humanity, suffered what we suffer, the Father, in his non-incarnate way, suffered what the Son went through. Likewise, the Spirit suffered what the Son went through (in a way appropriate to being the Spirit of the Son). In Christ, the whole God fully understands our pain and suffering.

Through the mediation of Christ, the whole of God’s love, in order to bring us comfort and ultimately to overcome it and lead us on to fullness of life, enters our pain and suffering with us and for us. Doing so involves bringing judgment on the sin and evil that causes our suffering. We see this in the crucifixion of Jesus, which leads to his resurrection. T.F. points out that it was on the cross that we see the “deepest point of our relations with God in judgment and suffering,” as Christ, fully human, took on the sufferings of the world due to sin and evil. But Jesus not only took on that suffering, he redeemed it.

The resurrected Christ is now with the Father, still understanding our pain, no longer feeling it, but empathizing with us in it. But we must not take such empathy superficially. Salvation requires more than someone to identify with and feel our pain—Jesus came to be our Savior and Redeemer, not just a sympathizer. While he took on flesh to share in suffering with his brothers and sisters, we must never forget Jesus did not suffer simply to identify with us, or to know what we feel when we suffer. Such a superficial empathy would leave us in the guilt of sin and under the power of evil and death. By his taking on our fallen human nature, and entering into our fallen condition, he came to condemn evil and rescue us from it at his own cost, reclaiming us for God. Jesus rejected all sin and evil and conquered all that causes pain: evil, sin, death and the devil. In doing so he heals our alienation and estrangement from God.

God’s great work of love

Because of this total victory, we can see the depth of God’s freely-given grace, even taking on our guilt and sin-filled condition to overcome it. In this great work of love poured out on us, we can see just how responsive God is to us in the depth of our greatest need. He held nothing back. But that very act of God’s personal responsiveness, his act of drawing near and being affected by us (to the point of the Son of God going through judgment against sin and the suffering of human shame and death) is the greatest demonstration of our Triune God’s constancy, faithfulness and love. In Jesus Christ, the one who became flesh, who then suffered, was crucified, buried, risen and then ascended on our behalf, we see who God is in his eternal being—the God of love who is “the same yesterday, and today and forever” (Heb. 13:8).

In praise of the impassible, passible God,
Joseph Tkach
_______________

PS: With each report of the terrible acts of violence in the US and various places around the world over the last couple of weeks, a Scripture kept coming to mind: “I know, O LORD, that the way of man is not in himself, that it is not in man who walks to direct his steps” (Jeremiah 10:23 ESV). Each day that passes in this fallen world brings us closer to Jesus’ return in glory. That reality gives me tremendous hope, whether his return is in my lifetime or not. As we wait, we will continue to have times that will call forth from the people of God what is known as lament, as noted in this recent post at Patheos:

To lament is to come alongside those who grieve, to sit with them (literally or figuratively) in the silence and to recognize there that in God’s interconnected creation, their pain is our pain. We might, in the silence, consider how it is that we share in the same pain. To lament is not to offer words of comfort; it is not to try to fix the problem or to prevent it from ever happening again. …Lament is a time for the hard work of searching our own souls, for the the sorts of rebellion and violence that if untended could burst out in violence toward others. I am reminded here of the words of Thomas Merton: “Instead of hating the people you think are war-makers, hate the appetites and disorder in your own soul, which are the causes of war. If you love peace, then hate injustice, hate tyranny, hate greed—but hate these things in yourself, not in another.”

Now is a time for lament, and I know you join me in praying for God’s mercy and grace along with protection of the innocent. Let us also pray that God hastens the day when we’ll celebrate the coming of the fullness of his kingdom. Come Lord Jesus.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

You have likely heard a lot over the last couple of weeks about “Brexit.” In a surprising move to many around the world, citizens of Great Britain voted to leave the European Union (EU). Though no one knows what the full impact of Brexit will eventually be, the vote to leave the EU certainly has people in the UK up in arms. GCI-USA Regional Pastor Rick Shallenberger was in the UK the week of the vote and sent me this report:

It was an interesting time to be in Great Britain. Everywhere I went people were talking about Brexit, sharing their personal views of the pros and the cons of “Remain” or “Leave”—the two options on the memorandum ballot. Interestingly, almost all of the opinions I heard were shared respectfully—even among people on different sides of the decision. It made me wonder why we can’t seem to have similar discussions in the US as we share our opinions about political candidates. Every UK paper I saw had the topic of Brexit on its cover—several of the daily papers making it clear which way they stood on the issue. The press and media attempted to influence people on both sides of the referendum with fear and manipulation. As I read one paper I would find myself being swayed on one side of the argument, but then after reading another paper, I found myself being swayed the opposite direction. There was a lot of frustration about what the decision would really mean. There will be for some time.

The vote was held on Thursday, June 23. Early exit polls indicated Britain would remain in the EU, and some of the papers erroneously headlined the wrong decision the following morning. By 5 am Friday morning, it was clear Brexit was a reality. As I walked around that morning, it struck me how normal everything was. At breakfast and in the coffee house later, all the discussion I heard was about Brexit and what the future held. No one had any absolutes, most speculated with some of the speculations being on the side of conspiracy-thinking. Not much different than what one might hear in a coffee shop in the US. What was interesting to me was how in one respect everything had changed for the future of Britain, and in another way nothing had changed for the average citizen—at least for the time being. A major decision had been voted for and the average citizen had no clue what the ramifications would be.

Several in the media pondered whether or not the average citizen even realized what the vote was about. This was fueled later in the day on Friday when a news story claimed the number one Google search in the UK that day was, “What is the EU?” There is a lot of confusion about what the future holds. When Prime Minister David Cameron announced his resignation, speculation increased all the more. Britain is going through a similar transition that we are facing in the US. It will be interesting to see what the future holds.

What bothers me the most, Joe, is to hear Christians speculate that this decision fulfills prophecy, some indicating that it aligns with British-Israelism. I even heard some say this decision makes way for the rise of the Holy Roman Empire. It saddens me when people read more into an event than is there. The British people need our prayers as they transition into a new reality for the country. Whether or not this was a good decision, it happened and so we pray for the people involved. We also continue to pray that God provides the means for the gospel to be shared in Great Britain.

Rick’s words remind me that as we study Scripture, rather than trying to align individual world events (like Brexit) with Bible prophecy, we should understand those prophecies in accordance with their over-arching purpose, which is to point us to Jesus—to who he is, and what he has, is, and will yet do for the salvation of the world. The purpose of prophecy is definitely not to provide us with a detailed time-line of end-time events.

