New Thoughts: (09/12/15-09/16/15)
As has often been the case, it seems, I begin with a curiosity of translation. It concerns the way various translations handle verse 6. The NASB makes Paul’s aim, “that in us you might learn not to exceed what is written.” But, other translations, such as the NIV, put the idea as, “so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, ‘Do not go beyond what is written’”. I don’t see anything about matheete (you might learn) that suggests such an understanding. The only thing I see that seems a bit odd is that the article to (the) precedes the clause in question. At first, there appears to be nothing to which we can apply that article. But, apparently in some manuscripts, the verb phoneoo is to be found. This means ‘to think’, or ‘to feel’.
Thayer’s notes its presence here, and says that this speaks of allowing one’s opinion of self to go beyond the standards of Scripture. That feels even more at odds with the way the passage is generally presented. For, Paul continues to indicate his purpose in this as being so that, “you will not take pride in one man over against another” (NIV); or, “no one of you might become arrogant in behalf of one against the other” (NASB). Here, the idea is of boasting about somebody else, not self.
But, the actual reading is hina-mee heis huper tou henos phusiousthe kata tou heterou. Hina-mee is that clause of absolute negation, and heis is one, so ‘No way would one’. Huper tou henos would approximate as ‘over the one’. And kata tou heterou gives us ‘against the other’, or ‘down on any other’. That heterou can indicate a distinction of class or kind where it applies to some quality, but that doesn’t really seem to fit here. What I am left with is ‘No way would one be puffed up about one over the other.’ So, there is something of self-opinion here, but it’s second hand, isn’t it?
I don’t know that I’m getting any nearer to an answer to my question, though. I don’t find cause to take this as indicating something written. Typically, as seen in the many parallel verses that provide the clause, “it is written”, that writing is indicated by some form of grapho: To write. But, here, though the term is present in geraptai, it is clearly the point, not the source of the point. It is the thing not to exceed, not the source of the idea. “Don’t exceed what is written.” That’s the sum of it, and it’s applied to opinions formed of men.
If we will stick with what is written in the way we assess ourselves and others, we will find ourselves without cause to boast of one as better than another. That’s the message, isn’t it? Whether you are so vain as to boast of your own great progress in sanctification, which would only obviate the claim, or you are given to boasting about your preferred teacher as better than the rest, the problem remains the same: To promote any sort of claim of superiority on their behalf requires that we assess them by something other than the measure of Scripture. The verdict of Scripture has not changed with the arrival of the Apostles, and it certainly hasn’t changed for any who have arisen since. Here it is written! “There is none righteous, not even one. There is none who understands, none who seeks for God. All have turned aside together and become useless. No one does good. There is not even one. Their throat is an open grave and their tongues keep deceiving. The poison of asps is under their lips and their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. They run swiftly to shed blood, leaving destruction and misery in their paths. They have not even known the path of peace, for there is no fear of God before their eyes” (Ro 3:10-18). Paul is just quoting the prophets there, and he is quoting them to the New Testament church. Nothing has changed. We have nothing to boast of beyond the righteousness of Christ. There’s a reason Paul would preach nothing but Christ, and Him crucified. That’s the only message that matters!
Learn, then! That’s Paul’s aim here. Learn that those who teach in God’s service are not in competition with one another. They are servants and coworkers under the same Master, and that which they can teach you of your own standing before God assuredly applies to them as well. This, they know right well. If you had asked Paul whether he was including himself in that sad assessment from Romans, he would assuredly respond in the affirmative. If you had asked Apollos if he felt himself to perhaps be an exception to that rule, he would reject it outright. No! We are all men condemned for our constant infidelities, and not one of us can look to anything other than the shocking grace of God’s mercy in taking it upon Himself to fulfill the righteous demands of the Law on our behalf. Don’t go beyond what is written!
In this age of name-brand movements, where every preacher is graded on his publications as much or more than his pastoral efforts, we are forever being urged to exalt. Oh! This broadcast is so excellent. Well, I don’t care much for what that one is teaching. Have you heard? Don’t you read? What a powerful ministry! But, that one? Dead letter. No sense of the Spirit there.
