Court in Session (08/18/26-08/19/26)

The account of this trial, for that’s what it was, contains a surprising level of detail.  The significance of these details may escape us somewhat, and in some cases may even seem superfluous.  But if nothing else, it suggests that Luke’s source in regard to these early events had first-hand knowledge of what had happened. This court was in session, and as we have seen, these sessions were to be held in daylight hours.  It is something of an assumption, but it seems to me at least one reason for this rule was that those governed by the Sanhedrin ought to have access to the deliberations of the Sanhedrin.  Alternately phrased, justice ought to be open to scrutiny.  It is rarely if ever served by secret courts and hidden hearings.

But who do we have gathered here?  Luke identifies three groups:  The rulers, the elders, and the scribes.  If I have properly understood the articles on the Sanhedrin, it would seem that it is in fact the Great Sanhedrin which is described.  There was indication that three divisions pertained to this council covering political, religious, and judicial matters.  That could be represented to us here in Luke’s three groups, the rulers being the political, the scribes the religious, and the elders the judicial sub-groups.  If this is indeed the case, then Peter and John have been brought before what was effectively the Supreme Court of Israel.  A comment from Hastings’ article makes this seem all the more likely to me.  That article observes that the Great Sanhedrin was authorized to pronounce verdicts in cases involving a false prophet, among other things.  This particular function would appear to have driving force in bringing these two to trial.  It is also the likely driver for bringing Jesus to trial.  But in both, I would have to observe that the political aspects of the group clearly also had their part.  In both cases, the ones brought to trial were perceived as a threat to their position.

I would also have to note that as Peter and John face this court, they do so with the experience of Jesus’ trial behind them.  They have learned by example, and that will demonstrate in Peter’s defense before this august body.  They have gathered in number and arrayed themselves to impose a powerful sense of their power and authority.  But we shall come to that in the next part of this exercise.

I remain curious as to the mention of John and Alexander by name.  It seems to be to no particular purpose.  It may be that by the time Luke is writing these two had risen to their own place.  John, it seems, did eventually become high priest, or at least president of the Sanhedrin, though this would appear to have happened subsequent to the destruction of Jerusalem, which places it too late for Luke’s experience.  Alexander is suggested as having a position of influence in Alexandria from whence Apollos came.  So he may have been familiar to Luke, at least by name, from discussions with that man.  But as to the reason for the Holy Spirit seeing fit to preserve their presence at this trial, I really do not see it.  As I say, it certainly attests to the knowledgeable sources to whom Luke has turned for the facts.  But beyond that, nothing.

So, here we are.  The court is in session, and bolstered, it seems, by a strong contingent of the high priestly families, which would suggest that perhaps the Sadducees wished to exert greater influence over the proceedings, as most if not all of the high priestly families were of that sect.  But the Pharisees are represented on the council as well.  This does not yet appear to cause any issues as regards the dealings with Peter and John, but it will as things develop, all the more when Paul starts having an impact.

But there is one further aspect to this court setting that I would emphasize.  The court has gathered to judge these two men.  But the court has simultaneously been gathered to be judged by Him who they claim to represent.  In that sense, what we see before us is a contesting of the old order by the new, or a rejection of the old order by Him Who establishes order.  We are witnessing a contest, if you will, between the teachers of the Law and the teachers of Grace.  From the standpoint of man, grace is on trial.  But from the standpoint of God, we might well say that law is on trial.  That may seem to overstate the case, but I don’t think it does necessarily.  Let us rather say it is the teachers of grace or the teachers of law that are on trial, each by the other.  The Law, after all, remains good, as Paul makes certain we understand.  But the Law, apart from Grace, is deadly.  It can only convict and condemn, never deliver.  And so we find in Peter’s first response a direct shot at the root issue with a Law devoid of grace:  We are on trial for a good deed done.  Here you are, the officialdom of religious life, the generally accepted arbiters of the ancient faith, and you have held us overnight for doing good!

We are not given to hear Peter’s tone in delivering his response, but nothing suggests anger or disrespect.  Had there been a hint of that, no doubt, the council would have reacted much as they did with Jesus, seeking to disabuse them of their disrespect and remind them forcibly who’s in charge.  But these words, delivered with calm reserve, would only be the more biting.  And Peter has the advantage.  He has the very present Holy Spirit as his counselor and restraint.  His normal, fiery self is still present, but is, shall we say, on a very tight leash.

Now, before we turn to the contest itself, I would speak somewhat to the lesson of this council.  We mustn’t lose sight of the content and impact of what Peter had been declaring to the people outside yesterday.  His message, truthful as it was, declared facts that were directly in opposition of the official account.  He declared Jesus resurrected and alive.  They had declared Him dead, and His body somehow stolen.  If Peter is found true, they must be found liars.  There is one impossible outcome for this trial, and that is that both parties should be found true.  And so, rather than seeking the truth – after all, they already know that the truth is not on their side – they are seeking to preserve position.  They would rather be thought right than be right.  How strong was this urge with them?  Peter’s just hit them with the answer!  "You’ve put us on trial for doing a good deed?”

Let us take warning from this.  We may well be such as have become wise in our own eyes.  I would say it’s somewhat to be expected if we have been seeking to understand God’s word and His ways.  If we have come to actual belief, by which I mean beliefs that are developed and concrete, which have been incorporated into the fabric of our being, into the course of our thinking, then I would rather hope we are convinced of the truth of those beliefs.  But then, we must likewise expect that those who adhere to the ideas of secular humanism or post-modernism, for all that we find it detached from reality and evidence, are fully convinced of the truth of their beliefs.  And that should be our warning.  We could yet be very wrong in our beliefs, even as we see that they are.  One would hope we are not so very far wrong as all that, that we have not come to deny physical evidence or the pathways of reason.  But still, when once we have come to a defined belief system, it can be hard to accept suggestions that portions of that system are perhaps in need of revision.

Obviously, as Christians we must hold to a core set of truths as non-negotiable.  The virgin birth, the sinless life, the death and resurrection of Jesus are not up for debate.  The reality of His being God Incarnate, simultaneously God and man, is so necessary to the plan and purpose of salvation as God has ordained and established it, that this, too, must be put beyond debate.  I would say the Triune Godhead, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is too thoroughly attested by Scripture to be debated.  And that being our source, we must also hold to the Scriptures as the inerrant, infallible work of the Holy Spirit, though written by men of God’s own choosing.