It saddens me that some Christians think that by figuring out a few things in prophecy, they can determine the date of Jesus’ return. Have they forgotten our Lord’s statement that no one knows the timing of that great event? (Matthew 24:36). What prophecy does show us is that God has a plan to bring about his purposes on earth, but his plan is not dependent upon us figuring out the details, including the exact time-line. We need not worry about such details in order to “be ready” for Jesus’ return. God’s plan, in and through Jesus and by the Spirit, includes atonement for all. Looking to and trusting in our triune God is what we need to be concerned with, not speculations about prophecy.

Years ago, Herbert Armstrong (our denomination’s founder) did say that Britain would eventually leave the European Union. But he did not get that idea from Scripture—he got it from others who taught what is known as Anglo- or British-Israelism (click here for details). It’s all too easy to grab hold of a few prophetic statements someone makes, thinking they are right and thus should be followed. But we must look at the larger picture. Herbert Armstrong (along with others) made multiple prophetic statements eventually proven wrong. Mr. Armstrong twice wrongly predicted detailed time-frames for end-time events, including Jesus’ return. Major erroneous predictions like those far outweigh the few, relatively minor predictions that actually came to pass.

The early Christians did not have Bibles to study like we do. They grew in grace and knowledge by hearing about Jesus—about how he fulfilled prophecy, how he came to reveal the Father, how he came to redeem us, how he came to be our atonement, how he came to offer salvation to all. That’s the message the early church shared, and it’s the message we are called to share. It’s a message that includes prophecies about Jesus being Lord over all history, including every power and authority. In Revelation 1:17 (ESV) Jesus gives this reassuring prophetic declaration: “Fear not, I am the first and the last.” The word “last” here translates the Greek word eschatos. Jesus is declaring that he is the “Last One”—our Eschatos (our eschatology). He is the Last Word and will have the last word about everything. Because of this and similar promises (Revelation 22:13; Isaiah 44:6; 48:12), we know that our hope is in Jesus, the incarnate eternal Word of God. The true hope he gives to us overcomes our fears, with no need for us to fall into the seductive, deadly trap of speculating about prophecy.

Rather than being told that Brexit is the beginning of some end of the world prophetic scenario, what the citizens of Great Britain need is to hear the good news of Jesus Christ. They do not need to hear that Brexit is somehow indicative of British-Israelism, or the beginning of the rise of the Holy Roman Empire, or any other such foolishness. What the people of Britain need to know is that they have a Savior who loves them and who will help guide them through whatever changes may come. They also need to know that they have brothers and sisters around the world praying for them, and a heavenly Father who was not surprised or caught off-guard by Brexit, but who is, always has been, and always will be faithful to them as his beloved children.

Trusting in Jesus, not in prophetic speculations,
Joseph Tkach

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

There are two little-known, rarely-observed holidays in the U.S. that address the issue of truthfulness: Honesty Day (April 30) and Tell the Truth Day (July 7). Has truth-telling become so rare that we need two holidays to get people thinking about this essential value? Though a lack of truthfulness is not exclusive to politicians, the current U.S. election cycle has brought forth a flurry of fact-checking activity calling into question the truthfulness of statements made by just about all of the presidential candidates. Sadly, honesty is no longer the norm in daily life, politicians included. I could cite many examples, but below are four statements—see if you can correctly match each with one of these four candidates: Rand Paul, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. [1]

1. “My mother named me after Sir Edmund Hillary after she read an article about his climbing Mount Everest.” (According to Snopes.com, Sir Edmond climbed Mt. Everest five years after this politician’s birth).
2. “I received $1 million for a speech in 2005.” (According to various sources, this politician actually received $400,000).
3. “Climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism.” (According to Politifact.com this is an overstatement).
4. “A man was put in prison for conspiracy just for having dirt on his land.” (According to FactCheck.org, the man was convicted of mail fraud, conspiracy and environmental violations for developing 67 mobile home lots inside federally protected wetlands without approval).

In providing these quotes, I’m not making political statements for or against any candidates. I refuse to do that, and it’s GCI policy that pastors not promote one candidate over another, or use their influence to sway members to vote one way or another. My point is that commitment to truth-telling is not the norm in our politics. Studies show that people expect politicians to lie. Dan Ariely, professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University, put it this way:

People want their politicians to lie to them. The reason…is that people care about politics. [They] understand that Washington is a dirty place and that lying is actually very helpful to get policies implemented.

Though I care about politics, I do not want politicians to lie to me and I think it is tragic that politicians believe they can’t get anything done without lying. But enough about politics. My main point is this: over the last several years, we’ve been witnessing a growing tragedy of untruthfulness in which lying is becoming the norm. When one liar succeeds, others are tempted to follow. Even more tragically, when a lie remains in active play, it has a lingering effect even after it has been refuted. Think of someone who has been falsely accused—though they prove their innocence, the damage continues.

A long history of lies

Though it seems to be on the rise, lying is nothing new—it started with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and has continued ever since. Harvard PhD and social scientist Bella DePaulo, who has been studying the psychology of deception for decades, summarizes some of her research in The Hows and Whys of Lies. She shows that people often do lie and examines their motivations. In one study, she put recorders on students for a week and found they lied, on average, in every third conversation of ten minutes or more. For adults, it was every fifth conversation. A few years later, Robert Feldman at the University of Massachusetts taped students in conversations with total strangers and got similar results. University of Toronto professor Kang Lee has done extensive research on children and lying. He set up an experiment in a video-monitored room and told children that a toy has been placed behind them, which they can have, but only if they do not peek. The adult then leaves the room and when they return a minute later asks the children if they peeked. At age 2, 30% lied; at 3, 50% lied; at age 5 or 6, 90% lied. Though Lee said he worries about the 10% who did not lie, I worry about a professor who has that worry!

Don’t believe everything you read

Though people tend to rely on scientists to tell the truth when making scientific claims, the facts indicate otherwise. According to Retraction Watch, retractions of scientific claims have increased 1900% in the last nine years. They also report that, in the first decade of the 21st century, “retractions of papers published by medical journals went up 19 fold, although the number of manuscripts being published only increased 44%.” Natural News reported that, according to the Committee on Publication Ethics, publication fraud occurs through fabrication, falsification and plagiarism. Most people (including most scientists), want to be honest, but if they live in a country where half-truths and bald-face lies are rampant, many begin to think, “Everybody cheats, so if I cheat here, then I guess that’s OK.” And so unfolds the tragedy of untruthfulness.