Now, clearly, as concerns the soundness of what is taught, there is every cause to assess and discern. If the teaching is just plain bogus, or dangerously off-base, of course we should say something, cautioning one and all to steer clear. But, if it’s a game of comparison shopping. Maybe you prefer McArthur to Sproul, where I would hold Sproul in higher esteem than Horton. It doesn’t matter. They are servants of God, and I frankly doubt that they feel themselves to be in competition one with another. If they did, that alone would be cause to set them aside as any sort of advisor in the faith.
How far shall we take this? Does it matter if our chosen heroes are long dead and returned to the dust? I, for example, tend to prefer the older sources. Give me a Calvin, a Luther, or an Augustine, although Augustine’s a hard one to digest. But, they are not the source of Truth. They are not infallible guides. They must be assessed against Scripture, against what is written.
Today, I will be beginning a class on the London Baptist Confession. Do I therefore uphold, let us say, Baptists as superior to all other denominations? Do I insist that those who hold fast to this confession are superior to those who don’t? It’s tempting. But, it would be wrong. That is not the point. The confessions are no more infallible than their authors. While written by Spirit-filled men, they are still written by men. They are not divinely inspired writings. They are the results of men who have earnestly sought to fully and rightly understand divinely inspired writings. Given that all such men are not in full agreement as to what they have understood, we ought to be the more cautious in supposing our own views to be somehow beyond question.
As to Wuest’s interpretation of this as suggesting the promotion of one teacher, ‘as against another of a different character’, that feels to me as though he is over-insistent on that particular sense of hetero. Certainly, insomuch as we make distinction between one and another, it would have to be on the basis of some difference, whether of character, style, or merely emphasis. I think of that tendency to promote Pauline doctrine as differing from Petrine or Johannine. But, it is one body of doctrine elucidated by one Spirit. How, then, can it differ? In the style of presentation, there is absolutely a difference to be seen. In emphasis, perhaps, we find the primary concerns of each teacher distinct. But, as to the content? They are one as He is One.
It might seem as though Paul’s thoughts have jumped the track going into verse 7, but note the connection. At the end of verse 6, he’s once again addressing the problem of arrogance: Inflated assessment of self. In verse 7, it’s still that same self being assessed, but now it’s by others. Who accounts you superior (besides yourself)? This is particularly apt, given the nature of their boasting. Really? You’re something special because you hold high opinion of somebody else? That’s it? That’s your claim on superiority? Now, the ground is prepared for the rest of that verse. What do you have that you didn’t get from elsewhere? And, if everything you have is secondhand, why are you boasting as if you produced it yourself? Yes. I’m paraphrasing heavily there. But, only because I don’t want the connecting thought lost.
Your pride is in your teacher? One could almost accept lifting up a good teacher – almost. But, to lift up of yourself based on nothing more than having followed a teacher you consider good? What’s that? Presumably, it would be a rare disciple indeed who chose a teacher he didn’t presume to be worth following. I suppose there may have been those who, having been rejected by the rabbi of their choice, and opted for a lesser teacher. But, then, we’re dealing with Greeks here, not Jews. It would be like taking up with a philosopher whose philosophy you didn’t really consider so very sound. In short, your claim to superiority is based on thinking like any other person would think.
Let me contextualize a bit. I tend to a view of doctrine that conforms pretty consistently with Reformed theology. I must take care, however, that I don’t become proud in that choice. Surely, those who hold a more Arminian understanding of doctrine are as confident of their own choices, at least those who have thought things through. Surely, the Anabaptists are as firm in their convictions as the stoutest Presbyterian, and those who hold an earnest faith modeled on Congregational tenets are no less certain of themselves than Baptists. To be sure, we can find those who walk in little more than an inherited faith, or thoughtless acceptance in any congregation. We tend to hold to the tenets upon which we were raised, assuming we were raised in the church, and we may never have given them much thought. Some of the great questions of theology don’t really resonate until one is given cause to question them.
