Outreach Enterprises

In the previous article on how to grow in faith we focused on the place of obedience to God and the inspiring power of the Word of God in stirring and increasing our faith. This week we focus on the nature of seed faith and its dynamics in increasing our faith.

Seed Faith

Both the physical and spiritual world in which we live is affected by sowing seeds and reaping harvests. Faith comes from seeds that we sow in our lives.

Unbelief and skepticism also comes from seeds we sow, whether philosophical or emotional. That is, it comes from thoughts that we nurture or hurts that we carry. Paul writes,

“Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption; but he who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.” (Galatians 6:7-8)

Jesus challenged his disciples for their lack of faith saying “For truly, I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.” (Matthew 17:20)

The table below outlines, from a number of passages, the seed that we need to sow and the resulting harvest that will be reaped.

Below are a number of steps that you can follow in exercising seed faith. They are not a formula, but simple steps that help you focus on God and exercise your faith. This week, why don’t you examine the passages identified above and work through these steps, expecting God to work in your life.

Steps of Seed Faith

1. Acknowledge that God is the source of all you need.
2. Sow your seed, give that it may come back multiplied.
3. Pray over your sown seed. Prayer is like water that helps the crops to grow.
4. Expect to reap a harvest. Expect God to do a miracle for you.
5. Give thanks to God for the harvest He has given to you. Thank God, for the miracle He has done for you.

Every person who commits their life to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour will be challenged to grow in faith. Jesus challenged his disciples to stretch their understanding to see the impossible things they could do through and with Jesus Christ. There are three aspects of our life with God that enable us to stretch our faith and grow in wisdom and righteousness. They are: Obedience, the Word of God, and Seed Faith. Today we will look at Obedience and the Word of God and next week we will explore Seed Faith.

Obedience

Faith always requires action. With most of the promises of God, there are accompanying conditions that we must carry out in order for God to fulfill His promise to us. For instance:

• God promises that if we give, then it will be given back to us in the same measure we give (Luke 6:38 );
• If we die to ourselves and our own desires and live to God, we will be given new and abundant life (Matthew 6:33 , 10:39 ); and
• If we forgive others, then we will be forgiven (Matthew 6:14 ).

Faith will bring us to a place of obedience. We are called to obey God and that obedience will open up a new growth in our faith.

The Word of God

Paul writes, “Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God” (Romans 10:17 ). God’s Word sparks new faith in our hearts and unleashes our ability to believe God, to listen to God’s counsel and instruction.

Paul writes: “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable:

• For teaching;
• For reproof;
• For correction; and
• For training in righteousness,

So that the man or woman of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:15 -17)

Next week we will move on to explore “Seed Faith”.

Matthew 4:1-11 (as well as Luke 4:1-14) includes a description of the temptation of Jesus, by the devil in the wilderness – an interaction that occurred after he had fasted for forty days and nights. In The Temptations of Jesus – Part One we addressed the issue of the temptation for power. Not that power in itself is a problem, but the means by which it is acquired and used. Jesus calls us to use a servant-leadership rather than coercive lordship approach to leadership. In the third temptation the focus changes from power to the acquisition of material riches, honour and glory. The third temptation reminds us that a key point of weakness lies with hankering after riches. However, the possession of power and riches themselves is not the problem – it is the price we pay to gain them and the attitudes we develop in possessing them that matters.

What was at stake in this temptation was possession of all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor or glory: riches “laid on” and honour far surpassing even Alexander the Great, as well as the Persian and Roman Emperors. The price was to leave God and bow down and worship the devil. The “if” moved from whether or not Jesus was the Son of God, to whether or not He could resist the lure of all the riches, kingdoms and glory of this world. We need to note that we have moved beyond simple needs for survival in a material world. Jesus response to the provision of simple needs is that we survive on something greater: the Word of God. However, God does provide for those needs when we make His kingdom and righteousness first in our lives and hearts (Mat 6). This temptation, however, deals with the movement to the possession of luxury at its grandest level. At this point we get into sticky ground. We agree that the right response is “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only’.” However, what about riches and glory themselves? Can we have them or not?

