New Thoughts (4/25/04-5/2/04)
We love to declare the name of Jesus, to speak of the power of the name of Jesus. We take care to add it as an endorsement upon our prayers and deeds, but do we understand hat it is we do? Many apply that phrase, 'in the name of Jesus,' as if it were an incantation of some sort. Many seem to think that no matter how absurd, how self-centered, how ungodly their prayer request might be, they can ensure a positive response from God by adding that little legal clause to the end. Do you see, by the way, how legalistic this incantation theology can become? It's not about the content, it's about the form!
I want to consider, instead, what it is that makes His name important to me. What was His intent when He taught His disciples to ask in His name? To begin with, it is necessary to understand the significance of the name A look at the dictionaries regarding this word makes clear just what that significance is. The name, especially in the societies we read of in Scripture, describes the character, the reputation, the authority of the one named. To speak another's name is to recall to mind everything about the one named.
In this case, it is Jesus whose name is uttered. If His name represents His character, I speak of purity, holiness, righteousness, man as man was intended to be. If His name represents His reputation, I speak of love, mercy, justice, wisdom, and understanding. If His name represents His authority, I do well to remember that all authority on heaven and earth has been given to Him. Indeed, when I use His name, I speak of all these things, whether intentionally or not.
To pray in Jesus name is to speak on His authority, to stand as His representative, seeking what is in accord with His will. Having this in my mind serves to keep the flesh out of our prayers. It puts an end to the petty requests that tend to clutter up my prayers, and leaves me seeking those things that serve to promote the kingdom of God, and nothing else.
To speak the name of Jesus is to be reminded of the pleasure that is mine in knowing Him to be my brother. To hear His name is to recall the great things He has done for me. How, then, can I use His name in an unworthy fashion? How can it fall so lightly from my lips? Yet, even then, I can say truthfully, hearing His name brings Him to mind. Even then, recognizing the foolish liberty I have taken, I am reminded of His excellence, of what is pleasing to my God (which this slip of the tongue is not). I recall His commandment - thou shalt not use the LORD's name in vain - and I am chagrined, ashamed. Thankfully, through such a moment, I am also brought back to the authority He has to forgive my sins, the interest He has in my sanctification, and the pleasure He has in calling me His own.
Lord, there is this weakness in my tongue, and we both know it. There is a weakness in me in general, which forces me to acknowledge that You alone are my strength. How often, Holy One, will I be allowed to make such a mess of my witness? How often, Lord, will I find myself displaying my sinfulness instead of Your righteousness? You have bought that righteousness for me. I know You see it. You see with a Father's eyes. Yet I so detest this inner condition of mine, Lord - the things that so easily fall off the tongue, which should never even be allowed to touch the tongue of your child. How is it, Lord? How can this be? I know that this is a process. I know that perfection must wait until I have been brought face to face with Perfection. And, yes, Lord, it's obvious to me how far You have progressed on this work that I call my life. Mine? Not at this point. So much of what I am today - all of what I am today - is due solely to Your grace, Your working. You not only paid for this life, You fashioned it, and You continue to refashion it even now. Oh, God! That You would break through! That You would bring about that instant change in me. Yet, I will thank You for Your touch is gentle, You don't overwhelm Your child. I will thank You because it is very clear to me, even if it is not so clear to those around me, that You have done great things in this man. Thank You, Father, that You are faithful to complete this work You have begun.
There is this, also, in the matter of the name - a comment I came across in Thayer's Lexicon in regards to the subject: Baptism, he writes, binds us to the public recognition and acknowledgement of the dignity and authority of Him into whom we were baptized! That's powerful! It's incredibly powerful, and in large part I think the Church has forgotten this aspect. We still recognize that in baptism we are publicly identifying with the death of Christ, and rising from the water in a symbolic act of joining Him in His resurrection life. We have forgotten, though, the binding nature of this act upon us. It's an acceptance of our office. Much like the Holy Spirit is the seal of office, the proof of our authority to act in the service of our Christ, baptism is our seal of acceptance. It is our signature upon the contract, as it were, indicating our willingness and our commitment to stand as His representative. By our baptism, we declare that we will call Him Lord, come what may. By our baptism, we declare that we will give Him the glory that is His due in the hearing of every man. We declare that we will not reserve our 'look what the Lord has done' rejoicing for the Church, but will rejoice as loud, if not louder among those who have yet to acknowledge Him Lord of all.