But, here’s the thing: If I begin to hold out my Reformed understanding as some sort of proof of superiority, or if I begin to look down upon my Arminian brothers as clearly misinformed, then what has happened? I have become arrogant on behalf of one against the other. I find myself having fallen prey to the very thing Paul is addressing in the church at Corinth. And, lest there be any doubt, were he writing to me, he would be on target. It is well and good to suppose we have the right doctrine. It would be rather distressing if we didn’t operate on that supposition. If we don’t believe it is the truth of God that we hold to, why are we holding to it at all? But, if we suppose we have cornered the market on the true understanding of God, that we, finally after all these centuries, have the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, we are setting up for a fall. We remain imperfect beings with partial sight of heaven’s grandeur. We are pretty sure we’ve got it right, but we need simultaneously to be even more certain that in some regards, we’ve most certainly got it wrong. We remain in need of teaching, however much we advance our learning.
That’s at least one perspective on what Paul is telling us here – and don’t lose sight of this: He’s telling us. It’s not just the Corinthians of the first century that had problems. It’s the Americans of the twenty-first. It’s the Europeans, the Asians, the Africans. Count down another few thousand years, and whatever the nations are at that point, the problems are unlikely to have changed significantly. Neither will the solution.
Let’s look at it. Here’s the answer Paul provides: Whatever gifts and advancements you have, they are received from Christ, not self-generated. When Festus commented on Paul’s great learning driving him mad, it was no cause for Paul to be puffed up and proud of himself. His great learning wasn’t something he’d generated. It wasn’t even the result of chasing down good teachers and reading good textbooks. He’d tried that, and it left him, by his own assessment, the worst of sinners. His learning came because Christ gave it to him. Christ took him. Christ claimed him. Christ sent him off into a mini-exile so that He might correct the accumulated error of Paul’s prior learning. Self-generated? No thank you!
This, though, is a humbling perspective. What I have is not by the sweat of my brow, nor is it by some internal genius of my own. What I have is that which Christ has given me. What I have that is True, I have because He has corrected me sufficiently in regard to my error. As one who, much to his own surprise, discovered his understanding moved from Arminian to Calvinist, I dare not let this become my assurance. My assurance is not to be found in the words of any man, however much I respect those words. Their words are not inerrant, and while it may give me pause to disagree with better minds, yet if the Word of God drives me to disagreement, I must do so with all due respect. If others, equally zealous in their pursuit of God’s truth, have arrived at a different understanding than I have, it behooves me not to assume my own superiority of knowledge and understanding, but rather, to seek of the Lord that He might bring correction wherever it is needed, whether in myself or in some other.
It is a humbling thing to be reminded that whatever it is I may have achieved, it’s not my doing anyway. If I am able to teach, it is because He has chosen to empower. If I stumble and stutter, it is very likely because I’ve lost sight of this truth. If I teach only to show how much I’ve learned, there I am again: Arrogant on behalf of another. This is not the way to help the kingdom of God.
At the same time, we must remain aware that our rich history, with all its disagreements and debates, is not really one of each generation surpassing the last. The words of our first Teacher remain as valid today as ever. Remember: A slave is not greater than his master (Jn 15:20a).
This thought permeates the remainder of the passage, as Paul draws contrast between his reality and their perceptions of themselves. It has already begun with the comment about their boasting. You keep saying you’re something special, but why? The most you can say for yourselves is that you took what was given to you. What’s so special about that? Now, he moves on to probe at their overinflated egos. You have apparently decided you have everything you need. Your wisdom and power are complete to the point that you figure you can just leave us behind. You’re already kings, and that without our company!
You could almost suppose Paul was singing their praises in earnest if it weren’t for the setting. Here is a case where pulling verses out of context could leave one driving to precisely the wrong conclusion. Think about it. Verse 8, in isolation, seems very encouraging of the view. You have arrived, man! You’ve got it all and you’ve got it working for you. Everything here is in the Indicative Mood. It’s all being put forth as statement of fact. And we even get that excited semi-endorsement at the end. Would indeed that this is the case! To be clear, that, too, is left in the Indicative. In a different setting, we might hear it more as, “I hope it’s true, because then I’ll be joining you.” But, the context does not permit it. Only by excising the verse from its surroundings can we achieve so positive a spin.