Is it wrong to be rich? Is it wrong to receive honour and glory for the things that we do? If we receive acclaim for achievements in this world have we become prideful? One answer is to reject all these things and do nothing that would either gain us riches or honour. We withdraw then into our own religious enclave and leave the world to run or perish by itself. This perception treats riches and glory as evil in themselves. Just like money! Well money itself is not evil; rather it is the love of money that is the root of all evil (1 Tim 6:10). Jesus also indicates that honour itself is not evil when he defends the woman who washed his feet with her tears and then anointed them with the richest of perfume (Mat 26:6-12). One of my leaders asked whether it was wrong to expect appreciation for what you do. The answer, on the one hand, is yes. If you do what you do to be appreciated, then your heart seeks the praise of men and women, which robs you of honour from Father God (Mat 7:1-18). However, on the other hand, it is wrong for us not to appreciate what others do for us in Kingdom business. Not only do we need to appreciate them, but to publically do so.

What about riches? Jesus notes that “blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth”. It is not the riches of this material world that is the problem but our heart attitude to God, His Kingdom and righteousness. The meek man, woman or child has yielded his or her rights to God and are sold out to His Cause and Purpose. Jesus notes that this type of people will have the things of this world to do the work of the Kingdom of God. Jesus proclaimed that we should store up treasure in heaven rather than earth (Mat 6:19-21). However, he nails the issue clearly when he adds for where your treasure is that is where your heart will be also. We need to turn our hearts away from a love of this world—its riches and glory—and turn our hearts wholly to God. We are to use, rather than love, the things of this world for Kingdom business and to see the purposes and cause of God come to fruition. Neither riches nor glory give satisfaction in this life, but only fulfilling God’s purpose for our lives from the beginning of time.

Both Matthew (4:1-11) and Luke’s (4:1-14) Gospels include a description of the temptation of Jesus, by the devil in the wilderness – an interaction that occurred after he had fasted for forty days and nights. The story is familiar to us, yet holds different levels of understanding, some plain and straight forward, others more complex. This story probably holds one of the most complex theological issues we have in the Gospels – the meaning of the temptations for Jesus Himself. Before exploring the more complex issues involved in the temptations (in the third of these articles), we are going to look at some of the significant truths touched on by the temptations themselves.

The temptations remind us that our points of weakness lay, on the one hand, around the desire for power, and on the other hand, with the hankering after riches. However, the possession of power and riches themselves is not the problem – it involves, rather, the price we pay to gain them and the attitudes we develop in possessing them. The first two temptations revolve around Jesus’ power, and challenge Him to prove Himself – “if you really are the Son of God…” Is not that the sum of our lives? I do not mean that we are the Son of God, but that we spend our lives trying to prove ourselves. How often do we exert ourselves to impress people, whom we perceive to be important, and have them simply tolerate us at the best? Whilst at the same time we totally ignore the incredible love of those closest to us – our husbands or wives, parents or children. How often have we returned home from work, college or school, rebuffed by those we try to impress there, only to vent our anger and take it out on our family and friends?

However, power does not only relate to positions that we hold that have certain responsibilities, and which, because of that come with certain levels of authority. The real problem is the means of gaining that power, whether positional or not, and then how we use it. Jesus instructs His disciples to seek true greatness through servanthood not rulership and lordship. He uses his own ministry as the example of one who serves. His issue is with the use of power that lords it over others, because of its coercive dynamics. Coercive power is always abusive power, whether it is overt and brutal, or covert and subtly manipulative. Jesus moves the focus of the disciples from the using of others for their own purposes, which denies their humanity and belittles their dignity, to loving them through servant leadership, which heightens their humanity and uplifts their dignity. Jesus does not direct us away from coercive power just because of its abusive nature, but because it is an ineffective use of power and leadership. We must be wary of assuming here that Jesus denies the use of power itself. Rather, he warns of a particular use of power in leadership dynamics. True use of power will see others grow through its outworking. As a result, they will be more likely to become healthier, wiser, freer and more autonomous than they would under a more coercive form of leadership.

