Next Door To Heaven (Chapter 9)

Next Door To Heaven (Chapter 9) Ron Bailey The Sin-Bearer What really happened on the cross? The Bible is a book of many parts, and all the parts do not have the same purpose; although together they comprise the Holy Scriptures and are completely trustworthy. To put it very simply, the Old Testament prepares us for the New, but we shall not understand the Old Testament without the New. In many ways the New Testament is the fulfillment of the Old. The Lord saw Himself as the great theme of the Old Testament; "You search the Scriptures,” He said on one occasion, “for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.” (1) The Scripture bore witness to Him; His person, His character, His work. Peter summed up the Holy writings in a different way in his letter; “Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. To them it was revealed that, not to themselves, but to us they were ministering the things which now have been reported to you through those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven — things which angels desire to look into.” (2) In many ways the Scriptures were ‘time-locked’ and their full meaning was not understood. When we move from the Old Testament to the New Testament we begin to read the unfolding of God’s purposes in the four accounts of the Life and Ministry of Christ. The first three accounts, Matthew, Mark and Luke, have many similarities and were probably written within 20 years of the events they record. They have something of the mood of a journalists ‘eye-witness’ account. John’s account is different; it was probably written almost 60 years afterwards and has a commentary added to the events it records. As events unfolded the disciples were often quite unaware of their significance and frequently quite misunderstood what was really happening. John, writing many years later, has thought through many of these implications and he sees significance in every detail. At the time, the disciples were often much less wise than even a casual reader would be now. Just as we have an added insight into the Old Testament by looking backwards from the Gospels, so quite often we have an added insight into the Gospels by looking backwards from John’s account and from the New Testament letters. During the actual time there was much that they could not digest. Although there was much important teaching that they did receive, some teaching was beyond them; “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.” (3) Although He spoke often of the fact of His coming death, He did not explain its significance to them at that time other than in fairly simple terms. It seems that they struggled even with the ‘fact’ of His death, and frequently missed the point. John’s account includes this explanation; you cannot bear them now. The implication, of course, is that a time was coming when they would be able to ‘bear them’. It is important to remember this when we read the gospel and when we see the behaviour of the disciples; they just could not ‘carry’ this real significance of this information and the Lord did not overburden them. The day came when the promise was fulfilled and by a unique gift of the Spirit He opened their minds… Then He said to them, These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me. And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures. Then He said to them, Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. (4) At this point the purpose of His death began to come more clearly into focus. John writing and commenting of the gospel events often gives us glimpses that were not enjoyed by the disciples of the day. So many things must have been quite beyond them. John the gospel recorder was almost certainly a disciple of John the Baptist, and it does not take much skill to see glimpses of him the gospel that bears his name. John Baptist’s work had been to prepare the way for the coming Lord. His preparatory work included a ‘call to repentance’ and a ‘baptism of repentance’; it not very appropriate that the first word we hear from his lips is ‘repent’ (5) . John Baptist also had words of counsel and direction, but his supreme task was to pave the way for a clear view of the coming Messiah (6) . All the gospel recorders tell us that John Baptist referred to Christ as a ‘Spirit and Fire Baptizer’ but only John tells us of another description that John Baptist used. When Jesus came to the Jordan and was baptized John Baptist had protested; I need your baptism and you come to me? (7)  John gave way and Jesus was baptized. John had another description for Jesus; not only was He to be a ‘Spirit and Fire Baptist’, but He was to have another unique role. The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! (8) The Old Testament people of God had a very complicated priestly system with elaborate sacrifices which had to be performed in precise ways. The heart of this system was an annual event called The Day of Atonement (9) . On this day in symbolic action the sins of the nation of Israel were dealt with in a remarkable way. Two important truths were captured in the event by the use of two goats. The first goat suffered a death penalty for the nation’s sin; this underlined the truth that ‘the soul that sins must die’(10) . The second goat did not die but ‘escaped’ into the wilderness. Before it did so an important ceremony had taken place; Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, confess over it all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, concerning all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and shall send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a suitable man. The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to an uninhabited land; and he shall release the goat in the wilderness. (11) In the pictorial truth of this ceremony the role of the goat was played by two separate animals but in the spiritual reality behind it, the two represented a double aspect, and the two goats are a complex picture of a single truth. As a result of the death penalty being enacted God’s righteous punishment was received by a substitute; the goat. But as a result of the sentence having been enacted God was now able to ‘remit’ or ‘send away’ the sins of His people on the back of the second goat. The goats were both sin-offering and sin-bearer. Not only was