No, Paul is clearly doing no more than to set forth their opinion in regard to themselves. And his conclusion? If only! The sum of that last clause is really saying that if their opinion were as well founded as it is glowing, it could only mean that his own time had come, too. There was no possibility that they were going to reign as kings without him, so if they reigned as kings, it could only mean that he likewise had entered into his reign. You cannot exceed your master.
The slave is never greater than his master, nor the student his teacher. If they persecuted Christ, they will persecute you. If they persecuted the Apostles, they will persecute you. That doesn’t require you to think yourself their equal. You will never be the Christ, though you follow Him all your days. You will never be an Apostle, though you cleave to their teachings with all your will. To follow as a disciple of such a teacher is not the same as becoming that teacher.
Take the idea and apply it to the philosophers of whom the Corinthians were so enamored, along with all Greece. Plato was a student of Socrates. He became a man of renown in his own right, but he did not become Socrates. Likewise, Aristotle was Plato’s student, and he, too, made great strides in thought and understanding. But, for all that, he never became Plato, or even Plato Jr.
We can, and to some degree should give careful attention to the great men who have preceded us. I think particularly of the great theologians who have carefully delved the depths of Scripture and brought forth troves of spiritual gems. These they recorded for our benefit, and it was done as the Spirit of God prompted. That is not to say that their writings are on the same God-breathed level as Scripture. But, they were men of God who took their faith seriously enough to lay their lives on the line for what they believed. The concern for Truth and for True Faith was, I dare say, a great deal stronger then than it is in our sad, post-modern age. So, then, we are fools to ignore them. We would also be poor students of those same Scriptures were we to set them on the same level as the Apostles.
Be that as it may, however much I may adhere to the theological framework that Calvin set down in writing for the benefit of the Church, and however much I may think myself a Calvinist, I shall never be Calvin. I shall never begin to approach Augustine, though I greatly value his thinking. Neither, I should have to say outright, can I claim to be in absolute agreement with either man. Yet, their words carry weight, and if I must diverge from their opinions on occasion, I do so with a degree of trepidation and a much greater degree of care.
We have received what men such as these have provided as our inheritance, every bit as much as we have received the very Word of God in the pages of Scripture laid down by prophet and apostle. Some will consider that a fine thing, and then point around the landscape at the many and sundry claimants to being teachers, prophets, and even apostles in our own day and ask on what basis we would determine which should be believed and which not. On what grounds, they might ask, do you so swiftly discount this one who says he’s an apostle? On what basis do you so readily set aside the prophecies of this fellow with his YouTube channel? Is it not possible that they are making just as great an addition to the body of sound doctrine as those you hold up from the past?
Well, let us consider. Do they take so great a care with the Scripture as those from the past? Do they test their grand statements against a clear and careful understanding of what God has already said? Do they test their proclamations for accuracy, or do they merely lay claim to the Holy Spirit’s endorsement of whatever happens to pop into their minds? The problem is that the only way to get a clear and accurate reading of the answers to such questions is to allow the test of time to reveal that which was true and that which was false. The reason we count those men as great men of the Church who helped lay out the foundations of its thinking can be found in the fact that they have, indeed, stood the test of time. I will even say that this holds as much for Arminius as for Calvin. Luther, for all that he is faulted for thinking like a citizen of his particular time and place, has stood the test of time. The Church, not this denomination or that, but the Church as a greater whole, has looked upon these men repeatedly, and found that while not one of them is perfect, all of them have made carefully considered and worthwhile contributions to our understanding of God and man, church and faith.
Whatever gifts and advancements in Christ each of these men had, they had as something received. They did not produce self-generated, self-serving doctrines of deceit. They did not do as they did in hopes of gaining a following, or accumulating a lot of likes on Facebook. They did so because they served the Lord God, and wanted those they served to learn to do likewise. Richly had they received, and richly did they give. To a man, I suspect, they gave out of the wealth God had provided them to their own hurt. In this, they showed themselves true disciples of the Apostles and of Christ.