Both Matthew (4:1-11) and Luke’s (4:1-14) Gospels include a description of the temptation of Jesus, by the devil in the wilderness – an interaction that occurred after he had fasted for forty days and nights. The story is familiar to us, yet holds different levels of understanding, some plain and straight forward, others more complex. This story probably holds one of the most complex theological issues we have in the Gospels – the meaning of the temptations for Jesus Himself. Before exploring the more complex issues involved in the temptations (in the third of these articles), we are going to look at some of the significant truths touched on by the temptations themselves.

The temptations remind us that our points of weakness lay, on the one hand, around the desire for power, and on the other hand, with the hankering after riches. However, the possession of power and riches themselves is not the problem – it involves, rather, the price we pay to gain them and the attitudes we develop in possessing them. The first two temptations revolve around Jesus’ power, and challenge Him to prove Himself – “if you really are the Son of God…” Is not that the sum of our lives? I do not mean that we are the Son of God, but that we spend our lives trying to prove ourselves. How often do we exert ourselves to impress people, whom we perceive to be important, and have them simply tolerate us at the best? Whilst at the same time we totally ignore the incredible love of those closest to us – our husbands or wives, parents or children. How often have we returned home from work, college or school, rebuffed by those we try to impress there, only to vent our anger and take it out on our family and friends?

However, power does not only relate to positions that we hold that have certain responsibilities, and which, because of that come with certain levels of authority. The real problem is the means of gaining that power, whether positional or not, and then how we use it. Jesus instructs His disciples to seek true greatness through servanthood not rulership and lordship. He uses his own ministry as the example of one who serves. His issue is with the use of power that lords it over others, because of its coercive dynamics. Coercive power is always abusive power, whether it is overt and brutal, or covert and subtly manipulative. Jesus moves the focus of the disciples from the using of others for their own purposes, which denies their humanity and belittles their dignity, to loving them through servant leadership, which heightens their humanity and uplifts their dignity. Jesus does not direct us away from coercive power just because of its abusive nature, but because it is an ineffective use of power and leadership. We must be wary of assuming here that Jesus denies the use of power itself. Rather, he warns of a particular use of power in leadership dynamics. True use of power will see others grow through its outworking. As a result, they will be more likely to become healthier, wiser, freer and more autonomous than they would under a more coercive form of leadership.

Next week we will explore the second element of Jesus’ temptation – the temptation of riches, honour and glory!

John opens his gospel with the statement: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made” (John 1:1-3). In doing so John identifies Jesus Christ with a unique identity of God. It does that by placing Him squarely in the midst of a Jewish understanding of the belief in One God , but one that does not infringe its monotheistic nature. The proclamation of Jesus Christ as the Messiah and the development of a Trinitarian understanding God (as Father, Son and Holy Spirit) do not deny the oneness of God but expands the understanding of the internal nature of such a God.

The early Church did not proclaim a different God to that understood by Jewish tradition, but saw Jesus Christ as part of the nature of the God who had appeared to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The same God – Yahweh – brought Israel out of Egypt , from a small tribe into Palestine as a nation established through the leadership of Moses and Joshua. Jesus Christ brings to us one of the significant aspects of the meaning of Yahweh, as God with us – God in the midst of us. Jesus came to show us that although God is almighty He does not stand aloof from us, but comes to share His love with us. He is a personal God who desires to have a personal relationship with us. He is the God who made the universe and world in which we live and made us with the personal nature that we have. He made us both material and spiritual persons so we could enjoy the world He made and enjoy our relationship with Him.

Sin and rebellion separate us from that love and its personal relationship. Sin is not simply doing the wrong things, but failing to be all that God intended us to be. We fail in such an endeavour because we were never intended to reach our full potential by ourselves. It was something that was meant to occur in and through our relationship with God. We can be morally blameless, yet fall short of the mark. Paul notes that he was blameless according to the Law, but was the chief of sinners because he had rejected and persecuted Jesus Christ. Jesus came so we could once again enter into a love relationship with God. His death on the cross paved the way for us to come back to God, be forgiven for our sins and enter into a holy and righteous relationship with the living God. He is the means by which we enter and stand in God’s presence. This Christmas we celebrate afresh the coming of that babe in a manger for us.