Yet, we have all of these other concerns that arise as we seek to understand God’s truth, and we will no doubt encounter others who are equally committed to understanding His truth who have arrived at very different understanding of these same points.  The truth of it is that no matter how careful we seek to be to practice sound exegesis, we still have the filter of our current understanding active as we read.  We will tend to interpret on the basis of what we consider established truth, and as such, find every exercise reinforcing what we already believe we know.  This renders correction difficult.  We may well come to discover that we have become too much like these rulers, elders, and scribes, ready to disregard the clear evidence brought before us by some unwelcome voice in favor of maintaining our own opinions.  But who knows through whom God may choose to speak a needful word of correction?  Will we indeed reject His instruction because of the messenger He has chosen?  We must take care.  We must remain prayerful.  Above all, we must remain humble in our opinions, in order that we may hear God speak, whether He speaks in agreement or speaks in pursuit of correcting our errors.

Father, I know this is something I need to take to heart.  I have been so many years now in these studies, and I become the more convinced as to my understanding of Your ways.  I must ask.  I must ask You, for I am not at all sure I could trust myself to answer rightly:  Have I understood rightly, or are there firmly held beliefs of mine that are yet invalid.  Or, which may be worse, have I settled for philosophical understandings, mere ideas, in place of the realities of walking with You?  That, too, I could readily believe of myself.  I see how I react to those whose conceptions of You are so very much at odds with what I think I know of You, and what those reactions reveal of me are not as they should be.  Yet, does that indicate their understandings ought to be accepted as correct, or simply that I remain a piece of work in Your hands, still far from complete?  Whatever the case may be, Lord, I pray You will retain or restore a spirit in me that is prepared to hear what You have to say, even at the cost of letting go of things I thought I knew as bedrock Truth.  You’ve had to do it before with me.  It would not, or at least ought not surprise me over much to find You need to do so again.  What can I say to this?  Have Your way in me, and I pray, find me willing to Your way.

A Question of Authority (08/19/26-08/20/26)

We are invited to witness a court in session as we come to this scene.  And it’s not the first time we’ve been invited into the workings of this particular court.  We saw it in the confrontations of these representatives and Jesus.  This was something of a trial, though not that one which resulted in His being brought to Pilate for crucifixion.  We are in the final week of Jesus’ ministry on earth in His humility.  He has made His triumphant entry into Jerusalem, cleared the marketplace the priests had caused to be set up in the court of the Gentiles, and gone back to Bethany for the night, returning to temple the next day.  And there, we are told, "the chief priests and the elders of the people came to Him” demanding answers (Mt 21:23).  "By what authority are You doing these things?  Who gave You this authority?”  There is a tacit understanding in these questions.  We are the authorities, and we didn’t authorize you.  And if we didn’t do it, well!  How dare you!

On that occasion, as I say, it is not an official session of the Sanhedrin that we have under observation, but perhaps a precursor to that, somewhat akin to the arrest of Peter and John yesterday.  The court is not in session as yet, but it is being called for the next day.  And now, here we are:  Court is in session.  And the question is put to these two.  "By what power, or in what name, have you done this?”  It’s the same question, really.  That these two had done something wondrous could hardly be denied.  As Peter will soon observe, the man to whom it was done is there standing beside them.  The evidence of a miracle is inescapable.  But the question remains.  "Who authorized you?”  We didn’t.  I have to wonder, for all this show of gathering in their numbers, encircling these two in what seems like an effort to intimidate, were they in fact fearful?  For they must have sensed the answer.  I’ve heard it said many a time that a wise lawyer does not ask a question before the court to which he does not already know the answer.  And these, if they had not heard it themselves, must surely have caught wind of what Peter and John had been teaching yesterday.  "Repent that God may send Jesus, the appointed Messiah, who is in heaven until the appointed time of restoration” (Ac 4:19-21).

Who authorized this?  In whose name are you acting?  Understand, this is something far stronger than some question of who are you voting for.  It’s a drumbeat I know I hit often, but it needs hitting.  This name after which they ask is not merely "Jesus the Nazarene.”  We might well hear it as asking, "What power do you serve?”  And that, I would note, gets us to one of the core functions of the Sanhedrin: the examination and ejection of false prophets.  What power do you serve?  We speak for God, who do you speak for?  That’s somewhat the attitude behind the question.  We are the religious authorities.  We define what is sound doctrine and practice.  Who are you to do or say anything counter to our august wisdom?

Who is your authority?  Who do you represent?  What is the source of this power you exercise?  Recall, this is the same bunch who accused Jesus of performing His miracles by the power of Beelzebul (Mt 12:24).  He, in turn, pointed out the absurdity of the charge, but it demonstrates the degree to which they were prepared to dismiss the obvious in order to maintain their position and power.  There was no place in their theology for a real and present Messiah.  The theory was fine, but they would not have it in practice.

So, the religious authorities bring these men to trial.  They are being examined for evidence of being false prophets.  After all, signs and wonders are insufficient in and of themselves.  They do not establish truth.  And we ought rightly to remain mindful of that, for this is not the erroneous opinion of man, but the clear declaration of Scripture.  Yet, that is a far cry from saying that every man who comes with a different interpretation, a different understanding, is de facto wrong.  That is where their error came.  They had come to assume the rightness of their own doctrines as bedrock; and that, even though among their own number there existed strong disagreements.  We will see those fissures worked to good advantage by Paul.  The doctrinal distinctives of Sadducee and Pharisee put them at loggerheads on certain subjects, even though both were represented on this council.  And nothing, it seems, was more suited to expose the disunity than the subject of resurrection.

They ask:  "Who authorized you?”  Peter answers.  "This was done by the power and authority of Jesus Messiah.”  And already, we have a major jab at these authorities.  In our translations, and in fact in any translation that seeks to rightly render the Greek, we will find Peter has referred to Him as Jesus Christ, and to make clear which Jesus he is talking about, he adds, "the Nazarene.”  But Peter is not supplying a surname here to distinguish which Jesus.  He did that by indicating his hometown.  You know, that Jesus who came from Nazareth.  You remember Him?  He is Messiah!  And right there, on that one word, he has put the court on trial.  They, after all, utterly rejected that claim.  Had they not done so, they could not possibly have arrived at the decision to see Him put to death, declared a criminal of the worst sort.  This is the one God sent to save you!  This is the one you have been waiting for lo, these many years!  And you rejected Him.  You destroyed Him.   Or tried to, anyway.