Believe (and follow) Jesus—he is the Truth

Lying, of course, is contrary to the way of Jesus, which is the way of truth. As Christians, we live in the truth of who Jesus is and of who we are in union with him. We value truth because we know who truth is—Jesus Christ! He says to us, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6 NKJV). These three dimensions of human existence are one in him and from him we receive all three. Take one away and the others collapse as well. While we cannot ourselves be the truth, in the light of who Jesus is we look for, live by, and depend upon all other truths relative to him. As followers of Jesus, we reject untruthfulness because it does not lead to participation in his life and love.

I thank God that many people are truth-tellers. But because untruthfulness abounds in our world, I long for the fullness of the kingdom when Jesus brings truth to bear in a renewed earth where all live in the truth of who they are in Christ (Isaiah 65:17; 2 Peter 3:13). At that time there will be no more tears—all will be healed and made whole. What an everlasting party that will be! And that, dear friends, is the truth!

Celebrating the truth that Jesus is and will always be,
Joseph Tkach

___________________

[1] Here is who made each campaign statement: (1) Hillary Clinton, (2) Donald Trump, (3) Bernie Sanders, (4) Rand Paul.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

I guess we’ve all experienced times of desperation when we cried out to God to intervene. Perhaps we prayed for a miracle, only to find that our prayer was seemingly to no avail when the miracle did not come. But I also guess most of us have experienced the joy of seeing the healing of a person we prayed for. I know a lady, who following prayer for her healing, had her missing rib grow back. The doctor told her, “Whatever you’re doing, keep doing it!” Many of us, I’m sure, have been comforted and encouraged knowing others are praying for us. I’m always encouraged when people tell me they’re praying for me. In reply I usually say “Thanks, I’ll take all the prayer I can receive!”

A misguided approach

Whether our experiences with prayer have been negative or positive (and we’ve likely had both), it’s important to remember Karl Barth’s observation: “The most certain element of our prayer is not our requests, but what comes from God: His response” (Prayer, p. 66). But it’s easy to misinterpret God’s responses to our prayers when he does not answer the way we expected. It’s easy to fall prey to the mistake of viewing prayer as a mechanical process—treating God as if he was a cosmic vending machine where we submit our requests and he automatically gives us the desired “product.” This misguided approach, which is little more than an attempt to bribe God, often involves using prayer as a way to gain control of situations we’re powerless to control.

The purpose of prayer

Prayer isn’t about trying to get God to do something that he doesn’t want to do—it’s about joining God in what he is doing. Prayer isn’t about trying to control God—it’s about acknowledging that God has everything under his control. Barth explained it this way: “To clasp the hands in prayer is the beginning of our uprising against the disorder of the world.” In making this statement, he was acknowledging that we who are not of the world are, in prayer, joining God in his mission to the world. Rather than taking us out of the world (with all its disorder), prayer joins us to God and to his mission to save the world.

Because God loves the world, he sent his Son into the world, and when we pray with minds and hearts open to God’s will, we are placing our trust in the One who loves the world and loves us—the One who can see the end from the beginning and who can help us see that this present, mortal life is the beginning, not the conclusion. That sort of prayer helps us see that the world is not as God wants it, and it changes us so we can be agents of hope here and now in God’s present, unfolding kingdom.

When the opposite of what they pray for occurs, some people leap to the deistic conclusion that God is distant and uninvolved. Some even abandon belief in God altogether. Such was the case for Michael Shermer, founder of the Skeptic’s Society. He lost faith in God when his college sweetheart was severely injured in an automobile accident. With a broken back and paralysis from the waist down, she was permanently confined to a wheelchair. Michael believed that because she was a really good person, God should have answered prayers for her healing.

God is in control

Rather than being a way to control God, prayer is humble acknowledgment that God is in control and we are not. In his book, God in the Dock, C.S. Lewis explained it this way:

Most of the events that go on in the universe are indeed out of our control, but not all. It is like a play in which the scene and the general outline of the story is fixed by the author, but certain minor details are left for the actors to improvise. It may be a mystery why He should have allowed us to cause real events at all, but it is no odder that He should allow us to cause them by praying than by any other method. [Christian philosopher Blaise] Pascal says that God “instituted prayer in order to allow His creatures the dignity of causality.” It would perhaps be truer to say that He invented both prayer and physical action for that purpose. He gave us small creatures the dignity of being able to contribute to the course of events in two different ways. He made the matter of the universe such that we can (in those limits) do things to it; that is why we can wash our own hands and feed or murder our fellow creatures. Similarly, He made His own plan or plot of history such that it admits a certain amount of free play and can be modified in response to our prayers. If it is foolish and impudent to ask for victory in war (on the ground that God might be expected to know best), it would be equally foolish and impudent to put on a [raincoat]—does not God know best whether you ought to be wet or dry?

Why pray?

Noting that God ordained prayer as a way for us to commune with him, Lewis explained in his book Miracles that God already has accounted for our prayers. The question then is this: Why pray? Lewis replies:

When we are praying about the result, say, of a battle or a medical consultation the thought will often cross our minds that (if only we knew it) the event is already decided one way or the other. I believe this to be no good reason for ceasing our prayers…. The event certainly has been decided—in a sense it was decided “before all worlds.” But one of the things taken into account in deciding it, and therefore one of the things that really cause it to happen, may be this very prayer that we are now offering.

Did you get that? God may be “answering” in response to a prayer he already knew you were going to pray. The ramifications of this are both thought-provoking and exciting. It tells us that our prayers are important; they matter. Lewis continues:

Though shocking as it may sound, I conclude that we can at noon become part causes of an event occurring at ten a.m. (Some scientists would find this easier than popular thought does.) The imagination will, no doubt, try to play all sorts of tricks on us at this point. It will ask, “Then if I stop praying can God go back and alter what has already happened?” No. The event has already happened and one of its causes has been the fact that you are asking such questions instead of praying. Thus something does really depend on my choice. My free act contributes to the cosmic shape. That contribution is made in eternity or “before all worlds”; but my consciousness of contributing reaches me at a particular point in the time-series.

Prayer matters

What Lewis is saying is that prayer matters—it always has and always will. Why? Because our prayers give us opportunity to join God in what he has done, is doing, and will do. Though we don’t understand all the ramifications of how science, God, prayer, physics, time and space, and things like quantum entanglement and quantum mechanics all work together, we know that God has determined such matters. Further, we know he has invited us to participate in what he is doing. Prayer is a big part of that participation.