Elizabeth, as it is recorded here, did not bear a child, she brought forth a son. Even as I was typing that last sentence, my Teacher was explaining to me just how important this really was, this distinction between child and son. 'Son' is a declaration of legitimacy. Given the scene unfolded in these verses, it is imperative that we understand that John is absolutely and unequivocally legitimate. Thayer's Lexicon declares that a son is "one begotten by a father, and born of a mother." What is being declared here, then, is that John is indeed the son of Zacharias. There has been no infidelity. God's judgment of this couple still stands. They are as they have been, righteous in His sight.
Herein lies yet another factor of the sonship that is declared of John. Not only is he declared the legitimate offspring of this righteous couple, but it is being declared that he shares in their character. He is a legitimate son of his father, and this will show, as he grows up, in the way his character traits reflect the character of his father. He, too, will come to be known as one who walks in righteousness, one who has heard and heeded the call of God to love justice, do kindness, and walk humbly before Him.
Given that we are studying the life of Jesus in studying the Gospels, it would be most improper to consider what it meant for John to be a son without also considering how these same things apply to our Lord and Savior. He, too, is declared a son, the Son of God. He, too, was "begotten by a Father, and born of a mother." He is the only-begotten Son of our Father, Who reigns on high, begotten of God, born of a woman. That is one of the key mysteries of faith, this matter of the God-Man.
For the story as it is being unfolded here, much of what we are learning in John's birth story comes as a foundation for Jesus' birth story. John is carefully declared legitimate. It was important to establish this, given the circumstances. For Jesus, this would become even more important. Joseph may not have been involved, but He was most assuredly a legitimate Son. This would be proven in the course of time in that His character consistently reflected the character of His Father. By the time of His death, even those who were not overly familiar with His message would see the character of God in Him. Even the rough and tumble soldiers of Rome would be forced to admit, "surely, this man was the Son of God."
How is it that we come to resemble our parents? For most of us, this is an unconscious factor, simply a result of growing up. For some, it becomes a conscious decision. It rather depends on the parents, I suppose. However, whether conscious or not, the primary factor behind this resemblance is intimacy. We have no choice but to be intimately familiar with our parents. We live with them for year after year, and whether it's intentional or whether it's an unavoidable consequence, we will come to resemble them in their ways, because those are the ways we have learned. When we are closely related to somebody in space for a length of time, we will inevitably pick up on some of their traits.
This is part of what makes marriage both such a challenge and such a wonder. Two people are joined together in the most intimate of human relationships. Each comes with the character traits inherited or learned from their own family histories. There may be little to nothing in common between the traits of the husband and the traits of the wife. Their histories are unique to each other. Their experiences growing up are as likely as not wholly unfamiliar to each other. My wife, for instance, grew up in a large (I mean large) family of limited means, and was raised pretty much in the same town all her life, with lots of relatives around. I, on the other hand, had only a pair of brothers, and moved with my family every few years. Most of my relatives I had hardly met until I was six or seven years old, and had left them pretty much behind by the time I was sixteen.
Such disparate backgrounds make it incredibly challenging to suddenly share a life! It cannot help but create conflict, because what is obviously right to one is totally wrong to the other, what is utterly natural to one will require incredible effort for the other. We come to the wedding each with our own habits, our own manners, and our own ways of thinking, and in that moment, we are suddenly thrust into a situation wherein our own habits, manners, and ways of thinking may have to give way. This may not happen immediately, and it may not happen easily, but if the marriage is to succeed, it will happen. Each will have given up a part of who they were to become who they are. Hopefully, given the choice of two histories, the couple will choose that which produces the best character in their new relationship.
I said that it was both a challenge and a wonder. The challenge has, I think, been made clear enough. Now comes the wonder of it. For those who persevere in this relationship, an amazing thing occurs: one finds that they have indeed changed, they have indeed taken on some of the characteristics of their partner. Indeed, both find this to be true. God declares that in marriage the two become one flesh. This is the incredibly mystery of marriage! Truly, in the course of time, there comes to be a merging - not a loss of one personality submerged in the other, but a melding of the two. Each learns from the other, absorbs from the other those things that were lacking, perhaps. Each is stronger in certain aspects, and the other will recognize that strength. Yet, it is not a struggle for supremacy, it's an acceptance of what will be for the best of this united organism moving forward.