I don’t see anything to suggest Peter was taking a defiant tone with them, yet there is nothing he could have said that would be more defiant.  And he doesn’t stop with that, does he?  He reminds them of the enormity of their error.  In case there is any misunderstanding, not that any such misunderstanding was really possible at this point, he adds, "the one you crucified.”  The charge is brought.  You killed Messiah!  You, who think yourselves the spiritual guides of Israel!  It is in His name that we have acted.  It is by His power that this man has been healed and is here standing before you in clearly evident perfect health – this man with whom you are surely familiar as having been very clearly lame and utterly incapable of standing.

Here’s the thing.  If it is by His power and authority that this has happened, there are clear implications to the fact that it has happened.  The healing of this man was assuredly a great blessing to him.  And it is quite evident that he received it as such.  How excited he had been yesterday!  How he praised God before one and all!  And how readily he has come before you today, a living testimony to what has just been said.  Jesus is Messiah.  This is not some past-tense, oops you rendered all God’s plans moot by your error claim.  It is present tense.  He is and remains Messiah.  Because though you crucified Him – yes, yes, we know you didn’t personally drive the nails through His hands and feet, but you may as well have; your responsibility, your moral reprehensibility is no less for the indirection – but God raised Him from death!  He still IS.  He remains alive.

And this is now a second charge laid against them, for they had been carefully promulgating the lie that these disciples of whom Peter and John are representative samples, had somehow stolen the body of Jesus from the grave.  They insisted this was the case, even knowing from the facts on the ground that it was not so.  They lied through their teeth, and paid the soldiers who had had charge of that tomb to lie as well.  That’s right sir, we were asleep at our post.  Guilty as charged.  Indeed, we were so deeply asleep that we didn’t even note the noise of that stone being rolled away.  Honestly, that lie had about as much power to convince as the attempted lies of a six year old.  And this gets us to the core of the action here.  It explains the reason for this man’s healing.  Indeed, we could reasonably argue that this man was healed precisely to provoke this trial, in order that God might put His judges on trial before His court.

And there is a fundamental truth exposed in Peter’s words.  It’s something of an echo of Proverbs 16:9.  "The mind of man plans his way, but the LORD directs his steps.”  I might put it thusly.  Man acts, but God’s actions determine the outcome.  This gets at one of the arguments raised against the idea of predestination, and those arguments are made no matter how plainly Scripture declares that predestination sets everything firmly in God’s hands.  If He has predetermined all that happens, the argument goes, that renders man but an automaton, and there can be no moral fault to his actions.  Judas cannot have been guilty if his betrayal of Jesus was predetermined by God.  Every punishment of hell becomes unjust, for man is rendered no different than a beast moved by instinct.  But that understanding falls short of the whole truth of the matter.

Man acts.  He is not forced to act.  He chooses to act.  The brothers of Joseph were not coerced into faking his death and selling him off to slavers.  Saul was not pushed inexorably to find a seer to call Samuel from the grave.  God in no way forced the tribes of Israel to divide themselves from Judah, even though He indicated the appointing of the northern king.  In each case, and in every other case, right on up to Pharaoh during the plagues, the man was left to act as he chose to act.  Nothing forced his hand.  Nothing constricted his actions.  He chose as he desired to choose.  But God also chose.  God also acted.  And God being God, His actions trump those of man.  He is able to so shape events that our worst choices yet bring about His desired conclusion.  So thorough is His planning, that our willful choices have all been taken into account by His planning.  I suppose we might say this is one of the benefits of being outside of time.  For Him, the linear flow of our actions is not linear, but something seen s but a point.  He knows.  He knows before we know.  But that doesn’t make us automatons acting without a say in the matter.  That doesn’t alleviate us of our moral responsibility for our choices.  We continue to choose and we continue to act.  And we continue to be responsible for our actions before the ultimate tribunal of God’s court.

As I have been observing, there are two courts in session here.  There is the earthly court of the earthly Sanhedrin, gathered to assess these two men and deliver official sanctions.  There is also, however, the heavenly Sanhedrin who, through the inspired testimony of Peter, are assessing this gathering of religious leaders and rendering judgment of their performance of their duties.  These men, curiously, are not particularly interested in the why of this miracle, nor even in the clear and evident fact of a miraculous healing.  They are concerned with power and prestige.  Their interest is supposed to be in the truth, and in the upholding of God’s holy name.  Instead, they are concerned with their name.  And so, rather than desiring to know what it means, they seek to undermine what they perceive to be the competition.  If they are the official representatives of God, after all, these two must represent some other source.  I don’t know if the Sadducees could construe another spirit driving these two, given that they didn’t really have room for the spiritual realm in their thinking.  But they clearly perceived this as an attack on their position.  And it was.  Only, it wasn’t Peter attacking.  It was the God they so poorly represented.  And it was not so much an attack outright, as one last chance to recognize their error and repent.

And so we find Peter, this rugged fisherman with no training and little self-control, standing proud in this place.  It is not pride in self, it is the proud assurance of knowing he belongs to Christ, and knowing that it is not himself coming up with the clever choice of words and the recollection of apt passages from Scripture.  God is with him.  This he knows.  The Sanhedrin, one rather suspects, thought more that God was lucky to have them.  The result is that we find before us yet another example of this book’s grand theme.  Peter and John are surrounded by the officialdom of the religious order of the day.  All religious authority, such as it was construed, has been brought to bear upon them.  But God is with him, and with John, and with the man who was healed.  And we find the promises of Jesus proved true yet again.  "It is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking in and through you” (Mt 10:20).  Indeed, this whole scene comes as a fulfillment of prophecy, a further evidence of the validity of Peter’s claim.  This Jesus, whom you crucified, but God raised from death, is the Messiah.

They had gathered, as it were, to test a prophet, part of their official duties.  And they were testing a prophet, only it wasn’t Peter.  Jesus had prophesied of what could be construed as this very event, though it is a scene that would play out repeatedly over the next centuries.  "Beware of men!  They will deliver you up to the courts, scourge you in the synagogues, drag you before kings and governors because of Me.  This shall be as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles as well.  When it happens, don’t be anxious about what you should say.  What you should say shall be given you in that hour” (Mt 10:17-19).  This is exactly what is happening here.  Somebody ran to fetch the authorities, hearing Peter speak of this one they had called upon the people to reject.  They heard the implicit charge against these leaders, and so did the leaders.  They acted.  They arrested.  They put on trial, gathered as the Supreme Court, not to be challenged in their verdict.  But they were challenged.  By God.  And they were found wanting.