As I pray, I often think of myself handing over or entrusting my prayers to God, knowing that, somehow, he will take and weave them into his good purposes, one way or another. I believe that God works together all things (including our prayers) for good in accordance with his glorious purposes. I’m also reminded that whenever we pray we are joining Jesus, our great High Priest, in his prayers of intercession. He takes our prayers, sanctifies them and shares them with the Father and the Holy Spirit. For that reason, I don’t believe there is ever an unanswered prayer. Our prayers join our Triune God in his will, purpose, and mission—much of which was determined before the foundation of the world.

While I can’t explain exactly why prayer matters, I trust God that it does. Therefore I’m encouraged when I hear that people are praying for me, and I hope you are encouraged knowing that I pray for you. I’m not doing so to try to control God, but to express my praise for the One who has all things under control.

Grateful that God is in control and that prayer matters,
Joseph Tkach

PS: For a previous Weekly Update letter on the practice of prayer, click here.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

One reason I greatly enjoy the conferences in our fellowship is the opportunities they afford to share meals and conversation with people I don’t often get to see. At a recent U.S. regional conference, I enjoyed discussing Albert Einstein’s historic work with meteorological scientist Michael Anderson, a friend and GCI elder from Connecticut. I mentioned how I’m enchanted by Einstein’s well-known statement that “God does not play dice with the universe.” I also noted to him my amazement that Einstein’s predictions about our visible universe, made over 100 years ago, have been verified by science through empirical measurement.

Gravitational waves

One of Einstein’s predictions was that there are speed-of-light gravitational waves traveling through space. Einstein considered them too small to be measured and thus unverifiable.

Though Einstein was right about the existence of gravitational waves, he was wrong to think they would never be discovered. In fact, they were recently detected and measured by the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) via its two installations in Louisiana and Washington. LIGO analyzed and merged multiple sources of light, using technology that is able to detect distortions one million times smaller than the width of a hydrogen atom. LIGO’s measurements suggest that these gravitational waves originated with a cataclysmic event in the primordial universe.

The realm of God

Given amazing discoveries like gravitational waves, some scientists wonder if there is a timeless dimension holding together our time-bound universe. Though the scientific community in general does not accept that idea, God’s revelation, centered on Jesus, tells us of a timeless dimension that the Bible refers to as eternity (I like to call it the realm of God). In musing on how something of that realm is revealed to us by God’s creation, David (who I imagine to be the first rap artist) wrote this:

The heavens declare the glory of God;
the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
Day after day they pour forth speech;
night after night they reveal knowledge.
They have no speech, they use no words;
no sound is heard from them.
Yet their voice goes out into all the earth,
their words to the ends of the world.
(Psalm 19:1-4)

Inner space and the limitations of science

Utilizing ever-more amazing technology, science continues to learn about the outer and inner realms of created space. Recently, scientists looked into the hidden recesses of inner space by examining what is left after smashing sub-atomic particles. With discoveries like this, some say humankind may be near the limit of what can be understood about the universe. Another friend and fellow GCI elder, John Meyer, alerted me to an article [1] featuring the work of Dr. Harry Cliff, a particle physicist at the European Organization for Nuclear Research. Dr. Cliff says we can’t go further in our understanding of the universe because “the laws of physics forbid it.”

Concerning what he calls “the two most dangerous numbers in the universe,” Dr. Cliff notes that if either was only minutely different, nothing would exist. The first number pertains to the strength of the Higgs field (see below), and the second with the repulsive force of the dark energy that accelerates the expansion of the universe. (I must interject a thought here: perhaps Dr. Cliff and others should ask where those two numbers originated and how they became firmly set in relationship with the universe.)

Following discovery of the Higgs boson—the so-called “God particle” [2] by a team of scientists (including Keith Baker, another friend and GCI member in Connecticut), attention turned to the Higgs field [3], the strength of which is a bit of a puzzle. When particles move through this field they gain mass and become protons, neutrons and electrons, which comprise all matter. The Higgs field runs on a constant, very weak energy level. As Dr. Cliff notes, “The Higgs field is just slightly on—it’s not zero, but it’s ten-thousand-trillion times weaker than its fully-on value.” This “weakness” defies current scientific understanding. (Could it be that many scientists engaging in the philosophy of science refuse to see that God has the Higgs field under his control?)

In The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What is the Question? [4], physicist Leon Lederman explains the discovery of the Higgs boson using a parody of the tower of Babel:

The issue is whether physicists will be confounded by this puzzle or whether, in contrast to the unhappy Babylonians, we will continue to build the tower and, as Einstein put it, “know the mind of God.” …The whole universe was of many languages, and of many speeches. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Waxahachie, and they dwelt there. And they said to one another, “Go to, let us build a Giant Collider, whose collisions may reach back to the beginning of time.” And they had superconducting magnets for bending, and protons had they for smashing. And the Lord came down to see the accelerator, which the children of men builded. And the Lord said, “Behold the people are unconfounding my confounding.” And the Lord sighed and said, “Go to, let us go down, and there give them the God Particle so that they may see how beautiful is the universe I have made.”

In reference to his second “dangerous number” (concerning dark energy), Dr. Cliff admits that science has extremely limited understanding. “The best idea,” he said, “is that it is the energy of empty space itself—the energy of the vacuum.” Noting that dark energy should be “10¹²⁰ times stronger than the value we observe from astronomy,” he concludes that theoretical physics has a real and quite mysterious problem:

We may be entering a new era in physics. An era where there are weird features in the universe that we cannot explain. An era where we have hints that we live in a multiverse that lies frustratingly beyond our reach. An era where we will never be able to answer the question “Why is there something rather than nothing?”

It’s unlikely that physicists will break through these limits without expending massive amounts of time and money. The collider in Geneva used in discovering the Higgs boson likely is not up to the further discoveries necessary to verify as yet unverified scientific theories. But some theories seem to be, in principle, beyond scientific verifiability. For instance, in order to verify the theory of multiple universes (the “multiverse”) we would need to get outside of our own and exist in another universe where the physics of it would be incomparable with that of our own (since that’s what makes it another universe)!

Including God in our thinking about the universe

Why was Albert Einstein so advanced in his thinking? I believe it is because he included in his thinking the reality of a creator of the universe. Though some claim he was an atheist or agnostic, it’s clear that Einstein did not exclude God from his thinking the way many scientists do. His metaphor that God does not play dice with the universe continues to cut through mysteries concerning the universe that baffle many scientists. Yes, Einstein was not able to adequately describe God’s role in creating and sustaining the universe, but then, neither am I, except to say that I know God as creator of both nature and science, the latter being our ability to understand, at least to some extent, the wonders and mysteries of the created universe.