Intimacy cannot help but reshape us. Take this marriage thought and move it into the Christian experience. We are the betrothed of Christ. We are brought into this most intimate of relationships, more intimate, even, than marriage. Husband and wife dwell together. Christian and Christ indwell each other. Nothing is hidden from our Husband. No thought is ours alone. We are in this incredibly intimate relationship with Him, and we cannot but recognize the superiority of His ways in all things. As we abide in this intimate relationship, we cannot help but pick up His character traits. The better and stronger is bound to rub off on the poorer and weaker. What an incredible blessing for us! We are drawn into this close relationship, under the perpetual tutelage of the Perfect Man. By His training, by this rubbing off of His character onto ourselves, we are prepared for intimacy with our Father. By this training, we are made the legitimate sons of our Father, as we, too, take on His character. And He is pleased to declare us legitimate, sons by relationship with Him, closely related to Him, and displaying the traits of His perfection in our own imperfect way.
Intimacy, I think, is shown to be lacking in those who came to see this baby. Where were these friends and family during the long months of Elizabeth's withdrawal? Who came to seek her out, to find out why she wasn't in the usual places? Not a one! Who came to see how Zacharias was faring? Not a one! Indeed, it strikes me that they were so unacquainted with this couple that they didn't know the limits of Zacharias' troubles. They seem to have been so unfamiliar that they thought his muteness extended to his ears, as well. Had they known this couple as intimate associates, they would have had not need to ask his opinion, because they would have known his story. If they were even somewhat close with Zacharias, they would have known to simply bring the tablet, and ask their question. Instead, they wave at him until he gestures back at them, indicating that they should bring the tablet.
Here is a lesson that needs to be learned. The church is called a family. It is called to be a family, and to behave as a family. If we settle for being the sort of family that surrounded this couple, we have failed utterly at our calling. If we're all about being around our fellow Christians when they're being blessed, but have nothing to do with them in their times of trial, what fellowship is that? If our love is reserved for those who are doing well, who have the least need of experiencing love at the moment, what is that? Even the worst heathen will go to a celebration. Even the hardest of men will gladly partake of your blessing, drink your wine, eat your food. Even those who don't particularly like you will do that much. But, who will be there when hard times come? Who will be there when the food runs out, when illness strikes, when all is not good and lovely? If we cannot answer, "Here I am, I'll be there," we've not yet understood the love God has shown to us.
His love was extended to us while we were still His enemies. His love was extended to us when we were at our most unlovely. His love saw the filth in which we were covered, saw the pain and suffering that we were enduring, understood that we had brought it on ourselves, but did not allow our guilt to cause His love to cease. He loved us in spite of ourselves, and in His love He took action. If our love is all words, and no action, John wrote, how is that love?
God's love acts. God's love acts first because it is truly Love. God's love acts that man might know His love, might know what love is, and might learn how to operate in that same love. He showed us mercy that His mercy would be made known. He has declared us not only His children, but His sons. Sons, if they are sons indeed, will bear the marks of intimacy with their Father. His character will be evident in their character, if they are indeed legitimate sons of the Father. If mercy, active compassion, active love, are in the character of my Father, how can it be that they would not also be in my character?
In my own life, I can see signs of this basic truth. There are things I have from my father on earth, for good or for ill, traits and habits of both mind and action that were learned from years of intimate relationship with him. The same holds true for my mother, to be sure, but as a son, it is the father that holds the greater influence, whether we would have it be so or not. In the example of the flesh, there are some things inherited that are a blessing to inherit. There are others which must be overcome, just as Mary overcame her name. This requires the regenerating work of a Holy God. It requires a new Father, and it requires that we spend time with Him. The modern concept of 'quality time' won't be enough. It takes the sacrifice of our time which intimacy demands, or we will not achieve the intimacy we need. Without that intimacy, we are never, ever, going to attain to any resemblance to Him who has made us. Without that intimacy, we have, in essence, refused the adoption that is offered us.