The man who stands before them healed stands as a sign, a clear evidence that this one they had condemned to death, this one whose return to life they so anxiously sought to cover up and deny, was in fact the Messiah whom God, their God, had appointed for man.  Further than that, it was clear and incontrovertible evidence that He not only was the Messiah; He still is.  Peter’s testimony, though the point is not made to them, and they were likely unaware of that prophetic word He had spoken to His disciples, serves as further evidence.  He is the True Prophet.  What He declares comes to pass.  He has met the Mosaic standard.  He excels the Mosaic standard.  For, as John taught, He is the very Word of God, the living expression of His Intelligence, His Wisdom, His Essence.  He is God made Man, and Man made eternal, the second and last Adam, in whom all who believe, all who are called by the Father to become sons, are rendered holy and acceptable in the sight of our God.  There is, there never has been, there never shall be another given.  All authority has been given to Him Who was, Who is, and Who shall be forevermore; our great and glorious High Priest and Lord, Jesus Messiah, the firstborn of the reborn.

Father, how wonderful, this mighty transformation which You have brought about by Your own right arm.  How incredible to consider that You, Who are complete in Yourself, Who have no need of anything additional, decided to create, and to create in so wonderful a manner, a people to bear Your name. You undertook to establish all that is, even knowing the corrupting impact sin would have on Your work.  And You did so knowing fully, down to the very minute of its happening, that this rebirth, this working of renewed life, would come to pass.  You spoke and it was.  You covenanted with Yourself, and undertook to make it so.  And it has been made so.  And I, for one, have been transformed because You acted.  Yet, I confess in this present stage of life, holding fast to Your truth becomes a more desperate affair.  I don’t say it becomes more difficult, for I don’t feel that I have any doubt as to Your truth.  I do, however, wonder at how it plays out in our present state. I hear my beloved insisting that she chooses life, and I look at her condition and wonder if that is indeed what she is choosing.  I wonder if my counsel to her is sound.  I wonder what I should say, if anything at all.  I know her love for You, and yet I find myself seriously questioning her perception of You.  But I know You are faithful.  I know that whom You have called, You have justified, You have sanctified, You have made alive.  And I know that life is something far grander, far more important, than this present, physical existence.  It is not that this present order is pointless, but as Your Apostle Paul wrote, the pains and trials of the present are less than nothing when weighed against the eternal weight of glory stored up in heaven for us.  Thank You.  Strengthen us to persist so long as it suits Your purpose that we should persist.  And may we, somehow, hold on to joy in that persistence.  I do ask that You would minister to my beloved, Your beloved, in her agony, that You would bring her through, and, should it suit Your purposes, bring an end to her pain.  If she causes herself unnecessary grief through her misconceptions, then I must trust in You to correct those misconceptions, for I know I will not be heard, nor any other mortal voice.  If she has the right of it, then let me be at peace with it.  This much I know:  All her days, as mine, are in Your hands, and You know the number thereof.  You will see us both through safely to Your heavenly home, in Your time, by the path of Your choosing.  We are Yours.

The Messiah (08/21/26)

The authorities, such as they were, demanded to know who authorized this healing which Peter had performed.  That is a remarkable thing in itself, isn’t it?  They were not interested in how so much as who said they could do this.  It’s not even a question of working on the Sabbath, as so bothered them with Jesus.  But the reason they show little regard for the value to this man of his being healed, it is because that miracle was not their primary concern.  Their concern was with what Peter had been teaching.  Yes, their question hinges on what they had done, but their doing had consisted not solely in performing a miracle, but also in proclaiming Jesus as the proper focus of faith.

As we have considered already, his declaration that Jesus was alive, resurrected from death by God, was something directly opposed to the the official temple version of events.  Worse, those in power knew that their version of events was a fabrication.  They may not believe in resurrection, but they could not possibly believe their own lies, either.  They knew that they were lies.  Peter had been gracious, offering them the thin defense of ignorance.  But even that comes as an assault on their dignity and authority.  Us?  Ignorant?  We are the authorities on Torah!  We are the defenders of the faith.  How dare you accuse us of ignorance!  Why, you have no learning in you.  You are but fishermen.  You have studied under no rabbi.  You have not spent years learning from your betters.  You are not authorized representatives of religion.  So, who authorized you?

And the response comes in bold declaration.  Who authorized us?  Jesus Messiah.  This is not simply applying a surname to Jesus.  It comes to be used in almost that fashion, but it is never so simple as that.  Jesus is the Messiah.  This is a truth claim.  This is a claim of divine authorization.  He has been authorized by God!  To our ears, this is also a clear claim of His divinity, and I do think that claim is to be found in Peter’s brief defense.  But it is not in the claim of office.  But behold what is claimed.  He has not only authority but power, and power to match that given to Moses.  On His authorization this man has been made whole, and stands here before you as irrefutable evidence.

There is absolutely a contest going on in this courtroom, a contest between adherence to Moses and adherence to Messiah.  We should understand, we must understand, that Moses and Messiah are not in fact in conflict.  They are in accord.  But these who have called the Apostles to judgment judge on the basis of Moses alone.  The Sadducees, who formed the bulk of the court, held Moses’ writings, the first five books of our Bible, to be, if not the sole reference for divine truth, then the chief reference.  What Moses wrote was Law.  Anything beyond that must be construed as commentary, as secondary.  Come to the Pharisees, and their view in regard to Moses was not far different.  He laid down the Law, explained what God had covenanted with His people, Israel.  And they had devoted themselves to establishing sufficient boundaries around those borders Moses laid down that they would never cross the line even by mistake.  Inevitably, though, their care became their mistake, and they began to take their own extensions as being equally binding with those God had declared through Moses.

But here’s the hard truth of the matter.  Salvation is not and never was in the name of Moses.  Search the Scriptures and you will find not a single suggestion that any sort of healing was ever accomplished in the name of Moses, or on the authority of Moses.  You certainly won’t find it recorded that he, through the power vested in him, raised a lame man to wholeness, and he assuredly never brought the dead to life.  Moses himself was never brought back from death to life and in fact by his own testimony declared the Messiah to come.  Now He has come.  There shall not be another.  There never was another.  He was Messiah before the beginning.  He remains Messiah after the end.