Natural science is fundamentally about discovery, which includes coming to realize that we lack explanations for many of the things we observe about the natural world. God, as yet, has not made these things known to us, nor has he allowed us, so far, to invent the means of research and development by which we may yet come to know. But more than that, if the original and continuing agency of the living God is essential to answering, Why is there something rather than nothing?, then the study of nature alone can never fully answer that question. This is so because God is not nature, nor is he a part of nature. As early church teachers such as Athanasius realized, Only God knows God and only God reveals God (see 1 Corinthians 2:11).

C.S Lewis put it this way: we should not expect to find the author of a book in the book of his own creation (although he could have written in something of himself as one of the characters of the book!). While nature seems to continually point beyond itself, the natural sciences are unable to go beyond their inherent limits to find answers to the kinds of questions they raise. The natural sciences require a higher level of explanation than they can ever deliver, since nature is not God, and science restricts itself to the study of nature.

Looking beyond the natural sciences to theological science

Acknowledging this limitation of science is important in that it helps us understand that if we are to have an ultimate explanation for nature (and for science itself), we will have to turn to a higher, more comprehensive level of explanation. Our study of nature (of inner and outer space in particular) has, seemingly, brought us to the point where we must recognize that nature raises questions that, in principle, science is unable to answer. Therefore we must look beyond the natural sciences to answer the very questions that this field of study raises.

In searching for answers we must examine theological science, which seeks knowledge from the study of the historical and personal revelation of God which comes through Israel and culminates in Jesus Christ, God’s ultimate self-revelation. Holy Scripture is the record of that revelation which affirms a kind of “multiverse,” consisting of two realms—the heavenly and the earthly. While we cannot exist outside our own universe and reach into another, we have received from that other heavenly “universe” of God his own revelation. The Author himself has broken into our universe and provided us the ultimate explanation for why there is something rather than nothing: the agency of our Triune God, who is the creator, sustainer and redeemer of this universe.

Amazed by God, his creation, and revelation,
Joseph Tkach

____________________

Note: all public domain pictures are via Wikimedia Commons.

[1] See the article at http://www.businessinsider.com/the-end-of-physics-as-we-know-it-2016-1. To watch the TED talk with Dr. Cliff referenced in the article, go to http://www.ted.com/talks/harry_cliff_have_we_reached_the_end_of_physics#t-705970.

[2] For more about the Higgs boson particle, go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson.

[3] For an explanation of the Higgs field, go to http://www.fnal.gov/pub/science/inquiring/questions/higgs_boson.html.

[4] See the referenced book at https://books.google.com/books?id=-v84Bp-LNNIC&printsec=frontcover&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false.

Dear child of God,

Though I was only 12 years old at the time, I have vivid memories of my father and grandfather being very pleased with me because I had gotten straight A’s on my report card. As a reward, grandpa gave me a rich-looking alligator hide wallet and dad gave me a $10 bill to put inside. I recall both saying they loved me, and that they were pleased I belonged to them. I also remember taking money out of my piggy bank, combining it with the $10 from my new wallet, and exchanging that money for $1 bills so my wallet would look full of cash. I knew it would make me feel like a millionaire at the penny candy store!

I still remember those gifts every June as Father’s Day draws near (it’s celebrated the third Sunday of June in many countries). That memory gets me thinking about my dad, my grandpa, and our heavenly Father’s love. But there is more to the story.

Not a week passed after I was given the wallet and cash before I lost both. I was grief-stricken! They must have fallen from my back pocket while I was at a movie theater with friends. I searched high and low, retracing my steps. I continued searching for several days, but the wallet and cash were nowhere to be found. Now, some 52 years later, I still feel the pain of that loss—not because of the monetary value involved, but because as gifts from my grandpa and dad, they held great sentimental value. What’s interesting is that the grief lasted only a short time, but the fond memories of the love expressed toward me by my grandfather and father have endured.

Though I appreciated their generous gifts, I cherished the love expressed by my dad and grandpa. Isn’t that what God wants for us—to cherish the depth and richness of his unconditional love? Jesus helps us understand the depth and breadth of that love in his parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the prodigal son. These parables, recorded in Luke 15, demonstrate the heavenly Father’s passionate love for his children, and show how God enjoys finding those who are lost. In doing so, these parables point to the incarnate Son of God (Jesus) who came to find us and take us home to his Father. Jesus not only reveals the Father to us, he reveals the Father’s desire to come to us in our lostness and bring us into his loving presence. Being pure love, God never stops calling our names with his love.

As Christian poet and musician Ricardo Sanchez wrote, “The devil knows your name but calls you by your sin. God knows your sin but calls you by your name.” The voice of our heavenly Father comes to us by his Word (Jesus), through the Spirit. The Word judges the sin in us, overcoming it and sending it away (as far as the east is from the west). Rather than condemning us, the Word declares God’s forgiveness, affirms us and sanctifies us.

When our ears (and hearts) are attuned to the living Word of God, we are able to understand his written word, the Bible, as God intends—and he intends that it convey the message of his love for us. This is made clear in Romans chapter 8, one of my favorite passages of Scripture. It begins with this declaration: “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1 ESV). It then ends with this powerful reminder of God’s never-ending, unconditional love for us: “For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:38-39 ESV).

We are assured that we are “in Christ” (we belong!) as we listen to the voice of God in Jesus, who said this: “When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers” (John 10:4-5 ESV). We hear our Lord’s voice and follow him as we read his words and know that it is him talking to us. Reading Scripture helps us know we are in relationship with God because that is his desire, and this reassurance brings us closer to him. Through Scripture, God speaks to us, affirming his love by confirming that we are his beloved children. We know it is God’s voice we are hearing when we are led to express love toward others, and as we experience increased humility, joy, and peace—all of which we know originate with God, our Father.

Knowing that our heavenly Father is calling our names as his beloved children motivates us to live as Paul described in his letter to the church in Colossae:

Put on then, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience, bearing with one another and, if one has a complaint against another, forgiving each other; as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive. And above all these put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony. And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body. And be thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God. And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him. (Colossians 3:12-17)

God’s voice leads us in the direction of his always-present fatherly love—a love poignantly celebrated by comedian Michael Jr. in the Father’s Day video embedded below. Some of you will remember that Michael Jr. entertained us at one of our international conferences several years ago.

On Father’s Day (and every day), let’s remember that our heavenly Father created us in order to love us. As the loving Father that he is, he wants us to hear his voice so that we can live the abundant life that is ours in relationship with him—knowing that he is always for us, always with us, always loving us.