On the other side of this, if we have accepted adoption, if we have enjoyed this intimate relationship to our Father, then it is impossible that our lives should not show evidence of it. If we are His children, we will do the things we see Him doing. If He shows love, we will show love. If He is merciful, we will be merciful. If His heart breaks for the neediness of the sin-sick and weary, ours will break, too. If He is willing to go out of His way to reach out to the worst of men, surely we can at least reach out to our brothers in their times of need?
There is one more thing to say of this. If we would reflect our Father, then as we do the things we see Him do, this is only part of the act of a son. We will also share His motivation. His motivation is, as was noted, to make His ways known. He shows mercy that we might know of His mercy, and avail ourselves of it. We, His children, must assuredly display the same mercy He shows towards us. But, there is a further step. Understanding why He has shown mercy, it behooves us to make known to those around us why He has done so. If He acts to proclaim His ways, we ought also to boldly acknowledge what He has done, and we dare not limit this boldness to the company of our family. It is those outside the walls of the church that need to hear of His mercy. We who are inside are already well aware of it.
Bring me to that place, Father. I have so far to go in this, and I know it. You have, it must be said, brought me a significant distance already. But, my mercy and my love are a fragile thing, still. Yours are steadfast and unchanging. You know my reaction to weakness and suffering, and it's not good. It is not even a bad reflection of Your ways. God! This needs changing. I know I must throw myself upon Your mercy once again, yet it feels so wrong, when my own mercy is so poor. Where is Your heart for the hurting in me? You have drawn me back to John's letters again, Lord, and the test he puts in there still stings to consider. How can I claim to love You if I'm not willing to show love to those around me? How I fall short in this area, my God! Still, I know that this has not destroyed Your love for me, for Your love is steadfast! I can only ask that You would continue your work in me, not give up on me. I can only hope that You will find me a willing lump of clay as You do Your work. So, let it be to me as You desire, my Lord.
There are a number of ways in which this passage is connected with the prophets and their prophecies, not the least of which is John's coming in fulfillment of prophecy. This is the clear and obvious connection. However, I want to explore some others that are perhaps less obvious.
First, there is Zacharias. As I was going through some of the encyclopedias in regards to this man of God, an interesting point caught my attention. He was, it would seem, named after a certain Zechariah, whom Jesus tells us was killed in the very Temple grounds, between the altar and the Holy Place (Lk 11:51). This is the same place in which Zacharias was struck dumb. In the former case, the voice of unbelief sought to silence the voice of God. In the latter case, God silenced the voice of unbelief. There is, in this, a certain identifying of the named with the namesake.
So much, in the days surrounding the birth of our Lord were of this prophetic nature, a sign and a wonder. It seems the whole family of which we read here were among those who stood as a sign to the nation, if the nation would but recognize the message. As I said, God silenced the voice of unbelief in Zacharias. This was done as a sign to him, but also as a sign to the people. He had been silenced in the very act of bearing the people's prayers to heaven. What did this mean? It meant, among other things, that unbelief will silence our prayers. The prayers of the righteous accomplish much (Jas 5:16), but there can be no righteousness apart from faith, and faith is not faith that does not believe.
In this action, I think Zacharias was also bringing to a head what the prophets had been saying centuries earlier. Over and over again Israel had been told by God that their sacrifices and rituals, because they were empty of faith and belief, were a stench in His house. Still, they didn't get it. Repeatedly, the prophets had told them that it was the heart that was of interest to God, not the material sacrifices. It was the heart that God desired, not empty words repeated at another's prompting. It is the heart that God desires, not songs mindlessly played to Him. All the religious trappings of the Jews, all the finery of the Sadducees, all the rigors of the Pharisees, were no more than that - trappings; white-washed sepulchers, Jesus called them. It was all act, and no reality. It was all appearance with no intimacy. As Zacharias stood before the waiting crowd, his silence shouted out God's message: "No more! Unbelief is cut off from the Temple!" No more would empty ritual suffice to bring one into the presence of God.