Would you have proof of this?  Never mind that proof stands before you in this man made whole.  He could have followed Jesus’ lead and turned to Isaiah at this point.  "The lame shall walk.”  But he does not, and wisely so, given the Sadducees’ propensity for relying on the Pentateuch for foundation.  But he does turn to the Psalms, to that favored verse which Jesus Himself had used for the same point.  He Is the Cornerstone, that stone having been rejected by the builders.  You are the builders, you who call us to judgment here.  You rejected Messiah, but God established Him as the critical component in the structure of His temple.  More!  You crucified Him, your Messiah!  But God raised Him from the dead.  We might as readily be asking, who authorizes you?  You are the authorities?  Well then, surely you should have known your Messiah when He walked among you.  Instead, you murdered Him.  If you were not ignorant, then what else can explain your deeds?

So much of this is left tacit, but it’s all there in that title given Jesus by Peter’s defense.  He is Messiah.  At absolute minimum, here is the prophet like Moses, whom Moses himself had declared would arise.  He has like authority to Moses.  Indeed, His authority far exceeds that of Moses, for He Himself authorized Moses.  He excels Moses because He is Lord of Moses.  And if He is Lord of Moses, then what does that make Him?  He is God.  He told you as much, but you would not hear it.  You thought you’d made your point by killing Him, for who could possibly believe that God could be killed?  Leave that for the pagans.  But here’s the thing.  It didn’t work.  He’s alive, and in fact, in heaven, sitting in judgment over this very council.  What does that make Him?

This is very much a mic drop moment.  There’s really nothing more to say when you’ve arrived at the conclusion Peter supplies.  "There is salvation in no other, for no other has been given under heaven by which we must be saved.”  There is no other.  Salvation has not been found in the name of Moses, nor could it be.  His own salvation is lain at the feet of Jesus.  Bear in mind, though he doesn’t mention it here, that Peter had been witness to Moses in conversation with Jesus there on the Mount of Transfiguration.  And there can be no doubt but that he learned by that observation that Moses subjected himself to Jesus, as did Elijah.  Jesus reigns supreme.  And if that is the case (which it is), then to hold forth any other before Him must necessarily be a sinful act.

Don’t forget that John is present in this event.  When those gathered ask, "Who authorized you?” the question is put to you plural.   The speaking role seems to fall to Peter, but the whole event is attributed to both together.  Naturally, one speaks for both because for both to speak leads only to confusion and cacophony.  Even in the speaking in tongues on that first Pentecost, one perceives that there must have been a taking of turns, else the result would have been undecipherable noise.  Here, it seems the Spirit made His choice of Peter, and gave him the words of his defense, to declare those truths to this council which God insisted they should hear.  But for John, these same truths were no less fundamental.

Come to the end of his gospel, and read his explanation of the reason for his writing.  These before whom he stands trial this day should have known.  In concluding his gospel, he writes, "These have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name” (Jn 20:31).  Here is the claim of deity made explicit.  He is the Son of God, and if the Son, the God Himself.  This had not been understood in regard to the expectations of Messiah.  People expected some valiant warrior, or a prophet, but nothing had prepared them for God Incarnate.  Indeed, the very idea was anathema to them.  "He made yourself out to be the Son of God.  By our law, He should die for that!” (Jn 19:7).  Why?  Because the claim was a claim to deity.  Never mind the truth of it.  It was unthinkable for them.  And yet, it hangs there in the air, "You should have known.”  And now, it is written that we may know.  And we, knowing, ought surely to come to this Cornerstone for that most fundamental healing which is salvation.  For there is no other means, no other to whom we could appeal.  Science won’t achieve it.  Other religions can’t achieve it.  Atheism certainly won’t achieve it.  There is precisely, exclusively, this One who has the authority and the power to make alive that which is dead, to make holy that which is in sin, to make righteous that which has been so thoroughly corrupted.

This being made known, how do you respond?  That is ever the question of the Gospel.  That is the crisis of the Gospel.  It is no longer, "You should have known.”  There is no longer a defense of ignorance, if ever there really was such a defense.  It is now, "You know.”  What remains is the question of what you will do with that knowledge.  Will you turn to Him in repentance, to seek and receive His forgiveness, and to obtain from Him the power, the capacity to live holy before Him?  Or will you deny Him, reject Him, suppress the truth you have received in unrighteousness so as to continue on your present course unbothered?  One way leads to life.  The other, necessarily, leads to death.  And that death is not the cessation of being that most surmise.  It is not sweet oblivion, but eternal awareness under the punishment of eternal, holy God, separated from Him with no hope of parole.  It sounds terrible.  It is terrible.  It is terrible beyond, I think, our capacity to truly fathom or imagine.  It is not, however, inevitable.  While breath remains, hope remains.  Turn to Him.  He calls.  Respond to Him.  He knocks.  Answer.  Open to Him, bow down to Him, and discover His love for you.  Even now you can know that forgiveness which is in Him.  Even now you can know life, and the rest that comes of being assured of life hereafter.  Choose you this day, if you have not already.  Rejoice in your salvation this day, if you have.

Healing and Salvation (08/22/26-08/23/26)

In preparing for this study, I chose to place the man who was made well under the matter of symbols.  His healing, while obviously very real, is also highly symbolic, and that, on multiple levels.  There is the obvious symbolic aspect as testifying to the authority Peter and John had to speak on behalf of God.  That action had served to validate their office as messengers of God.  This aspect of symbolism is in play as these two stand trial before the Sanhedrin.  There is also, however, a second layer of symbolism, and that is revealed in the fact that we find the same term, sozo, employed both to speak of this man being made well, and of being saved.  We could add a third reference in the use of the noun salvation, which is derived from this same verb.

To be healed, made well, is wonderful.  But it is, so far as the arts of physical healing go, temporary.  However well we are healed of however many diseases and injuries, there remains that date set by God upon which the life of this physical body shall cease.  The soul shall journey on.  The spirit shall persist.  But this tent of flesh is incapable of eternality.  Parts wear out.  Cells age out and degenerate, and sooner or later, the machine fails.  That being the case, I would suggest to you that every physical healing, as great a blessing as it may be, is but symbolic.  I’m not going to slide into gnostic thinking, and tell you that this physical life is of no consequence, only the spiritual.  I am, however, going to insist that we ought to view the blessings of this life in light of eternity, healing perhaps chief among them.