Go back to our passage. Paul describes the situation for himself and for his fellow apostles. We are on display. We’re back here at the end of the parade, the ones marked out for execution in the arena. We will be set against trained gladiators and wild beasts for the amusement of the worldly. Angels and men alike look at our situation with a mixture of amazement and dismay. These are the men God plans to use to establish His kingdom? Really? Just look at them! They are weak, powerless creatures who can’t even see to their own needs. Theirs is not even to do or die. It’s only to die. But, then, think of their King. He was born to die. His whole purpose in life was to come to its end, that by ending it not only would He live, but we might live. These men, devoted to His service, could not be expected to do less than to willingly follow Him even to their own death.
Against this picture, Paul holds up the one the Corinthians have painted of themselves. Here are the Apostles: Condemned men whose foolishness has left them weak and devoid of any honor in the sight of man. Here are the Corinthians: Men wise and strong, honored by one and all in the world. Which looks more like Jesus? “We are fools! Yes, for the sake of Christ.” But, you? You revert to philosophical form, and suppose that to follow Christ is to display the same sort of wisdom, prudence, sophistry that define the great philosophers of Greece. You mistake fine language for knowledge. But, whatever your gifts and advancements in Christ, they remain things received, not something you have generated in your own strength. Worded differently, whatever you have from your own strength is vanity and wind.
If you are His, you will keep His word. If you are His, you will keep my word, for my word comes of keeping His. Thus might we find Paul applying the words of Jesus from John 15:20 to the situation. As I have been saying, that message reverberates throughout this passage.
But, bring it forward. We are in a day and age that has less and less esteem for history. Many describe the situation as having begun by and large with my own generation, and the sense that nothing of any importance happened prior to our arrival on the scene. The world, let us say, prior to World War II, has nothing to tell us. We are so much more advanced. Perhaps now, we can date that to the dawn of the computerized age. This is an attitude that permeates society right now. It informs our politics, our arts, our education, and our sciences. It informs our churches, sad to say. Too much of the religious landscape today is built on more or less throwing out the past because our new ideas are clearly superior. Our programs are going to work because, well, they’re ours! They’ve got to be better than that stolid, boring stuff they had back in the Victorian age. Certainly, we’re far superior to the Puritans or the Pilgrims. It just stands to reason!
But, the student is never greater than his teacher. I should think it a much more likely assessment of the situation to suppose the church has been falling almost from inception, each age a little less true to Christ than the last. I am mindful that the Reformation was not a throwing out of the past, but rather an attempt to relocate it, to cut out some of the cruff that had accumulated. Paul describes the Apostles here as being viewed as the offscoured scum of the world. They were treated like something you ought to scrape off your shoes before you come in the house. That’s an image that has a particular poignancy for farming communities. It would have for Roman and Grecian society as well, given the way streets doubled as sewers.
We have a different issue. We see our own forebears in that same sort of light. We look back at these ancient men of faith, and write them off as poor, uninformed primitives. They have to have been. Just compare the lifestyles. Compare our scientific advancements. Compare our concern for the health and welfare of the world! Yes. Please do. But, make it an honest comparison.
Those men of the 16th century saw that what needed offscouring was the scum of the world that had accumulated on the Church. The Church needed cleaning, and they were willing to risk life and limb to see the Church restored. Notice that word. Restored. Not remade. Not reimagined. Returned to its proper forms. That did not necessarily mean trying to re-establish the primitive church, although in some corners, that was indeed the idea. No. It meant holding up every practice, tenet, and teaching of the Church against the light of Apostolic teaching, against the message of Scripture, to see whether it was of one accord or not. That which was found at odds with Scripture must be scraped off, that the beauty, the blazing purity, of God’s intended Church might shine once more.