Hear this second similarity of Zacharias with his namesake. It is recorded in the scene which Jesus mentioned that Zechariah was delivering the word of God to the nation of Israel (1Chr 24:20-21). "You wonder why you are in this situation? I tell you it is because you insist on breaking the Law of your God." Then comes the clincher: "Because you have forsaken the LORD, He has also forsaken you." On that day, when Zacharias went in to offer incense, the situation hadn't really changed much. The people were there, but they no longer knew the LORD, and in Zacharias' silence, the verdict was delivered. "Because you don't really hear Me, I no longer hear you."
This just poured into my thoughts: Do you see the parallel between this situation and the friends and family that came to the circumcision of John? Same problem. They were friends and family, yet their actions and their surprise declared how little they knew this couple. It was just like this with God's people. They came to His house. They rejoiced with Him when good things happened. Yet, they were shocked and dismayed by some of the things He did, because they didn't really know Him. There was a problem with intimacy here. They knew how to look good, to do the right things, just like Zacharias' family knew. They knew they should come rejoice at the birth of a child, yet for nine months they were clueless that the event was coming up. They knew they should be at the circumcision, form and reputation demanded it, yet they had no inkling of what this child was. Surely, had they truly known the parents, they would have heard about the import of this babe many times over!
The nation knew they should come to the Temple on the prescribed days. They knew what animals to bring for sacrifice, they knew which songs to sing, they knew when to gesticulate, and when to remain silent. But they didn't know God. They called themselves His friends, His people, yet they were in the dark as to what He was about. They knew about Him, but they didn't know Him. The message of Zacharias' silence was God's declaration to a nation gone deaf. You have forsaken Me. Unbelief is a forsaking of the Faithful One. I, therefore, forsake you. I leave you to your own devices. You have chosen to make your own way, so be it.
In the evenings, of late, I have been reading an overview of the prophets. One thing that the author points out in many different places is the way that the prophets would use short-term prophecies to bolster the truth claims of their long-term prophecies. Their words were forever a mixture of hope and doom, both seeming beyond the possible to those who heard them. Unbelief was the easy reaction. So many false prophets about, why should we believe this one? The short-term prophecies provided them with reason to believe. The prophet was right about this, chances are he is right about that, as well.
In the prophetic days of our Savior's birth, I think we witness this same short-term / long-term scenario, except that Gabriel stands in the role of prophet - the messenger delivering God's word. The birth of John, and the impossibility of that birth according to the physical evidence, stood as proof that his word was true. If what he had declared about this child John was true, then what he had declared to Mary was also true. His validity as God's spokesman is established by this birth. When Mary's turn came, the groundwork was laid for her vindication as a righteous woman. As impossible as the story of Jesus' conception might be, the one who had born word of that conception was shown trustworthy. The impossible was true. What we have here is the equivalent of an establishing of legal precedent, only the court in which the precedent is established is the court of the Most High God.
John's birth was in itself a sign and a wonder. It was a sign that the prophetic office was being revived. Israel had known only silence from God for several centuries, but now, He was announcing that He had something to say. His message hadn't changed. What He had to say was exactly what He had been saying all along, "turn from your wicked ways, love your God with all your heart and soul and mind. I don't care about your rituals, I care about you!" The call had gone out many times, and each time, a few would hear and respond, but before long, all would return to the way it had always been. John was the announcement of the last call. Each one encountering John in his ministry was faced with a decision, an unavoidable decision. The call was to repentance, and those who heard could either repent, or ignore the message.
In a later time, those who had heard John would face another crisis of decision. With his passing, it seems that somebody somewhere decided to make a profit on the prophet's name, and promoted him as the Messiah, in spite of his own clear preaching to the contrary. He had even gone so far as to point to Jesus and say, 'there He is! The Lamb of God!' Of course, that was in the backwaters of Galilee, and perhaps was not a well attended event. At any rate, the movement John began became distorted in his absence, and turned into a cult all its own. They were trending in the right direction, but were off course in one critical aspect. When course correction came, how would they choose? Would they insist on idolizing this man God had used, or would they turn their eyes upon the One God had chosen? Would they pursue God and His Truth, or would they insist on their own hero, and their own misunderstanding?