the penalty suffered by a substitute but a substitute carried away the defilement from God’s people. The people of John Baptist’s day were familiar with the ritual of the Day of Atonement and its two goats. The consequence for Israel was …on that day the priest shall make atonement for you, to cleanse you, that you may be clean from all your sins before the LORD. (12) They were familiar with the concept of a goat acting as a sin-bearer for Israel, but what can they have made of John Baptist’s amazing statement? A lamb would now be a sin-bearer, and not for Israel’s sins only but for the sin of the world. Behold said John. This is not Israel’s goat, but God’s lamb, and He is the World’s Sin Bearer. We are familiar with the ideas now but for those of John Baptist’s day it must have been ‘mind blowing’. Christ’s death then was not as a martyr or as an example but as a Sin-Bearer. As a result of Israel’s Day of Atonement God was able to remain among His people. Paul, the apostle, later wrote; Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God. For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him (13). He is taking up all the symbolism of the Day of Atonement. Christ became the world’s substitute, the Sin-bearer. Peter too, having had his understanding opened, saw the amazing implications of what occurred on the cross; who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness——by whose stripes you were healed. (14) This truth is revealed again and again in the New Testament in similar pictures which illustrate different aspects of the same truth. One such picture is the symbolism of propitiation. There is beautiful little picture of propitiation which lies almost forgotten in the story of Esau and Jacob. Jacob’s cunning had opened up a gulf between him and his brother. Esau was so angry that he pronounced a death sentence upon his brother; So Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing with which his father blessed him, and Esau said in his heart, "The days of mourning for my father are at hand; then I will kill my brother Jacob." (15)  Jacob fled and the separation lasted probably for twenty years, but finally the time came for Jacob to return to his own land. His quick thinking had not deserted him and Jacob decided he must takes steps to pacify Esau. Jacob split up his family to ensure the survival of at least part of his family, and then set to work to get back into Esau’s favour. To begin he sends a conciliatory message but is horrified to hear that Esau is on his way with what sounds like a small army. (16) His solution was an costly present sent in installments with the intention of softening up his brother. The account is fascinating, as is Jacob’s self-honesty. His thinking is recorded plainly for all to see; "and also say, ‘Behold, your servant Jacob is behind us.’" For he said, "I will appease him with the present that goes before me, and afterward I will see his face; perhaps he will accept me."(17) Although the circumstances are not very noble this is a perfect example of ‘propitiation’. ‘Propitiation’ is the price paid in order to remove enmity. It is an instinct deep in the human psyche. If I offend someone I may be able to ‘put things right’ by providing the right price. This was the instinct which caused the child to try to buy his way back into his mother’s favour with a bunch of flowers, or even the husband who forgot the anniversary! Sometimes we even use the language; ‘please accept this peace-offering’. That, in essence, is what a propitiation is; a peace offering. I will appease him with the present that goes before me, and afterward I will see his face; perhaps he will accept me. It is the instinct behind all heathen sacrifice given to propitiate an angry local god. How are we to understand Christ’s death in these terms? Our sin is an offence to God and has opened up an enormous gulf between us. When we begin to understand this rightly our response is one of fear and a frantic search for the right ‘peace-offering’. We can hear it in the voices of the people in Jerusalem on the day that Peter told them that they had executed God’s King but that God had raised Him to heaven’s throne.  "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" (18) That is the plaintive cry for a solution; ‘what shall we do?’. What can we do to remedy the offence? How can we get back into God’s favour. Without the Bible’s revelation men would attempt to find the price. Some still do. Some give costly gifts to church. Some give costly promises of lives to be lived ‘better’ than before. Without the Bible’s revelation we can never calculate the cost of such reconciliation. The offence is far too great; the gap is far to wide for it to be spanned from our side. This is the background behind part of Romans when Paul, speaking of the redemption that is in Christ, writes; being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (19) Paul says God has ‘set out’ the ‘peace-offering’; the propitiation. We sometime say that Christ paid the price for our sins; the truth is even more wonderful… God paid the price, and the price He paid was the death, the blood, of His Son. Christ is the ‘propitiation’; the price paid in order to remove the enmity.  Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself... Even in those dimmer days of the Old Testament the truth had been declared, but it was to be hundreds of years before its full interpretation; Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way; And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, And as a sheep before its shearers is silent, So He opened not His mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment, And who will declare His generation? For He was cut off from the land of the living; For the transgressions of My people He was stricken. And they made His grave with the wicked—But with the rich at His death, Because He had done no violence, Nor was any deceit in His mouth. Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand. (20) Notes: 1. John 5:39 NKJ 2. 1 Peter 1:10-12 3. John 16:12-14 4. Luke 24:45-47 5. Matt 3:2 6. John 1:31 7. Matt 3:14 8. John 1:29 9. Leviticus 16 10. Ezekiel 18:20 11. Leviticus 16:21,22 12. Leviticus 16:30. 13. 2 Cor 5:18-21 14. 1 Peter 2:24 15. Genesis 27:41 16. Genesis 33:6.7 17. Genesis 33:20 18. Acts 2:36,37 19. Romans 3:24-26 20. Isaiah 53:4-10ff