As we noted last week, Genesis 2 finishes with unity, togetherness and completeness in a world without shame, conflict and turmoil. This sense of paradise was only short-lived as the story quickly moved towards a shift away from God to a world full of good and evil – a world of which we are very much aware. If the world that we know constantly oscillates between good and evil, how real then is this sense of paradise? This sense of a utopian world hankers in many of us that search for a Shangri-La or a place that takes us out of the rat race to a place of tranquility and peace where men and women are truly human.

It lays at the heart of the hippy movement of the 1960s and 70s; for those who move to half-acre properties in places on the outskirts of our cities where people are “truly friendly”; and for those who move to the sunshine state where it is “beautiful one day, perfect the next”. It is also something that we have sought for in the church in our search for authentic communities of love. Yet even in the best of such communities, there is the disintegration of authenticity that is part of our broken world, especially with the diversion of our focus from God to the church. Although we cannot prove the existence of a prior paradise state, it still lays resident within us as a longing of the heart.

With the opening verses of Genesis 3, trouble comes to paradise in the form of a temptation. A temptation of a particular type that quickly moved humanity from unity, togetherness and completeness to the edges of despair that afflicts our human experience and the frailty of our human identity. As one scholar noted, these stories do not mention the term sin. Certainly, these stories do not intimate at, even indirectly, the most common understanding of the term sin – moral violation. However, one particular understanding of the term sin – to miss the mark – does resonate with the movement to despair and the frailty of human identity that the Genesis stories describe. It is such an understanding of the term sin that led the Pharisaical Paul, who was perfect according to the law, to declare that he was the chief of sinners. On the moral level, Paul could not be faulted – he kept the Law. On the Damascus Road, he learnt that in the very defense of the Law, he had persecuted Jesus the Christ and by doing so had severely missed the purposes of God.

The response to the temptation itself was to miss the mark of God’s intention for humanity. The temptation was to act and live independently from God – to seek our own glory and prestige. This is the true meaning of arrogance. Its aspirations for knowledge of good and evil resulted in a breaching of our human identity that produced a frailty of our human nature that affected our fundamental relationships. It brought an estrangement from God (Genesis 3:10; Isaiah 59:1-2; Romans 8:7-8); a disharmony with other people (Genesis 4:8; Colossians 3:5-9); a betrayal of ourselves with a bondage to self or selfishness (James 1:14; Galatians 5:19-24); and death to our spiritual sensitivity (Genesis 2:17; 3:24; Romans 6:23; 8:6; Ephesians 2:1; James 1:15). This brought a total confusion to the understanding of our nature – the fundamental question of who we are. This state of despair is not easily lessened by the obedience to the Law. The keeping of the religious and moral aspects of the Law do not necessarily negate this act of independence. This is because working for God is a lot easier than working with God.

Jesus came specifically to address the movement from dignity to despair that is part of our human condition. He addressed our estrangement with God, breaching his own relationship with God in order to bring us back to God; his sacrifice on the cross had the two-fold effect of bringing forgiveness for our sins and enabling us to die to sin and live to righteousness; he revealed the nature of God’s love and enabled us to participate in that love and through it to love others; and he enabled us to once again to become sensitive to our spiritual nature and our ability to worship and experience God on a spiritual level. The “Good News” is that in Jesus Christ, God has done everything necessary to liberate us from sin and restore the broken relationship with God and others. This process of restoration is encountered by our understanding that:

• Jesus came into the world to save the world (Matthew 1:21 ; Luke 19:10; 1 Timothy 1:15; 1 John 4:14);
• Jesus died to save sinners (Isaiah 53:5-6; John 10:10-1; Romans 5:8, 17; 6:23 ; 2 Corinthians 5:18-20);
• We accept the offer of salvation through faith, accepting God’s gift of His Son (Romans 3:24 -25; 5:1; Ephesians 2:8-10);
• Saving faith is the act of receiving Jesus Christ (John 1:12 ; Revelation 3:20 );
• New life is restored through Jesus Christ – God’s life in us, eternal life (1 Corinthians 6:17 ; 2 Corinthians 5:17 ; 1 John 5:11 -12); and
• The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from sin and takes away guilt (Hebrews 9:14 ; 1 John 1:8-14).