Did that mean absolute agreement amongst all those reformers? Clearly not. They had their disagreements, and almost all of them persist right down to our own day. Are we demonstrating our superior understanding when we belittle these differences, or seek to ignore them so that we can all ‘just get along’? Are we more Christian for being so concerned to address the worldly needs of our congregations? Or, are we demonstrably less Christian in proving ourselves less concerned for their eternal needs?
We blind ourselves with our self-importance every bit as much as these Corinthians were doing. We pronounce ourselves wonderful, and ever so devoted to Christ, all the while demonstrating that nothing could be further from the truth. We are devoted to the flesh, and have tried to put His seal upon our opinions. We are too advanced to learn from our forebears, too enlightened, even to settle for the simple message of the Gospel. How greatly we would benefit from considering the implications of this! The message of the Gospel, the message of the Cross, is foolishness to those who are dying. They’re sure they’ve got a better message, a greater truth. And they will follow it right into the pit of Hell. Is that really the model we should choose?
We can feed the world, clothe the naked, and redistribute the wealth so that nobody lacks a thing. We can see to every earthly need of every last person we encounter. And, we would feel so good about ourselves for having done so! Why, just look at us! And, I will tell you that we should care about these things. Our Lord does call us to such acts. But, they are not our primary purpose – not in life, and not in ministry. However well we provide for those around us, they are just as dead. Their situation is just as dire. If we are looking to their physical needs and leaving the spiritual matters as secondary, we are in reality leaving them in worse shape than we found them. Now, they are convinced that the Church endorses this same materialistic perspective, and if they’re physical all right, they must be spiritually all right. No need for confession or repentance if you’ve got a good car, comfy clothes, and a roof over your head. Clearly, God is pleased with you, so what’s to confess?
Our forebears knew better. We would do better to learn from their learning. Observe their mistakes, yes, and seek to avoid repeating them. But, don’t discount their successes. Those, we ought to repeat as often as we may. We serve a Church that is, or should be, constantly reforming itself, constantly assessing its practices for validity. The scraper we are given consists of the Word of God. It is strengthened for us by those who have examined the Scriptures in regard to their own practices, and left us a record of their findings. Let us, then, be willing to take that scraper and apply it to the soles of our own practice, lest we come to the end of our days only to discover that the only Judge that matters looks upon us as scum and off-scrapings.
The rest of Paul’s words through verse 13 really just complete the contrast. It’s a litany of abuses heaped upon the Apostles. At first, he simply discusses the fundamental hardships of life on the road. There’s never enough, and nothing but work, work, work. And, they can’t even keep it to the work of the ministry. No. Atop all the labors of establishing these churches, they’ve got to support themselves, too. They’re men with two jobs, three even. Yet, this is the same Paul who has the secret of doing with plenty or with want. His satisfaction isn’t found in the stuff of this life. It’s found in Christ.
What we see here is that the Apostles share in the repute of the Gospel. That is to say, the Christian is perceived in the same light as Christianity. What is that perception? “The word of the cross is foolishness to the perishing” (1Co 1:18a). To us who are being saved it is the power of God, as that verse concludes. But, from the world’s perspective, it’s a pack of retrograde nonsense, and we are fools to believe it. Those who have dedicated their lives to its service more fully are greater fools – or charlatans. The jury’s still out on that. It is, once again, the point that the student does not excel the teacher. Our teacher is Christ. He has sent His Apostles as professors and tutors serving under His command. Now, we are a nation of priests, as Scripture says, scattered amongst all the lands of mankind, all of us serving together under Christ and His Apostles, continuing the work they have begun, all to the glory of our King. But, we shall continue to be thought fools by the world. Let us not so comport as to be found fools by our own brethren.
In that sense, I think of our brothers and sisters overseas, seeking Christ under much harder circumstances. If they hear of our situation at all, what must they think of us? They face death and worse for confessing the name of Christ. We face, perhaps, some ridicule. They may have their throats cut for proclaiming the Gospel. We might get called to the boss’s office and asked to save it for our off hours.