Always remember that your heavenly Father has given everything to you in and by his incarnate Son, Jesus Christ. Unlike the wallet and the cash that I lost those many years ago (they were temporary), God’s gift to you (and me) is permanent. Even if you momentarily lose sight of his gift, your heavenly Father is always there—knocking, seeking, finding you (even if you are lost), so you may fully appreciate and experience his gift of unconditional, never-ending love.

Wishing you all Happy Father’s Day,
Joseph Tkach

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Some Christians are in the habit of using strange-sounding phrases like, “The Lord spoke to me,” “my prayer language,” “God gave me a word of knowledge,” “the Lord put a burden on my heart,” and “God gave me the anointing.” I’m not saying such phrases are wrong, nor is it my intent to mock them, but I do want to point out that the use of such Christian “in-speak” tends to detract from biblically accurate communication. In this letter I want to focus on the use (and misuse) of the phrase, the anointing.

In Scripture, the word anoint typically is used to refer to a way of confirming a special work that God is doing in or through a particular person. People are anointed for healing, in preparation for burial, and when being consecrated (commissioned) as a king, priest or prophet. When a priest or prophet would anoint someone to commission them for leadership, a transfer of authority (and thus power) to the one being anointed is sometimes noted. But it’s important to note that the one performing the anointing was not in control of that power—the anointing was not the equivalent of a dying king passing their rule on to a successor. Rather, the person who was anointing the king, priest or prophet was setting them aside in a public way to confirm that God truly had called that person into a particular leadership responsibility. For example, when the prophet Samuel anointed David, he was commissioning him as king, not transferring the Holy Spirit to David.

In Psalm 139:7-12, David shows that God is present everywhere (he is omnipresent). This means that the Spirit is not some sort of force under our control that we can transfer from one person to another through anointing. Moreover, Scripture shows that the Holy Spirit is not a “force” but a “person”—he speaks (Acts 13:2), is grieved (Ephesians 4:30), and has a will (1 Corinthians 12:11). By remembering that the Spirit is an omnipresent, divine person, we guard against false teaching, including the misuse of the word anointing.

Sadly, the word anointing is frequently misused. On the one hand it’s misused in referring to subjective experiences like “pins and needles” feelings. On the other hand, it’s misused to refer to a transfer of power (“receiving the Spirit”) akin to being given another helping of mashed potatoes! This wrong-headed thinking concludes that the Spirit is not present until hands are laid on a person, or that a person cannot have the Holy Spirit abiding in them until some action is completed apart from believing in the Son. These conclusions are badly mistaken—God does not fragment himself! Moreover, God’s being and doing is not conditioned (dependent on), nor determined by, for example, the use of our hands in a prayer. We can’t claim to be “alive in Christ,” and that he resides in us, then turn around and claim he is somehow not in us. The apostle John put it this way: “He whom God has sent speaks the words of God; for he gives the Spirit without measure” (John 3:34 NASB).

It may surprise some folks to learn that anointing does not involve a tangible transfer of power as if anointing is like plugging a television into an electrical wall outlet. The Spirit’s power is not a commodity to be purchased, traded, exchanged or accessed like a physical form of power. Moreover, there is no such thing as the receiving of a single, double, or triple portion of the Spirit as though receiving him is like scooping extra servings of food onto a dinner plate. The Bible never has Jesus or any of his apostles teaching that we can receive such an “extra portion.” What we do find in Scripture is a sorcerer named Simon being rebuked by the apostle Peter for trying to buy a portion of the Spirit’s power (Acts 8:9-24).

At this point, some might be wondering about the story of Elisha in 2 Kings 2, and the account of Pentecost in Acts 2. Let’s take Elisha’s story first. You’ll recall that the Jordan River was parted for Elijah and Elisha’s benefit:

When they had crossed, Elijah said to Elisha, “Tell me, what can I do for you before I am taken from you?” “Let me inherit a double portion of your spirit,” Elisha replied. “You have asked a difficult thing,” Elijah said, “yet if you see me when I am taken from you, it will be yours—otherwise, it will not.” (2 Kings 2:9-10)

Elisha’s request was made in accordance with the legal terminology of Deuteronomy 21:17, which specifies that the firstborn was to receive pî šnayim (“a double share”) of his patrimony. So Elisha was not asking for a double portion of Elijah’s anointing, but for a double portion of his spirit, meaning to be heir to Elijah’s office and gifts. Here is a case of misreading what is actually said in Scripture through an overly literal interpretation. If someone says “you’re pulling my leg,” you know what it means—you haven’t literally grabbed his leg.

In Acts 2, Luke tells us what happened on the day of Pentecost following Jesus’ ascension. There is no reference in that account to people receiving a “portion” of the Holy Spirit. Nor does Luke tell us that there was a transfer of power from one person to another. Rather, he notes that God audibly and visibly set apart those who were there through the outpouring of the Spirit. The word anoint is not even used in that account, though we may legitimately view it that way since the anointing came directly from God. As Luke notes, everyone heard Peter’s sermon in their own language. The skeptics accused the participants of being drunk (in our day, a few attempt to interpret this as being “drunk in the spirit,” but the text does not support any such idea). Peter set them straight:

These people are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the morning! No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: “In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.” (Acts 2:15-18)

As Peter noted, this event was a fulfillment of prophecy. Jesus had instructed his disciples to wait in Jerusalem and they were blessed in doing so. It was the birth of the New Testament church.

Ultimately, the one who is supremely the anointed one is Jesus himself. His title, Messiah, is derived from the Hebrew word for anointed, and means “the anointed one.” “Christ” is the same title in Greek, derived from the word for anointee. In Scripture, Jesus Christ is portrayed as fulfilling in a full and final way the three anointed offices of prophet, priest and king. While in the Old Testament only special persons were anointed for God’s service, in the New Testament all believers receive the anointing by the Holy One (1 John. 2:20). God fulfills his plan for us by adopting us as his children by the work of Jesus in the Holy Spirit. That’s a true anointing—our sharing in Jesus’ own anointing, by the Spirit, who he sends to us in the name of the Father.

In the name of the Father, Son and Spirit,
Joseph Tkach

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Genesis is perhaps the most debated book in the Bible, largely because its purpose and nature are often misunderstood. Fundamentalists and evolutionists alike claim that Genesis conflicts with science. But Genesis makes no attempt to address many of the questions that are the concern of modern, evolutionary science. The purpose of the creation narratives in Genesis (there are two, as I explain below) is not scientific but theological (with philosophical and religious implications). The creation narratives reveal who the creator God is, what kind of relationship he has with his creation, and his ultimate purpose for his creation. Science has other concerns.