In the second of our series concerning the nature of justice and humanity, I noted that God created men and women with the power to think, to choose, and to worship and commune with God. Although, sin has perverted these capacities, they are still apparent in the nature of men and women – noting that the term sin itself is a loaded word that needs some unpacking. However, before we can move further in understanding the movement to despair that afflicts our human experience and the frailty of the human identity; we need to pause to clarify the direction from which our discussion proceeds. Having noted two different approaches to understanding the creation stories – the mythical and literal – it is important to understand the background to these approaches.

The mythical approach arises out of the liberal school of theology and the use of the historical-critical method of interpreting the scriptures. The literal approach, on the other hand, is usually attributed to a fundamentalist school of theology. It is always difficult to use generalizations about any particular approach so I will term the extremes of these approaches as philosophical liberalism and philosophical fundamentalism. The extreme liberal approach sees the scriptures as simply the words of men and women, which are reflections of their human experiences, interpreted in light of the divine. They deny any supernatural aspects of the scriptures, including any divine/human interactions, noting these as mythical stories. For instance, Martin Noth in A History of Israel proposes that Jacob and his twelve sons never existed (Genesis). They were mythical stories to give background and support to a confederacy of tribes that came together in Palestine itself, on the verge of their possession of the land. It is also seen in the approach of the “Jesus Seminar” that proposes that at the most only 20% of the words attributed to Jesus in the gospels were spoken by Jesus – the rest were the creation of the early Church.

The extreme fundamentalist approach sees the scriptures as only the Word of God, whereby God is seen as having dictated the words to the authors. The scriptures thus are inerrant, which proposes that there are no errors in the Bible. Any errors that may be noted are simply apparent. This poses some difficulties since John and the Synoptic gospels differ in the date of the last supper. There are also some discrepancies noted in the revelation of the Hebrew word for God, YHWH, to the Patriarchs – Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – and Moses. Some proponents of this approach also deny the existence of miracles today. For them, miracles ceased once the Canon of Scriptures (the Bible as we know it) was completed.

One of the difficulties that has arisen over the debate between these two approaches, is that they have distracted us from what the text of the scriptures have to say and the truth claims they make. Two philosophers – Paul Ricoeur and Hans-Georg Gadamer – have proposed a greater engagement of the biblical texts themselves. They have done this without denying the issues raised by both philosophical liberalism and philosophical fundamentalism. Ricoeur notes that the biblical texts are both human words produced by humans and embedded in their situation, as well as the words of God, for God is both the author and referent of the biblical canon – that is, God is involved in the inspiration of the entire biblical texts. Ricoeur also notes that the texts of the Bible have a life of their own independent from the intentions of their authors. Gadamer takes us a step further and calls us to engage the texts of the Bible in a dialogue that involves both our presuppositions and ideas and the truth claims that lie within the texts themselves. He, along with Jürgen Habermas, Paul Ricoeur, Bernard Lonergan and Paulo Friere, dispute the objective claims of the Enlightenment, scientific positivism and philosophy and the anti-supernatural use of the historical-critical method of interpretation of the biblical texts. This does not dispute the fruit of scientific endeavours that have served us mightily in almost every arena of our lives, but calls for caution over the absolute claims of scientific philosophy that are not as objective as previously claimed.

Thus having noted the mythical and literal issues that are raised in understanding the creation stories we move to a discussion of the theological truths they propose. The first of these is understanding that the two writers of the creation stories (Genesis 1-2:3 & Genesis 2:4-25) reflect the same theme as in 1 Timothy 6:15 -16 where Paul wrote:

“For at just the right time Christ will be revealed from heaven by the blessed and only almighty God, the King of kings and Lord of lords. He alone can never die, and he lives in light so brilliant that no human can approach him. No human eye has ever seen him, nor ever will. All honor and power to him forever! Amen!”