Look at the dedication and perseverance demonstrated by the Apostles. We work for no pay in harsh circumstances amidst an ungrateful people. We are hungry, thirsty and cold at most times. We are beaten and laughed at, but we do not respond in kind. We bless. We seek to be conciliatory. If they persecute us, we hold ourselves erect and firm, steady in our faith and steady in our conduct. The whole thing builds to that concluding crescendo of humiliation. We are considered as scum, as off-scrapings; dregs; dung on the shoes of humanity. That is certainly what a post-Christian world thinks of us, just as did the pre-Christian world. If there was a season when this did not hold, it has come and gone.
What to do? Follow the example set by those you claim to follow. If you lead, lead by serving. If you serve, serve as serving the Lord directly. Account yourself the least significant of those amongst whom you find yourself. May I just say, this doesn’t only apply to our treatment of one another in the ministry. It applies equally well to our treatment of those yet in darkness. If we seek to bring them the Gospel from a place of pride and arrogance, it will avail us nothing. Our example belies our message. No. I think it is particularly needful as we bring the Gospel to those who have their own beliefs to come in humility, offering a better way with a servant’s heart and care. I come not to belittle your upbringing, what your parents taught you. I come not to belittle your commitment and faith. I come to show you another way, one which will serve you better; one which leads to life.
Consider Paul’s approach in Athens. Admittedly, it was not his most successful effort. But, he did not come at them belittling their myriad gods, or laughing at their polytheism. He actually honored them for their piety. From that launching point, he moved to explain to them the One they sought to worship as they considered the unnamed god. You have been seeking without benefit of full knowledge. Let me help. That’s a far better approach than dismissing their religious pursuits as horribly misguided and then offering to set them straight. These may have the same goal, but only one is likely to achieve that goal.
Whatever resistance or ridicule you face for standing in your faith, stand. Let your character and your demeanor reflect the message that is in you. Let them be your message, for the aphorism is true, that actions speak louder than words. If, on the other hand, you allow yourself a display of pride or pique, how shall you pronounce yourself a disciple? Now, I know as well as you that our example is never perfect. No man holds to his moral code as he ought. That’s been the underlying weakness that gets used to play the gotcha game with various politicians. You say you’re for this, but look! You do that. It’s also been the great weakness of the Church as it seeks to declare the Lord. You say you believe this, but look! You do that. You say He’s made you a new man, but you still stink just like the old one.
Over against that stands the Apostle: They revile, we bless. They persecute, we endure. They slander, we reconcile. We shall not return evil for evil. Now, let it be said: With man, this is impossible. But, with God, all things are possible. If we will seek Him with all our hearts, He will fill all our hearts. He will grant us the strength to persevere. That’s never been the problem. The problem has always been that however willing we are in spirit, the flesh remains weak. We are committed in principle, in theory. The question is whether we are committed in spirit and in truth.
The sum of the message is this: If you are disciples, you should be living and thinking like the One you follow. If you are a Christian, this should certainly imply that you live and think like Christ. That is not in any way to say that you are, or shall become, little gods. But, He has said it plainly enough. “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments” (Jn 14:15).
So, let’s turn this around just for a moment. Your living and thinking do reflect discipleship. It is often said that every man is slave to some master. We can rephrase that to say that every man is the disciple of some teacher. Discipleship is not the question. The question is what teacher are you really following? I must stress that this is not a question of what teacher you think you are following, or what teacher you claim to be following. What teacher do your deeds declare that you really are following?
It is a test, I fear, that few if any will pass. There are times when I think I can say that my Teacher is clearly to be seen in my discipleship. But, there are also times when this is most clearly not the case. It ought not to be so, but our Lord sees fit to keep us ever mindful of our need for Him. We shall not excel Him. In this life, it’s a safe bet that we shall not even meet His example. We are forever falling short of the measure of God. But, He is forever drawing us nearer the mark, forever accounting for our shortfall, that we may, in the end, be found (and manifestly shown to be) righteous in Him.
In the meantime, Lord, I pray that You would grant me the strength of Spirit to indeed stand firm in this faith You have given me. May my example consistently show the watching world that I am Yours, and there can be no better thing. May I live in such a way as to make Your glory known, Your Gospel desired, and Your Truth honored.
