THOMAS - "LET'S STOP BEING SO CRITICAL" (PART 3 OF 6)

 

St. Thomas by Peter Paul Rubens from his Twelve Apostles series at the Museo del Prado, Madrid, c. 1611

Continuing with a series urging believers to give up being inclined to negative thoughts for Lent and finding so much joy in that attitude they never go back to being critical.

How many look at the title and painting of today's blog and immediately think, "Oh, it's doubting Thomas?"

No, Doubting isn't his first name. No, Biblically his nickname isn't "Doubting Thomas;" it's "the Twin." 

Yes, Thomas doubted, but in Mark 16:9-14 stated that the eleven did not believe the report of the women or the two disciples from Emmaus and Jesus rebuked them. Also, Matthew 28:17 stated some (plural) doubted - this was at the Great Commission, and after Thomas showed up. So why single out Thomas? No! Good! Reason!

Let's look at what else we know about Thomas, starting with the Synoptic Gospels - we know he's one of the twelve. And that's it. Well, since Matthew and Luke's lists technically list six pairs of disciples, they both put Matthew together with Thomas.

When you get to John, you learn more. This is where we learn he's nicknamed "the Twin." It may be he had a twin, it may be that he looked similar to either one of the other apostles or Jesus Himself, and it may be that he used to play baseball in Minnesota. The last one is slightly less likely than the others.

Thomas also was on the passenger list for Peter's post-Resurrection fishing trip in John 21. I find it interesting that he and Nathaniel (aka Bartholomew) joined Peter and the Zebedee brothers, but Peter's brother and fellow fisher Andrew didn't.

Yes, I'm now working backward in John. We also hear from Thomas in John 14:5. Here, Thomas (and probably other) disciples were stumped by what Jesus had said. Unlike the others, he raised his hand (maybe) and asked "Lord, we do not know where you are going, and how can we know the way?" I'm sure you all know the answer. What you don't have John 14:6 memorized?

However, I want you to think of John 11 next time you want to dub him "Doubting Thomas." This chapter starts with Jesus being informed that his friend Lazarus was sick. I'm sure you know the story. Jesus waited two days, and then shocked his disciples by saying that Lazarus was dead and then left to Judea, where recently they tried to stone him.

But do you remember a disciple saying, "Let us go also that  we may die with him?" It's in John 11:16. Notice who that disciple was? Yep. Thomas.

After hearing that statement, do you think we should call him "Doubting Thomas?" Should we not rather call him "Ready to Die for Christ Thomas?" 

Maybe we should stop vilifying Thomas? You think?

 

SUNDAY PSALMS PART 26 OF 48 - PSALM 116

Cool Creek Park, Westfield, Indiana

 

1    I love the LORD, because He has heard
     My voice and my supplications.
2   Because He has inclined His ear to me,
     Therefore I will call upon Him as long as I live.
3   The pains of death surrounded me,
     And the pangs of Sheol laid hold of me;
     I found trouble and sorrow.
4   Then I called upon the name of the LORD:
     "O Lord, I implore You, deliver my soul!"

5   Gracious is the LORD, and righteous;
     Yes, our God is merciful.
6   The LORD preserves the simple;
     I was brought low, and He saved me.
7   Return to your rest, O my soul,
     For the LORD has dealt bountifully with you.

8   For You have delivered my soul from death,
     My eyes from tears,
     And my feet from falling.
9   I will walk before the LORD
     In the land of the living.
10 I believed, therefore I spoke,
    "I am greatly afflicted."
11  I said in my haste,
    "All men are liars."

12 What shall I render to the LORD
     For all His benefits toward me?
13  I will take up the cup of salvation,
     And call upon the name of the LORD.
14  I will pay my vows to the LORD
     Now in the presence of all His people.
15  Precious in the sight of the LORD
     Is the death of His saints.

16  O LORD, truly I am Your servant;
     I am Your servant, the son of Your maidservant;
     You have loosed my bonds.
17  I will offer to You the sacrifice of thanksgiving,
     And will call upon the name of the LORD.
18  I will pay my vows to the LORD
     Now in the presence of all His people,
19  In the courts of the LORD's house,
     In the midst of you, O Jerusalem. 

     Praise the Lord!
                        Psalm 116:1-19, New King James Version

 

Two of my favorite singers, both of whom I know personally, have written and recorded songs based on this Psalm (Barry Kay, "I Love The Lord," from his "Beyond The Song" project, and Amy Shreve, "Psalm 116," which leads off her "Whisper" CD and is also on her compilation "The God of All Hope.")