At every turn the enemy of our souls is waiting and active, seeking to turn the good things of God against Him and against His people. Repeatedly, he sought to discredit the line fro which the Christ would descend. Just look at the histories of those who are part of the line of Jesus! But, that line was divinely interrupted to bring us the Perfect Son. Repeatedly, he tried to cut Jesus' ministry short, to dissuade Him from His course, but He would not be moved from the Father's purpose. He raised up any number of pretenders to the throne, in hopes of leading folks astray, and numbing them to the claims that Christ would legitimately make. They'd seen this act before. He thought he'd do some damage control by finally having this Christ crucified, but it turns out that once again, he was simply playing into God's hand.
He tried to corrupt John's ministry as well. How else would those who heard the Forerunner try and promote him as the King? John was certainly clear on his ministry and his role. He had his moments of doubt, to be sure, but he knew he was not the one. There is absolutely no possibility that he was teaching his disciples that the messenger was the key to everything. Scripture would not support it. Scripture had defined his role, and he knew it. It was the enemy coming in after removing him from the scene who managed to corrupt the message, confuse the minds of his followers, and make of the good office of the Forerunner a ministry of deception.
But, he cannot and will not prevail! It took decades to undo the damage, but the damage was undone. Those who served the God of truth encountered these misled disciples and recognized what had happened. They did not shout down the misled, did not cut them off from fellowship. They simply took the time to show them where they had made a mistake, and to lead them into the fullness of truth. Rather than condemn the cult, and give the devil his small victory, they overcame the enemy with the word of their testimony, with the power of Christ, and with the strength of Truth. He will always prevail!
The ISBE tells us that Josephus confirms the existence of John, as well as his execution at Herod's hands. The account differs a bit, which is hardly surprising. Had Herod let it be known that he had imprisoned this holy man because he dared to speak against royal sins, had he let it be known that he had executed this man for no better reason than because he had made foolish promises to his daughter, there would have been an uproar. So, he put a 'public face' on the execution, explained how he was concerned that this man would start a revolution of some sort.
See the cleverness of the enemy in this! As I said, he had raised up any number of false claimants, each promising to deliver Israel from the oppression of the Romans by force. Many had followed after these imposters and died for it. In the meantime, Israel had been trained to expect a Messiah far different from He who was promised. They were trained by these experiences to think that He would come as a conquering King, and they let the message of the Suffering Servant slip away. This conditioning made a place for Herod's excuse. They conditioned his thinking, and the thinking of the people in such a way that the story was plausible. Satan exploited his preparations to the full, once again instigating God's chosen people to remove the mouthpiece of God from among themselves! The primary rebel had successfully instigated rebellion by pointing to all these false rebels he had planted.
In this, he was laying the groundwork to destroy the Son of God, as well. John was a practice run. This is almost an anti-prophecy, it occurs to me. In John, God was establishing credentials with His people. He was building assurance in the thoughts of the righteous that He was still faithful to His word. As I noted earlier in this study, John's birth paves the way for accepting the birth of God's Son as legitimate. He was the Forerunner in more ways than one! God followed a path typical of the prophets - establishing the validity of the long-term vision by offering the proofs of short-term visions fulfilled. Satan was trying the same approach in reverse. He sought to discredit the Messiah, the long-term fulfillment, by first discrediting and destroying the Forerunner.
This is ever the way of it. God seeks to establish our confidence in Himself. He shows Himself faithful, plants in our lives any number of reasons and experiences by which we can know His faithfulness towards us. Table Talk magazine has been going through the book of Hebrews this year, and in that study, we have just been considering the surety God provides upon His covenant. He who cannot lie made a promise to us, and He backed it up by an oath sworn on His perfect witness. By two unchangeable things, He established His covenant with man. He did more than should have been necessary to make it plain to us that He is Faithful and True.
Satan is constantly at work seeking to undermine our confidence in God. He's forever trying to plant doubts in our minds. He's forever trying to bring down the men God raises up, in hopes of causing us to lose faith in our Salvation. He's forever trying to plant doubts in our minds that God would really do what He has promised to do, that He could possibly be bothered to save such miscreants as ourselves. He's forever trying to distort the picture God has painted, to feed us a story that is just slightly off from Truth, just enough to destroy us, but not so much that we will notice that we've gone wrong. But God will prevail!