Evolutionary creation?

The creation narratives of Genesis do not give detailed descriptions of the mechanisms involved that explain exactly how creation came about or unfolded. The descriptions are not “scientific” (as we would say today) in that way. But that does not mean they are inaccurate about what they do explain. Unfortunately, many of the scientists in the ongoing debate make claims that are largely philosophical rather than strictly scientific. Scientist Richard Dawkins (one of the so-called new atheists), a vocal contributor to the debate, is a prime example. His arguments, rather than being about material aspects of creation ascertained by the scientific method, are philosophical claims involving speculative logical inferences about God, religion and evil made from selected scientific information. That being said, a right understanding of Genesis does not rule out the possibility that God has (at least in part) used evolutionary processes to advance his creative purposes.

The creation narratives in Genesis leave room for theistic evolution (others prefer the term evolutionary creation), by which God oversees evolutionary processes in bringing about his purposes for creation. God’s oversight of and intervention in his creation comes, ultimately, in and through Jesus Christ. Since Genesis and the rest of Scripture do not specify the means God used (and continues to use) in creating, we are free to adopt the best scientific theories available that do not contradict the theological claims of biblical revelation.

Why the Genesis creation narratives?

Because the purpose of the Genesis creation narratives is fundamentally theological, they rule out the claims of atheism, polytheism, deism and dualism. In fact, the Genesis creation narratives likely were written to address those who had heard of and possibly believed in the creation myths taught by the polytheistic religions of Babylonia, Akkadia and Egypt. Evidence for this is seen in the many similarities between the Genesis creation accounts and the Babylonian creation myth known as Enûma Eliš. One of those similarities is that both begin with a watery chaos.

Unfortunately, some skeptics go too far in what they make of these similarities, claiming that the author of Genesis merely changed the Babylonian creation myth to make it about the God of Israel. But in making that claim they fail to account for the crucial differences between the biblical and the polytheistic creation narratives. Genesis gives us a theological explanation of who God is quite different than that of the pagan myths. Whereas Genesis tells the story of the creation of humanity by the one God of Israel, Enûma Eliš tells the story of creation through many gods, who in turn give birth to several other gods who grow up to be quite a rowdy bunch (much like humans!).

Concerning the differences between the Genesis creation narratives and the Babylonian creation myth, Victor Hurowitz (in Is the Creation Story Babylonian?), wrote that it is “patently untenable” to speculate that the biblical authors simply took Enûma Eliš and “applied it to YHWH.” [1] As Hurowitz and others have noted, the character and purpose of the one creator God presented in Genesis is entirely different from the gods of the polytheistic creation myths. Consequently the depiction in Genesis of God’s relationship with humans is entirely different than the relationship between the gods and humans depicted in the pagan myths.

Reading Genesis rightly

Adding to the complexity of understanding Genesis is that it contains two creation narratives in its first few chapters. Current debates about Genesis often overlook this, along with three other facts: 1) the creation narratives are small parts of the larger whole of Genesis, 2) the focus of Genesis is not creation but the nation of Israel, 3) Genesis is part of the Pentateuch and the entire Bible, giving it a much larger context than is typically acknowledged.

It’s also important to note that Genesis must be read through ancient eyes rather than modern ones. These different “lenses” assume different things and ask different questions. Reading with ancient eyes requires that we become aware of our modern perspectives that mainly want to know how things work and how to use things for our purposes. Modern “scientific” explanations insist that we don’t need to know anything about any agent involved in creation, but only the mechanisms of the natural world. It also insists that there is no need to know the ultimate purposes of those things that exist—only how to use them for our own ends. In our modern era, these philosophical assumptions determine what constitutes scientific explanation, thus reducing the search for knowledge by asking essentially technological questions.

Reading Genesis rightly also requires that we understand what the original audience expected from stories such as the creation narratives. Ancient readers would not have looked to Genesis to learn how creation works at the natural, material and causal levels. Instead, they would have wanted to know about the agent(s) responsible for creation and its ultimate purpose or destiny.

Rather than trying to make Genesis answer modern, very constricted scientific questions it was not designed to address, we should ask, What questions was Genesis actually designed to answer? Genesis reveals theological truths about the agency behind creation and its purpose. It does this in fairly straightforward ways that do not require logical inferences and speculations about what is written.

For example, no passage of Scripture directly states the age of the universe. Trying to determine the date of creation from the Bible requires interpolating from what the biblical authors say about other things. But such interpolations (logical inferences) do not lead to truth. That is why the church, when it began to debate the improper question of the age of the universe, was unable to come to agreement. Those who contributed to the debate offered only unprovable theories based on unprovable assumptions, generated by logical inferences using biblical information provided for very different purposes! An example is the work of Bishop James Ussher who claimed to have calculated the exact date of creation based on inferences from biblical genealogies.

Another key issue in reading Genesis rightly is being able to identify the literary genre of the text. Tremper Longman III, professor of biblical studies at Westmont College, makes that point in his book, How to Read Genesis: “No reading of the book [of Genesis] can proceed without making a genre identification. Most people do it without reflection, a dangerous procedure since an error in this area results in fundamental misunderstanding of the book’s message” (p. 23).

Ultimately, the only way to rightly read Genesis is to read it through the “lens” of Jesus Christ—carefully accounting for his life, death, resurrection and ascension. In his Gospel, Luke tells us that, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, [Jesus] explained to [his followers] what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). Jesus then said to them, “‘This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44). Luke then tells us that Jesus “opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures” (Luke 24:45). It is Jesus—who he is and what he has done—that informs our understanding of Genesis as well as the rest of the Old Testament (and, indeed, the whole of Scripture).

The importance of seeing the whole picture

In Genesis: the Movie, Episcopal priest and scholar Robert Farrar Capon explains the book’s title and purpose:

[My purpose is to] help people stop reading the Bible as if it were a manual of instruction in religion or spirituality or morality or anything else and to start watching it as a film, presented to you by the Holy Spirit, who is the movie director. When you watch a movie, you don’t stop 10 minutes into the film and try to decide what it means. You cannot fairly say anything about the movie until you have seen the whole movie and hold it in your mind as an entirety—as a whole piece. And that is what needs to be done with the Bible. It has to be seen as one thing. So I’d like people to see biblical inspiration, not as a matter of word-by-word inspiration, but as scenes in the movie the way the director wants to show it to you, that is, scene-by-scene.