This is an uplifting Psalm, but verse 15 is the one that stands out: "Precious in the sight of Yahweh is the death of His saints." I especially think of this verse in connection with ministries to the Persecuted Church like Voice of the Martyrs, Spirit of Martyrdom, and Vision Beyond Borders.

One thing I noticed is the repetition of the phrase "call on the LORD" or more frequently "call on the Name of the LORD." I read an excellent book on the Biblical Theology of Prayer titled Calling On The Name of the Lord by J. Gary Millar. He focuses on how men started calling on the name of the Lord after the birth of Adam's grandson Enosh (Gen. 4:26), and defines how this is throughout Scripture asking God to do what He promised.
 

 

EVEN CHURCH FATHERS CAN BE CONTROVERSIAL - A LOOK AT ORIGEN OF ALEXANDRIA

 

 

Have you ever heard that there are many ways to interpret the Bible, almost implying that there's no way of knowing what it really means?

This is the halfway point in my 13 installment look at the Church Fathers, using Bryan Litfin's Getting To Know The Church Fathers: An Evangelical Introduction as a guide. Today's subject is Origen. I was about to write "Today's saint," but Origen (like Tertullian) was never canonized. 

I believe I've mentioned in another blog (possibly the one I did for All Saints Day a couple of months ago) that I take the typical Biblicist view of sainthood, which is that all believers are saints. (In all except one of his letters to the churches, Paul addresses the recipients as being saints, including the carnal Corinthians; the exception was the Galatians, where they were on the verge of following "another gospel.") With that definition, I definitely consider Origen a saint (and the same for Tertullian, but you might remember me referring to that a couple of days ago).

Why do I unhesitatingly consider him a saint? Two reasons. He clearly loved the Lord, and he loved the church. He got carried away in trying to live out the passage of being a eunuch for God's sake (which he later realized was unwise), and lived a life of self-sacrifice which weakened him physically. He also taught others the Gospel during a time of severe persecution, and when his students were arrested, Origen risked his freedom visiting them in prison and shouting encouragement to them when they faced martyrdom (which Origen later did as well).

Some of you may not have known this about Origen. Those who are familiar with him probably associate him first of all with his allegorical interpretation of Scripture. Those who know my life story are aware I went to a Bible college that emphasized a literal interpretation of Scripture, and view symbolizing Scripture with wariness, afraid the interpreter will use that hermeneutic to justify any fanciful thing he would think of. On the other hand, though, is there an equally dangerous extreme of plain sense interpretation, where we believe that an unbeliever is able to read Scripture and understand what it means?

First of all, Origen believed the Bible was Spiritual, and thus there was more to it than the historical/literal words (which Origen did not reject). Also, being aware of the danger I mentioned above, he established three safeguards against his allegories taking us to la la land. They are:

1. The Catholic Church's Rule of Faith. The Rule of Faith is the precursor to the Apostle's Creed, and Origen was in agreement with other church fathers such as Irenaeus and Tertullian concerning what it taught.
2. The nature of Scripture. Origen believed Scripture was both about Christ and from Him. See John 5:39. If you've heard some say that Jesus is on every page of the Bible, you're repeating a concept that may have originated with Origen.
   
3. The upright character of the interpreter. To understand Scripture requires a pure heart. Godly maturity and wisdom prevent going into error.

Origen was definitely considered a Biblical scholar. His allegorical approach was not due to a lack of respect for Scripture but rather the opposite. Is it possible that, as Festus taunted Paul, that much learning made him mad? Should we be skeptical of Christian intellectuals and academians? Or are we going the other direction and promoting anti-intellectualism? 

There are ideas that Origen came up with which weren't completely orthodox. For example, he believed that Satan would eventually repent, and that our resurrection bodies won't be physical, neither view being accepted by the mainstream church. But anybody who's familiar with Pilgrim's Progress or the Chronicles of Narnia realize symbolism and story can effectively communicate truth.

 

 

"HE WHO LOVES FATHER OR MOTHER MORE THAN ME..." - A LOOK AT PERPETUA OF CARTHAGE

 

History books are dominated by men, and Church History books are no exception. You may have noticed that in my series based on Getting to Know the Church Fathers: An Evangelical Introduction by Bryan Litfin, so far it has all been men included, and starting in chapter 6, that trend resumes and continues through the book. But does that mean women had no impact on Christian history?

Perpetua was included by Litfin to introduce a female who had a role in church history. My opinion - I do not consider Perpetua a "church father" like most of the others in the book not because of gender but because to me the Church Fathers earned that role by influential writing. (I wouldn't list the famous martyr Polycarp one either, and there's a gentleman included later in Litfin's book who I also would not consider a church father.) However, her story is definitely influential.