Consider the many potential meanings that assign to this verb sozo.  It can indicate keeping one safe, a guarding action.  It can speak to rescue from danger.  Funny thing, but reading in Table Talk this morning drew my thoughts briefly to Psalm 34, written by David as he took refuge in the cave of Adullum after being driven out of Abimelech’s courts and still being pursued by Saul.  There with his small cohort, he writes a salve for his heart and makes this glorious claim.  "I sought the LORD, and He answered me, and delivered me from all my fears” (Ps 34:4).  He delivered me.  He rescued me.  We are on this same experience of salvation, of sozo.  He states it again.  "The angel of the LORD encamps around those who fear Him, and rescues them” (Ps 34:7).  Here we have the dual aspects of rescue and keeping save, deliverance and guarding.  Yet, all of this, while again very much appreciated in the realm of physical life, is but a foretaste of the more wonderful salvation that is ours in Christ.  All of these things – rescue from peril, restoration of physical health, let us add wealth and material security – are what we might consider as being the present experience of God’s delivering power, a phrase I take from Zhodiates’ lexical entry on our term.  They are a down payment, if you will, on the full promise of life in Christ.

Now, obviously, such material blessings are given not only to the righteous, but also, and sometimes even more abundantly, to the reprobate.  Many a place in Scripture finds the writer disturbed by that fact.  Why do evil men prosper, and the righteous go wanting?  And yet, "I have been young, and now I am old, and I have never seen the righteous forsaken, or his descendants begging for bread” (Ps 37:25).  Though trials may come, and seem even to overwhelm; though our weak faith may hang by a thread under the torrents of sin and sorrow, of pain and suffering and the torment of walking in this sin sick world; still He proves faithful.  Still He upholds us.  Still, though death should overtake us, He gives us life.  This is the promise of our Savior, the Messiah appointed for us.  "I AM the resurrection and the life.  He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live.  And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die.” (Jn 11:25-11:26). And the poignant question which follows:  "Do you believe this?”

On the face of it, it seems like Jesus talks out both sides of his mouth on this point.  He may die, but he shall never die.  How can this be?  But we are simply back at the divide of body and soul.  And again, as concerns the physical plant, the body, I would maintain there’s really no maybe involved.  It is presented in the subjunctive mood in that first case, which the NASB has chosen to render as a contingent, potential outcome.  But it can as readily serve to indicate an eventual outcome, almost as certain as the indicative, but not as yet come to pass.  The subjunctive is the mood of prayer, amongst other things.  It does not, one hopes, indicate doubt as concerns the object of prayer, or at least not as far as the assurance of God answering.  I would have to say that in matters of prayer, there is often a shade of doubt, but not about God hearing and responding, rather about the propriety of our request or our expectations.  He will answer.  It may be, though, that His answer differs from our idea of what should happen.  Where He differs, we can rest in the assurance that His answer is ever and always going to be better than our ideas of how things should be.

But life never truly ends.  That is a marvel.  It is also, for many, cause for great trepidation.  For the eternality of the soul applies to saint and sinner alike.  The duration is not different, only the setting, the shape of that eternal existence.  Shall it be spent in life worthy of being called life, the best of life, given us in Christ Jesus, who IS Life?  Or shall it be spent in eternal exile from His presence, kept under torment in Hades for crimes against eternal God?  There is no third option.

If you would have life, then Peter’s conclusion here must be taken to heart.  Salvation, and here we speak not of physical health or bodily security, but of the higher principle of deliverance from the penalty of judgment before the court of eternal God, is not to be had from any other source.  It is in Jesus Christ, Jesus Messiah alone.  No other is, has been, or shall be authorized.  No other has the power to offer this life or to supply it, but Him alone.  It will do no good to claim that other gods men may devise are just alternate names for Him Who is God.  The tenets of these false religions make clear that it is some other object that has their worship.  It will do no good to claim Christ but worship an idol of our own imagining, God redefined to suit our preferences.  It is this Jesus, the man from Nazareth, born in poverty to a young mother, having no place to call His home, spent by zeal for His Father’s house, and put to death most cruel upon a cross by the gathered opposition of mankind.  Yet, He lives!  Death could not hold Him.  How could it?  He Is Life!  He has taken death captive, destroyed its power; a power it never held over Him, but which served to terrorize man fallen under sin, keeping us from knowing the love of God. 

There is your salvation.  The wrath of God has been meted out upon Him in our stead.  This, by His choosing, by His covenanted agreement before ever the first moment of dawning Creation emerged from chaos and nothingness.  Before "In the beginning,” it had been established among the Persons of the Godhead that this would be the course of events.  He would be born a man of no means, nothing to suggest His deity, His primacy, to live as a man, to die as a man, and to take our place in suffering the just punishment of our sins.  God’s justice has been satisfied.  Our lives have been spared.  And we, who were born under the sentence of death, find ourselves pardoned, transformed, and assured of life, though we die.

The whole of this life is, in many ways, symbolic.  That is not to say it is pointless or to be dismissed.  It is assuredly no leave to sin without concern.  To recall R. C. Sproul’s tagline, Right Now Counts Forever.  How we live in this life matters.  We are called to be living parables, living sacrifices (Ro 12:1).  What we are not called to be is our own righteousness.  Rather, we display the riches of Him Who called us, and proclaim His excellencies (1Pe 2:9).  Salvation is to a purpose, and it’s not simply, nor even primarily, the purpose of giving us joy and peace, certainly not a life of ease as the health and wealth gospel seeks to suggest.  This is not our best life now.  Our best life lies ahead.  But this present life is indeed made better, whatever its circumstances, by the assurance of our true salvation.  We have been saved.  We have been made well.

Salvation is, as I noted somewhere in my preparations, the ultimate healing.  There is no promise to be found that insists we shall suffer no sickness in this life if we belong to Christ.  That is nonsense of the first order.  The redeemed yet die, and not necessarily of old age.  Shall we account Paul less righteous for having poor eyesight?  Shall we account the Apostles condemned for failing to evade martyrdom?  Obviously not!  It is a thing most heinous to insist to the chronically ill that there must be some sin in them which has caused this to be the case.  Jesus rejected it.  Why, then, do so many who purport to follow Him fail to do so?  It does nothing to damage the reputation of God if we admit to having a cold, to having cancer.  It does nothing to tarnish His glory if we avail ourselves of such things as medical science has provided to address our maladies.  He remains our Provider.  Did we somehow steal His glory when we availed ourselves of the grocery store for our food?  How is this any different?  It’s not.  Whatever the means, where life is supported, it remains God Who supports it.  But however well this physical life is supported, it is the spiritual that persists.  The physical remains temporary, and we who have come to know the salvation that has been made ours in Christ Jesus ought to pursue what remains of this temporary state with a committed purpose to glorify Him by how we live it.