I want to return to this thought of the public face. Herod was putting a public face on his decision to execute John, but he was hardly the only one to do so. In his own way, he was reflecting the state of God's people in general. Worship had become a public face for them. It was an attempt to appear holy and righteous in spite of the real internal situation. The Temple leaders looked good. They dressed well, and were on their best behavior whenever they went out amongst the people. The Pharisees looked good, ever so careful to follow all the rules, and ever so careful to make sure that this obedience was visible to all. But it was only the public face. The interior condition of each and every one of these men was exactly as God's own estimate put it, "none righteous, not even one."
Mankind had this innate desire to be righteous in themselves, but they can't be. It's not in us to do good. The fall destroyed our hope of living life in full compliance with the commands of a holy God. But, we're forever convincing ourselves we can, and because we think we can, we will stress over the fact that we don't. We're so sure we should be able to be good that we do everything in our power to look like we're good. We avoid confessing our sins to each other. That's so Catholic, after all. We don't need to confess to man when we have our High Priest in heaven. But, isn't He the very One who teaches us to confess to one another? Why do you suppose that is? I would suggest He put forth that command for the simple purpose of protecting us from our tendency towards hypocrisy, towards the public face.
Hypocrisy, "the public face," this is what has turned off so many from seeking God in the church, from seeking God at all. Put another way, how many ears have been closed to His calling because of the actions of those who claim to be the called? This same thing is, I think, in play amongst the relatives of John's parents in the scene before us. "Stop calling him Zacharias! His name is John." A lack of intimacy on the part of these relatives and friends led to this faux pas on their part. They didn't know because they didn't really know the parents. But, what was going through their minds? They were thinking, "Aha! They're not such a righteous couple after all! Hah! I knew they were hypocrites. All that feigned holiness, but we don't even know who this child's father is!"
They were wrong, of course, but there was just cause for them to think that the appearance of righteousness this couple had displayed was no more than that, no more than appearance. They lived in a period when the Roman occupation force decided who was the high priest. They knew full well that it had nothing to do with God, all to do with money. "You cannot serve both God and money," Jesus warned (Lk 16:13). This was a direct shot at the Temple leadership of the day. They did not serve God. They could not, for they had not come into service at His call, but at Caesar's. Their authority was delegated to them through the wrong channels. The people knew the falsehood at the top, and they supposed that such falsehood spread downward through the whole structure.
Moving forward to our own time, we stand in a situation not unlike that period. We no longer have civil authorities appointing the pastorate, but we do see civil law invading the church. In many places, we are seeing public opinion win out over God's opinion. Why? Because the Church has become more concerned about appearances than realities. Worse yet, they're trying to look good to the wrong folks! The church doesn't want to appear to be irrelevant, so they change their doctrine to align with public opinion. Thereby, they make themselves irrelevant. Not only do they have nothing different to say, but they declare their views to be so vacuous, so vacillating, that their thoughts mean less than nothing. A parakeet has firmer convictions in what it says! Oh, their attendance may increased, but faith has decreased, and the numbers will mean nothing in the final assessment.
Even where the doctrine is solid, there is a creeping hypocrisy setting in. We see it in the format of the 'seeker friendly.' We see it in the church of the perpetually joyful. All is goodness and light, but there's not a one who walks into that place without recognizing that it's nothing more than "the public face." People are hungry for something real, something that admits to the trials of life and still offers hope, something that recognizes the realities of sickness and pain, but also recognizes the realities beyond that sickness and pain. When these reality-starved masses come into the Church of God, what do they receive? Too often, they receive nothing but sugar. Worship is a happy, happy, joyful, joyful thing. There is no place in our worship any more to admit to struggling, to admit to doubt, to admit to weakness. David knew better. His worship was full of such admissions. God! I would that you would wipe this enemy of mine from the face of the earth. God! Look at this mess I'm in! God! I'm about to perish here. I'm ready to give up. How long, Lord? How long am I going to have to wait for You to come fix this? You won't hear these songs in the church today. They would admit to weakness in the Christian, would suggest that maybe even the oldest believer still needs God.
No, it's OK to express a desire for God, a hunger for God, perhaps even a need for God, but we cannot let it be known that these feelings are prompted by some defect in ourselves. We long for Him because we want to. If there is a need, it's a need kind of like the need for desert. It's just want in stronger terms, and let us be clear that it's all about our choice. And we don't even see that we are still playing the devil's game, trying to put ourselves on God's throne instead of placing Him on ours.