I think Capon is on to something here. If we don’t see the whole picture of the Bible, it’s easy to derive inaccurate meanings from passages that we are pulling out of the context of that one “movie.” It’s when we see what the Holy Spirit as the movie director is doing that we pick up the clues woven into the text. Capon’s book helps us understand not only the purpose of the book of Genesis, but how the whole of Scripture is integrated around the core of God’s ultimate plan of redemption in Jesus Christ.

Reading Genesis in the light of Jesus

I’m glad to say that my dear friend John McKenna (pictured at right) is writing a book that will offer important incarnational, Trinitarian perspective on Genesis. It will explain that Moses, the author of Genesis, was the great prophet who lived at the beginning of Israel’s history. It will note parallels between Moses and Jesus, referencing, for example, Deuteronomy 18:15 (KJV): “The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken.” Recognizing Moses as a prophet significantly impacts how we read Genesis.

John will also explain that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are “primordial prophecy” with the first chapter relating to the cosmos as first created or developed, and the second through the eleventh chapters relating to the earliest ages of history. John will explain that the remainder of Genesis is “ancestral prophecy”—telling the story of inheritance.

Please join me in encouraging Dr. McKenna to finish this important book, and also join me in reading Genesis from the perspective of who Jesus is and what his plan is for all humanity. After all, as Paul says in Colossians 1:15-20, everything was created through the Son, for the Son, and to be inherited by the Son of God. In the Old Testament, we see God’s faithfulness displayed in what he was doing to prepare the world for the Incarnation of the Son of God, leading to the redemption of all humanity in and through Jesus. It is in this light that Genesis is rightly read.

Rejoicing in the goodness of our Creator who is our Redeemer,
Joseph Tkach

PS: To read more on this topic, we recommend Three Views on Creation and Evolution, and Four Views on the Historical Adam. The latter book has a helpful chapter by Denis Lamaroux on evolutionary creation. Also click here for a related Surprising God post by Gary Deddo.

---

[1] Quoted from Exploring Genesis: The Bible’s Ancient Traditions in Context, a free e-book from the Biblical Archaeology Society. Here is an extended quote from Hurowitz’s chapter in that book:

As recent scholarship is making clear, simplistic comparison between Enûma Eliš and the biblical tradition—as if the Bible were directly dependent on Enûma Eliš and it alone—is patently untenable.… In light of all this and more, it is impossible to accept today in a simplistic manner the claims… that the biblical authors took the Babylonian Story of Creation, that is Enûma Eliš, and simply applied it to YHWH, God of Israel. The specific parallels are fewer than originally thought and even the best ones are not entirely certain. (pp. 11-12)

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

We’ve just completed the fourth of seven 2016 US regional conferences with the theme, Renewal: building on the foundation of Jesus. Jesus said he would build his church (Matthew 16:18), and he continues to do just that. Though some say Christianity is declining and dying, the opposite is true. According to a recent Pew Research Center study, the world’s Christian population is projected to grow from 2.2 billion in 2010 to 2.9 billion by 2050, meaning that nearly one in three people on earth will be Christian by mid-century. What excites me is that some of that growth will occur within our fellowship, Grace Communion International.

The wide spectrum of Christianity has three main branches: Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant. The Protestant branch, of which we are part, has multiple denominations, with some self-identifying as evangelicals. When asked, I explain that GCI is part of the evangelical community. Some ask what it means to be evangelical. Let me explain.

The term evangelical comes from the Greek word euangelion, which is used in the New Testament to refer to the good news (gospel). Evangelicals focus on proclaiming the good news about the salvation brought to sinners by Jesus Christ. An emphasis on the person and work of Jesus is thus essential, as is an emphasis on the importance of the Bible. Evangelicals are a vibrant, diverse group devoted to sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ. Evangelical believers are found in many denominations and churches, bringing together Reformed, Holiness, Anabaptist, Pentecostal, Charismatic, and other traditions.

When I say GCI is evangelical, I mean that in a theological sense. This is important to note because the term evangelical is often used in a sociological sense to refer to a large and diverse social-political grouping. Journalists often use the term in describing groups at the fringe of evangelicalism.

As most of you know, GCI became a member denomination of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) in 1997. I currently serve on its Board of Directors. The NAE was founded in 1942 and has grown to include more than 40 denominations, as well as universities, para-church ministries, publishers and independent churches. Knowing that the definition of evangelical has been confused (even misused), the NAE initiated a study in partnership with Lifeway Research to refine the definition of what it means to be evangelical. The result determined that an evangelical is identified by strong agreement with the following four statements:

• The Bible is the highest authority for what I believe.
• It is very important for me personally to encourage non-Christians to trust Jesus Christ as their Savior.
• Jesus Christ’s death on the cross is the only sacrifice that could remove the penalty of my sin.
• Only those who trust in Jesus Christ alone as their Savior receive God’s free gift of eternal salvation.

Though some who are part of the current Trinitarian renewal movement might word these statements somewhat differently, it should be noted that both Karl Barth and T.F. Torrance were happy to use the word “evangelical” in its theological sense.

In 1997, Don Argue, NAE president at the time, announced WCG’s (now GCI’s) acceptance into membership with this statement: “We see the dramatic changes that have occurred among our friends as God’s continuing efforts to bring renewal and revival for His glory.” This was a moment of qualitative growth for GCI and our growth (qualitative and quantitative) has continued.

In 2007 GCI had about 36,000 members worldwide (most in the US). Today we have nearly that many outside the US alone. While we have been staying even in numbers in the West (USA, Canada, Australia and UK), we have been on a growth spurt in Asia and Africa. In the West, though we have gained members and planted new churches, that growth has been offset by the number of people who have died or discontinued attending for a number of reasons, including relocating to areas where there are no GCI congregations.

In previous Weekly Update letters I’ve highlighted GCI’s rapid growth in Mozambique. Many of you have joined me in celebrating what the Holy Spirit is doing there. We are also celebrating wonderful growth in Togo and Tanzania where dozens of churches are joining us and new churches are being planted (click here to read a report from Kalengule Kaoma). There are other developments in the works that I hope to be able to share with you soon. By God’s grace, GCI is moving forward!

Please keep Kalengule and his family in prayer. He travels to some hard-to-get-to places. Also pray for our other mission developers as they continue to follow where the Spirit leads in spreading the good news in far-flung parts of the world. Living and sharing the gospel is our motto and mission, and that is what being evangelical is all about.

Celebrating what God is doing in and through us,
Joseph Tkach