If we have physical health, let it serve to demonstrate spiritual health.  I think of that brief prayer John offers for the recipient of his third epistle.  "I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers” (3Jn 2).  This in no way indicates that physical well-being is dependent upon, or a necessary outworking of spiritual well-being.  Many a saint has suffered under chronic affliction.  The truly saintly, I would maintain, have done so with clear display of the grace of God, granting them a strength and serenity in the face of trial the like of which would be inconceivable for one laboring along by main strength.  This is the assurance of heaven.  This is the rock-solid knowledge that however difficult, however painful this present experience of life, it is temporary, and heaven awaits us at the end of it.  There shall be a place for us in a realm where all pain and sorrow have gone, tears are wiped away; a place where, as Paul writes, the weight of glory which is ours forevermore shall be far beyond all comparison to the light and momentary afflictions of this life (2Co 4:17).  That may be hard to hang onto when life is hard, when age creeps up on us, and this physical plant starts to fail us.  But look at the precedent for that assurance Paul gives us!  "Though our outer man is decaying, yet our inner man is being renewed day by day” (2Co 4:16).  This is our blessed assurance.  This is our down payment on the salvation to come when Christ returns to take up His new name, His new and full authority.

For those in that hall of judgment, how was this received?  How was it understood?  To the Sadducees, given their disregard for the spiritual realm, and their rejection of the very idea of resurrection, what would salvation even mean?  Did they hear it as anything more than physical healing?  It seems to me that they would have to hold to the material blessings of this life as the whole point of religion.  For if nothing comes after the grave, then to what else can one look for blessings?  I wonder if we might not position them as the first order of the health and wealth perspective on religion.  Surely for them it must have been concern for your best life now, given that they had no expectation of any other.

For the Pharisees, this was not an issue.  However it was that they understood it, they did at least acknowledge the life of the spirit and the reality of resurrection.  Yet it seems that most of their effort was expended not on matters of the spirit, but on matters of the flesh.  They believed in the afterlife, but it seems that they believed they could only attain to that life by scrupulous observance of every law of piety in this life.  They did not so much rely on the power of God as seek to avoid falling under it.  The love of God seems to have been all but absent from their theology, and He was more a tyrant God, not all that unlike the gods of their neighbors.  Perhaps that’s an unfair reduction of their ideas.

What’s our story, then?  We profess a belief in heaven, and in an eternity that lies ahead for us.  But how much do we actually believe it?  Is it more than a fantasy for us?  With Martha, we must come to terms with Jesus’ question.  "Do you believe this?”  Do you really believe it?  Has this reality been integrated into your person, informing your views when it comes to this present life?  Paul’s assessment of his own life makes plain that he, for one, had indeed laid hold of this reality in full.  Whatever it is that must be endured in this present life, it will be as nothing when measured against the eternal weight of glory.  It is already as nothing because that eternal weight is already our assured inheritance in Christ Jesus, our Lord!  And so, as he faced trial before Nero, he could assure his friends back in Philippi, "For me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain” (Php 1:21).  In life or in death, he would serve his Lord, and exalt Him.  This ought to define us every bit as much as it did him.

Too often, for me, to live is stuff, and to die at times a thing to be put off as long as possible, at other times a means to escape the trials of this life.  I don’t often travel that latter course, but when I see those around me suffering endlessly and seeking to prolong their days in spite of it, I do start thinking along those lines.  Why hold on, if remaining is nothing but pain and suffering.  Is that desperate clinging to this life truly choosing life?  But it’s a dark turn, and one does not wish to remain on that course longer than necessary.  There is joy in this life, however much the suffering.  There is beauty in this life, in spite of the corruptions of sin in myself and in my fellow man.  In spite of the worst abuses of mankind en toto, still this creation reveals God in His beauty and power.  And it should be enjoyed.  God, after all, created it to house us, to bless us.  And He assuredly rejects the idea of suicide.  If it is a mortal sin to take the life of another, even by accident, then surely it is a mortal sin to take one’s own life.  Why?  I would suggest for the very same reason as defined the first sin of Satan and Adam in their turn.  It’s an attempt to usurp God’s rightful rule.  He has determined the number of our days, and any attempt by us to cut those days short constitutes a claim to His prerogative.  It says, I am the captain of my life, and I decide.  Dependence is gone.  Humility before almighty God is gone.  Piety can’t dress it up and give it any better appearance.

Nothing about this requires that we prolong the agony of dying.  Nothing in this demands that we avail ourselves of every trick of modern medicine to retain a grip on physical life as long as possible, even when all capacity for enjoying life, or even consciously participating in life has fled from us.  It seems to me that often our kind intentions in preserving the life of the chronically ill and the aging at all costs becomes in reality a vicious cruelty.  But I will continue to maintain as bedrock principle that however much we may medicate and manipulate in hopes of prolonging life, we cannot in fact add so much as a day, so much as a minute to the span of our lives, as it has been determined by God in His perfect, unchanging counsel.  I still maintain that however much we may act in foolish disregard for our health, even to the point of pursuing suicide, we will not succeed in shortening our life by so much as a moment.  God knows the number of our days.  That does not preclude whatever actions we may take in the proud hope of controlling our destiny.  It does, however, lend to those efforts a certain futility.  They give us a semblance of control, it is true, and not just a semblance.  We do have control of our decisions – and responsibility for their consequences, not only before the courts of man, but before the throne of heaven.  That God has fully accounted for your decisions even before you made them alters nothing.  That is the nature of going through this life as a moral agent, with a will to choose and power to do so. 

Yet, God remains fully in control.  God remains sovereign.  Far better for us if we are incorporating that reality into our lives, and into our thinking.  This does not demand an agonizing hour of prayer before each and every least decision of our day.  It does insist that we live in light of eternity.  It does necessitate that we live our lives, as meets me most mornings in Table Talk, corem deo, consciously aware that we live before the face of God.  But we live this out in the full realization of what Peter is saying here.  This Jesus, the Messiah appointed for us by God, has power and authority to save, to bring about in us the ultimate healing which is the transformation of this sinful soul such that it is now clothed in His own righteousness, given legal standing before the court of heaven, our record of sins expunged from the books, no charge able to be brought against us.  This is not permit to sin, but courage to continue.  This is the rest into which our Savior has led us.  We can strive after holiness now with the assurance of His love, with the encouragement of His beckoning us from the finish line to stay the course, and with His power, His divine power, flooding into us, flooding through us, to supply our effort, and His forgiveness, His assured forgiveness at the ready so often as we have need of it, and recognize our need.