Those whom God is truly calling, those to whose eyes he is prying open will walk into an atmosphere such as this, and immediately determine that they came to the wrong place. This isn't reality, this is self-delusion! Is there a time for such celebration? Absolutely! Is that time every week without fail? Absolutely not! There's a time for tears. There's a time for outright frustration with the state of the universe. There's a time for pleading with a Holy Lord. God is not afraid of us, folks! He's not afraid of our emotions. He created them, for crying out loud! He's experienced them, and far more! He's not afraid of our thoughts, our questions, not even our doubts. Indeed, He'd prefer that we get this junk out in the open where we can deal with it together with Him. If we simply bury our doubts for fear of offending this God we think to serve, it is just smoldering rebellion, and the only ones being fooled in the matter are ourselves.
If only we can get it through our heads once and for all that God is greater than all that, if we can clue in that He is the one in control, not us, then maybe, just maybe, we'll dare to get real with Him. And maybe, just maybe, if we get real with God, we'll start being able to get real with each other! Maybe, just maybe, we'll finally accept that all our righteousness is just filthy rags, and stop trying to pretend our clothes are clean. Maybe, when we see our brothers and sisters trying to look good in spite of their reality, we'll stop imitating them, and free them from the effort instead. Maybe we'll stop insisting that our fellow Christians should look all perfect and happy, and recognize that they're all just as much a work in progress as ourselves. Maybe, just maybe, we'll stop working so hard at looking good that we miss the gift God has given us in Christ, by which we are truly made good.
In doing this, we will be doing no more than obeying our Lord. What great power there is in that obedience! The power of obedience is clearly on display in Elizabeth and Zacharias. Elizabeth was faithful to the Lord's plan for her. There had been a season of silence and seclusion, but now the news had gone forth - she not only was going to have a baby, but the baby was now here. In v58, we read the reaction to her obedience - and notice that she did not simply announce the baby, she announced the Lord's mercy towards her in giving her this child. All the glory goes to God, who has magnificently displayed His mercy. The result of this is that the family and relatives, though almost clueless as to the situation of the last several months, understand that God's mercy has been shown, and they rejoice with her who is rejoicing.
At the very end of this particular passage, we again see the power of obedience on display. The family is confused. They don't understand why Elizabeth wants to name this child John. Indeed, they're quite certain something must be wrong here, so they check with Zacharias. Now, Zacharias had been a little bit slow off the starting line. He didn't immediately lay hold of the promise that was set before him, and for nine months he had born the consequences of that doubt. Yet, throughout that nine months, he remained obedient to his God. Here, in response to the confusion, he gives public display to obedience, he declares his assent to God's plan. "His name is John," is Zacharias' declaration that he would obey God's command even in this most personal matter of naming his child. It was also a confession that the child was not his, but the Lord's. What was the result of obedience? They were astonished!
Obedience has that tendency. If we are willing to lay aside our pride and our opinions, and simply pursue the course that God has set out for us, astonishing things are going to happen. Obedience is going to lead us to do things that will not make a bit of sense in the eyes of the watching world. They won't get it. We probably won't even get it. Eventually, though, the result God has been purposing will come to pass, and we will not be the only ones to stand in awe of what He has done in that moment. No, there is incredible power in obedience, because in obedience we are operating not in our own strength but in the strength of our Lord. In obedience, we admit our utter weakness, and depend wholly upon Him. We set aside all possibility of leaning on our own understanding, because we don't understand! We are forced to walk by faith alone, and when faith is active, the Spirit is moving, and when the Spirit is moving, there is power - dunamis - power to overcome obstacles, power to rise above, power to accept the word of the Lord and power to act upon that word.
Obedience to the Lord is the very thing that turned the world upside down in the days of the apostles. Obedience to the Lord today will do no less. When we accept His right over us, when we learn to serve in spirit and in truth, wholeheartedly and at all times, we will see such change in the world around us. We will see wonders in our own lives, and wonders such as the most hardened unbeliever will yet marvel at. Obedience will make straight the path of the Lord. Obedience will open wide the gates that the King of glory may come in upon the scene. Obedience seeks to fulfill the prayer of 'Thy will be done.'