We're in an era where we admire if not idolize independence and individualism. For example, in real life would a military officer keep his job if he showed the same adherence to regulations as Captain James T. Kirk of the Starship Enterprize did? This was not the world of the Roman empire. In those days, when a daughter was born, the father had the choice of accepting her into the family or leave her exposed to her death. Thus, an highborn accepted daughter was expected to be loyal and have absolute respect for her father and her clan.

Perpetua and several of her family - including her personal slave Felicity - became Christians. The one exception - Perpetua's father. When she was arrested, tried, and sentenced to death for her faith, her father begged her to renounce Christ for his sake as well as to spare her life. This was not accepted behavior by a daughter.

But Perpetua lived out Jesus' teaching "He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me. He who seeks to find his life will lose it and he who loses his life for My sake will find it." (Matthew 10:37-39) 

In a coming segment, I will deal with a Church Father who did not believe women should preach but they were allowed to sing. Perpetua was considered to be a Montanist, a segment of the church that gave a stronger role to women as well as being open to a continuance of the gifts like tongues and prophecy (Montanists referred to their movement as "the New Prophecy") and to a strict, almost legalistic, lifestyle. In its homeland of Phrygia, they wrote down their "prophecies" and equated it with the rest of Scripture.

When Montanism made its way to North Africa, where Perpetua lived, it kept its rigorism but was more compatible with orthodox Christianity. Tertullian, who shared Perpetua's hometown of Carthage, was considered by some to have converted to Montanism, and that would not be the case if they were off-base on the essentials of the faith. Litfin quotes a couple of prophecies given by Perpetua concerning her martyrdom.

What was so awful about being a Christian that they were thrown to the lions? One thing is they considered their King not to be Caesar, but Christ. Caesar was a rival king to the True Sovereign of the Universe. In addition, Romans were expected to offer incense to "the genius" - that is guardian spirit or divine power - of the Emperor. The Greek word for "genius" is "daimon" - what word does that remind you of? Yep, Perpetua and other Christians thought the same thing. Any way they would sacrifice to a demon?

Like Ignatius of Antioch and others Christian martyrs, Perpetua and Felicity and their fellow martyrs did not see themselves as victims or their deaths as a tragedy, but they considered themselves as victors over the wiles of the Devil and their deaths as an honor to their Ruler.

THE FIRST CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHER/APOLOGIST - A LOOK AT JUSTIN MARTYR

Would you believe there was a time when you could identify a philosopher by how they dressed? Likewise, would you believe there was a Christian who chose to wear the outfit of a philosopher?

Justin Martyr became interested in philosophy as a young man in the early 100's. He sat under Stoicist, Aristotlean, and Pythagorean followers before focusing on Platonist teaching. He still wasn't satisfied until he encountered an older Christian.

As mentioned above, Justin chose the garb of the philosopher. This gave him opportunities. For example, it lead him into a friendly dialogue with Trypho the Jew, which Justin put in print... er, written form. 

Bryan Litfin, in his book Getting To Know The Church Fathers: An Evangelical Introduction, distinguished his ministry with Ignatius of Antioch. Ignatius' letters were those of a pastor, strengthening the Church. Justin's primary ministry was to those outside, and he presented the Gospel in a way that reached those of the Greco-Roman society.

Justin did not feel philosophy (or more technically true philosophy) was at odds with the Gospel. He also showed some early wrestling with the realization that the Father was God and Jesus, the Logos, was God, and the Father was not Jesus.

This early church leader did live up to his name. He knew of the consequences taking the name of Christ could have; in fact, the martyrdom of Christians drew him before he came to the faith.

Justin is known for the above Dialogue With Trypho. He also wrote his First Apology and Second Apology. In the former, he gives a picture of what a second century church service looked like.

How do we deal with different people of different backgrounds? Justin Martyr was an early example on contextualization, but while he changed his presentation of the truth, he didn't change the truth.

THE LONG ROAD TO MARTYRDOM - A LOOK AT IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH

 

Ignatius of Antioch

I believe it was last year that I saw a meme which said, "If I get killed by a mountain lion, know that my last words were 'Here, kitty, kitty.'" Is it possible that those were the last words of a church father?

 

There are a pair of Saint Ignatiuses. My guess is the better known one is Ignatius of Loyola (1491-1556), founder of the Jesuit movement. Fourteen hundred years earlier was the Saint he was probably named after, Ignatius of Antioch. Note of interest: Before moving to Indy, Becky and I lived in the part of Nashville, TN known as Antioch, and we were about a mile from St. Ignatius of Antioch Catholic Church.