The Genesis writers are unanimous in this regard – what an incredible, awesome God is our God, who made both the heavens and the earth and all that is contained within them. This awesome God then made us, in the divine image and likeness and infused us with the divine life, making us both material and spiritual entities who have the capacity to relate to both a material and spiritual world.

Last week we started looking at the theme of justice and the nature of humanity. There we took up the theme that God is a just God who is not indifferent to injustice and calls us to account for the things we do and the things we do not do. We also noted that the biblical concept of a just God did not see God’s application of justice as either harsh or cruel. Rather God’s justice is tempered by love, mercy and kindness. If the biblical testimony describes God as a just God then what does that mean when we come to consider the nature or state of the human person? What type of person does such a God create?

The two Genesis creation stories (Genesis 1-2:3 & Genesis 2:4-25) have had great scrutiny in recent decades, with some believing they are simply mythical stories that portray theological and anthropological truths, whilst others believe that the stories should be taken literally.

Though some see the scientific evolutionary theory approach as more reliable, it too has come under great scrutiny with serious questioning of the objective claims of scientific positivism. I like the view expressed in Job where God asks Job whether he had been there when God had laid the foundations of the earth. The answer: NO!

We cannot, however, simply take an agnostic view of this issue; as what we believe about the beginnings of the world and humanity affect how we live our life and how we treat other people and God. The biblical testimony notes four things about human beings that are important to how we treat others:

• Men and women are the pinnacle of God’s creation, made in the image and likeness of God and as such were “very good” – Genesis 1:26f;
• Men and women are intelligent beings, they have the power of rational thought, a capacity to reason things out and come to logical conclusions – Isaiah 1:18;
• Men and women are Moral beings. They have the capacity to recognise the difference between right and wrong. They are able to make free moral choices. They can say YES to God as well as NO – Deuteronomy 30:19;
• Men and women are Spiritual beings. They have the capacity to know and enjoy fellowship with God – Genesis 3; John 4:24.

Thus men and women were created with the power to think, to choose, and to worship and commune with God. SIN has perverted these capacities, but they are still apparent in the nature of men and women.

Over the next few weeks we will be looking at the issue of justice and humanity, starting with looking at the concept of a Just God. By this we do not simply mean that there is only one God (that certainly is fundamental to our understanding of our Triune God) but also to what extent justice is important to God.

If, for instance, God is unjust or simply by nature indifferent to justice (such as the lack of difference between the concepts of good and evil in Buddhism and Eastern Mysticism) then we are alone in our efforts. It also means that anything goes, that is, to the extent that you can get away with it. Survival of the fittest plays a significant role and there is no accountability or responsibility for what we do or do not do. It implies that we can use other people for our own ends, rather than loving them for themselves.

This notion can also produce a romantic understanding of heaven for some Christians, where we all get there in the end. However, we cannot so easily get away with the idea that there is no justice in the universe, or any sense of indifference towards issues of justice. The concept of an unjust God or an indifferent God can only be cold and heartless. It betrays our humanity and the validity of our being.

On the other hand, if God is a just God and justice is important to God then we face an entirely different world where justice matters and accountability is required. At the same time, we must face the fact that the concept of a just God can produce a particularly cold and harsh picture of God.

Such a picture of God had developed in Israel amongst the Pharisees in Jesus’ time. This picture did not reflect the revelation of God as Yahweh, who desired an intimate relationship with His people. The biblical texts tell us that God is a just God, but at the same time He is neither cold nor harsh. God’s justice is accompanied by faith, love, kindness and mercy. In representing a just God, Jesus challenges the Pharisees’ harsh application of the Law given through Moses that had become a burden for people to carry. He highlights their neglect of the more essential ingredients of the Law: justice, faith, mercy, kindness and love. This concept takes into account that this Just God is also Love.