Lord, I have been feeling the test of late, and I have felt my thoughts travel, at least touch upon, things previously unthinkable. Would that they would remain unthinkable.  It is most surely a hard stretch of late.  You know.  I know You know.  And I thank You for the strength and grace You have been pouring out, at the same time begging Your forgiveness for those moments when I fail to lay hold of the grace You provide.  I feel stretched to my limits and well beyond them, and I see my beloved wife suffering, and know she is being stretched and tried even more.  I cannot claim to approve of her choices.  Nor can I counsel her any differently.  She knows by now that I would counsel an entirely different approach both to her health and her faith. But she does not answer to me, certainly not in matters of conscience, and I would feel myself most thoroughly in the wrong were I to try and force compliance.  She is Yours.  However much I may disagree on current practices, whatever doubts I have as to who she is listening to, I remain confident that she is in fact Yours.  And if that is so, then I must likewise confidently assert the truth You teach:  Your sheep hear Your voice and will not listen to another.  I come, then, asking that You would in fact guide her fully, heal her body if that suits Your purpose.  But by all means, grant to her and to me the ultimate healing which is Your salvation, come in full on that day when You welcome us home.  To this I hold.  To You I hold.  Let it be our peace, knowing You have us well and truly in hand.

Divine Necessity (08/23/26)

There is one final detail of Peter’s defense that I would like to focus on for just a moment, and that centers on the tiny word, dei.  It is a small word, yet it carries immense significance.  Look at that concluding statement.  "There is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved.”  It is that must that has my attention.  It indicates a necessity.  And being that it is Jesus, the Son of God that is in view with that name, it indicates a divine necessity.  But in what regard?

Looking at the lexical entries on that word we have translated as must, there is a wide range of potential meaning.  It could mean that the outcome is unavoidable.  It could mean that there’s a sort of contractual obligation.  Put it in the context of covenant, and it is binding:  each part must act thus and so.  I can speak to propriety:  It is only right and proper that this be done.  Or, it can come down to the detrital will of God.  God has decreed it shall be so, ergo it must be so.  So, in what sense does Peter intend us to hear this?  Is it the sense of inevitability?  That would seem to push for a universalist perspective, that it is inevitable that all will be saved.  But any such understanding seems to me to run counter to the full testimony of Scripture, let alone of reason.  If salvation must come to all, then what point is there to maintaining even the least concern for faith or religion?  We may as well just get on with doing as we please.  The outcome won’t be changed, right?  But such an understand must leave God devoid of Justice, and that simply will not do.

So, if it is not inevitability, is it legal in nature, a covenanted demand of compliance?  I suppose on some level it might be seen as such.  Arguably, the demands of Mosaic Law rendered it necessary that some other means of salvation must be presented.  It is hinted at in the sacrificial system.  Seems like somewhere along the way, the hint aspect of that system had become in their thinking the concrete aspect, the full reality.  But at best, any salvific impact of those sacrifices had been limited in their power to atone.  There was a reason the process had to be repeated annually, daily.  The blood of goats and bulls could never suffice to pay the penalty for sin.  It needed something more, a life of equal worth to the offense, and this was had in Christ Jesus, in His willing choice to suffer death on our behalf that we might have life on His behalf.

But let us recall the matter of the name once again.  It’s not the pronouncing of the syllables of His given name, whether we choose the Anglicized Greek of Jesus, or the Aramaic Yeshua.  The power is not in the word by which He is named, but in the authority of Him Who is named.  He has the authority to save.  He has the power to save.  And where He acts to do so, rest assured, that it is ‘necessary in the nature of things’ that salvation is in fact achieved.  When God acts, there is no doubt.  We are back at the assurance Jesus proclaims to us.  "My sheep hear My voice.  I know them.  They follow Me.  And I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish.  No one shall snatch them from Me” (Jn 10:27-28). 

A quick observation:  What leads into this is Jesus informing His hearers, "You do not believe, because you are not My sheep” (Jn 10:26).  That must surely put paid to any thought of universalism!  If there is a "Not My Sheep” category, then those in that category are not in fact saved.  Salvation is not  on offer.  The power is not exercised in regard to them.  Neither do I see any opportunity afforded here for them to alter that decision.  If it was in their power to decide, then decide they did.  "They took up stones again to stone Him” (Jn 10:31).

But for us who are accounted His sheep, given Him by His Father, now our Father, the outcome is doubly assured.  None shall snatch us from the hand of Christ.  No one is able to snatch us out of the hand of our Father (Jn 10:29).  There is your necessity.  There is the must of salvation.  Whom the Father calls, shall answer.  It is necessary and unavoidable in the nature of the thing.  Whom He calls, He shall justify.  It is necessary in the nature of His divine being.  Whom He has justified, He most assuredly also glorified (Ro 8:30).  The outcome is determined, for God has spoken.  He speaks and it is. He has spoken, and so it must be.

Yet, for us, there remains a second application of this necessity.  It is necessary that we come to Him Who was given us to obtain salvation.  We will not find salvation in any other so-called god.  We will not attain to salvation through any political movement, or any patriotic nationalism.  We will not attain to salvation through wealth, through science, through military might or any another thing.  And, as concerns those immediately in view in these proceedings, we will never attain to salvation by the works of the Law.  Those works are, and ever were, beyond us.  The Law is good, but as Paul observes, it could only expose our sins, never actually address them or prevent them.  It is no cure, only a diagnosis.  The Great Physician alone can cure, can heal in the ultimate healing that is salvation.  That does not imply freedom from malady in this current life.  Neither does it denude this current life of all value.  But it does provide hope – real hope.  This is hope in the biblical sense of absolute assurance, not the wishful thinking of our usual hopes and desires.  This is your blessed assurance.  "Jesus is mine.”  Far more critically, I am His.  And that really is all that matters.  I am His.  He has me.  And He won’t let go.

Glory to God in the highest!  Even so, Lord, so be it.  It must be so.