Ignatius (from here on in this blog, "Ignatius" refers to the one from Antioch) was the first Church Father dealt with in Getting to Know the Church Fathers: An Evangelical Introduction by Bryan Litfin. We know very few details about his life; the year his death was set approximately at 115, at that death was assumed to be via a lion or the like in the Roman Colesium. How long he lived, why was he arrested and sent to Rome for execution, and what the name of Budd Abbott's famous third baseman was all have the same answer: "I don't know."

Here are the few facts we know of Ignatius:

• He was a bishop from Antioch of Syria, the city where followers of Jesus were first called Christians, from where Paul started his three missionary journeys. It is possible that Ignatius may have known of Paul, though it might have been as a child.
• He was arrested and traveled to Rome, writing seven letters during the journey. During a holdover in Smyrna, Asia Minor. he was visited there by Smyrna's bishop Polycarp -if you're not familiar with him, look up his inspiring martyrdom defense at age 86 - and bishops from other neighboring cities including one name Onesimus (Philemon's former slave?), who came to encourage their captive brother. Five of his letters were to churches that sent representatives to him along the journey, with the other two being a personal note to Polycarp and a letter to the Church in Rome asking them not to interfere in any way with his martyrdom.
  

We often think of the church of the first three centuries as being persecuted from without but faithful to Christ. That picture is not true. In his ministry in Antioch, he faced two different forms of false teaching that despite their differences shared a dangerous similarity: Both minimized the value and necessity of Jesus' death and resurrection.

On one hand are the Judaizers. You may remember that the important Council in Jerusalem was convened due to Paul and Barnabas being confronted in Antioch following the first missionary journey by believing Pharisees who stated the Gentile converts needed to be circumcised. Antioch was also the location where Paul publicly rebuked Peter for giving mixed messages about the Gospel by changing his eating partners when they had Jewish visitors sent by James. If you think the verdict of the Jerusalem Council and Paul's letter to the Galatians ended the conflict, guess again. I've seen groups today 2000 years later still Judaizing believers, as well as other forms of legalistic teaching. 

How does this teaching weaken the Christian faith? Simple. Christ's death was not enough for salvation. God's grace is not sufficient. Rather, we need to help God save us by obeying Him.

On the other hand were early Gnostics. The emphasis of Gnostics is knowledge, and they believed Jesus came to be a spiritual teacher, a guru if you will. They held to a belief called Docetism, which had little problem of Christ being deity but a big problem with His humanity. For them, it was not necessary for Him to be born, and much less for Him to die a tortuous death. Instead, we are saved by knowledge, by mystical teachings of Jesus (as well as other Gnostic leaders).

What is the solution? Ignatius proposed the concept of a single bishop in each city. The purpose was not to give authority to that bishop but for the sake of unity. The church needs to be unified by both truth and love. Too many focus so intently on one or the other that they don't focus enough on the other.

As I hinted in describing his letter to Rome, Ignatius did not consider a painful criminal's death as a mark of failure. Rather, he viewed it as the cry of a victor, that his demise validated his stands against the Judaizers and the Docetists. Ignatius asked the Romans not to interfere with his martyrdom, and added that some of the wild beasts were on the timid side, so he planned to coax them to eat him. Is it possible that Ignatius' final words were the Greek equivalent of "Here, kitty kitty?"

Are you willing to die an unpleasant death for the sake of Christ? Do you deal with either legalists (including but not limited to Judaizers) or with those who relegate Jesus to being a wise teacher rather than a Sacrifice and Savior? What are you doing to encourage (or discourage) unity in your local church? Do you support, encourage, and even submit to your church leader(s) for the sake of unity and the Gospel?

BOOK REVIEW - WHEN FAITH IS FORBIDDEN BY TODD NETTLETON

 

This is a MUST read book for Christians. Todd Nettleton leads you on a forty day journey interviewing Christians who live in countries where their government and/or community are not happy with them being Christians.

In the West, we view religious persecution as something that happens over there in other parts of the world, but will not happen here, and if it does, we have no one to blame but ourselves for those negative, unwanted circumstances. The believers we meet in this book, on the other hand, see persecution as a natural consequence for faith and view suffering for Jesus Christ as an honor. One lady in the book referred to her time in prison, for example, as "A wonderful time." What causes people to have this mindset?

Todd's stories are nice and short, and this book is great for a devotional. After the story, he challenges the reader to examine where their faith is on certain topics.

I've read over 20 non-fiction books and more than two dozen novels this year (2021), and if you asked me to recommend one book, this would be the one.