Next Door to Heaven (Part 7)

Next Door to Heaven (Part 7)
Ron Bailey


Setting the Stage


Luke is the main historian of the New Testament. He carefully date-stamps the beginnings of John’s work in water baptism by putting it, "in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontus Pilate being governor of Judea, Herod being tetrarch of Itrurea and the region of Trachonitus and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene." (1) Caesar Augustus died in AD 14 but Tiberius Caesar was associated with him for the last two years of his reign; this gives us a date of AD 26 for Luke’s account of John Baptist’s ministry.

Paul gives a different kind of time scale. In the passage where he had described Israel’s years of waiting for the Seed to come He refers to the coming future moment as the "time appointed by the father." And then with a note of triumph he declares when the fulness of the time had come God sent forth his Son. (2) His word for ‘fulness’ was a word used of a ship being fully manned and ready for sailing, as the English would says ‘a full ship’s complement’. We might even paraphrase it very loosely by saying when everything was completely ready God launched his Son.

The coming of Christ was not the result of a sudden impulse on the part of the Godhead, but a perfectly synchronized and perfectly executed keeping of an appointment. On the natural level we can see how the political events of the past centuries had prepared the Mediterranean world for the coming of the Truth. The momentous changes that over hundreds of years would disrupt the lives of hundreds of thousands were all the preparations for history’s central event. The stage was being set…

On the level of language the conquests of Alexander the Great, three hundred years earlier, had spread Greek culture from Greece to India. If the Finns (3) are the snow-specialists and the Hebrews are the sin-specialists then the Greeks were the thinking-specialists. They had numerous words for thought processes which gave the possibility of great exactness to communication; they were the idealists of the ancient world. Their philosophers and their philosophies still hold a place of honor in western universities. Their language developed in such a way that its prepositions, for example, could have an almost mathematical precision. Greek commerce (they were great sailors) had consolidated their cultural base around the borders of the Mediterranean. The stage was being set…

Greek ideas filtered into Judaism sometimes to advantage and sometimes not. The people of the Old Covenant who spread throughout the Mediterranean became more at home in Greek than in Hebrew and a Greek translation of their sacred scriptures was produced. (4) This is turn, gave non-Hebrews the opportunity to learn about the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and to consider the moral codes of Judaism. This version of the Bible was later to become one of the most powerful weapons in the early spread of Christianity. The stage was being set…

This Greek culture mind-set was taken up by the Roman empire which followed Alexander’s and proved a lingua-franca of thoughts and ideas for western Europe. (5) The Romans who later annexed the broken remnants of Alexander’s successors also added their own contribution. The Romans were the law-specialists. Its codification, its application and its enforcement were all part of the lasting consequence of the Roman Empire. Their army operated not only as frightening machine of conquest but as an international police force.

The Romans cleared the Mediterranean of pirates. They established a system of roads to speed their armies from one location to another. In Britain there were better roads in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD under the Romans than in the 18th century! A network of roads spread from Rome to the Persian Gulf to North Africa, to the whole of Western Europe including most of Britain. Their shipping routes and road network expedited the itinerant preachers of the gospel and gave them a measure of safety. The Roman Pax Romana was harsh, but it was peace. The stage was being set…

On the inner frontiers too the time was ripe. Greek philosophies might gratify the mind but they could never warm the heart. Much Greek philosophy was highly speculative but a consensus had been reached that the physical world and the body in particular was essentially evil. Being ‘evil’ it must be restrained. In some ways philosophies were a reaction against the puerile and amoral antics of the Greek gods. The high moral ground of Judaism was an attraction to many at this time. Some converted and became thorough going Jewish proselytes, and some merely became fellow-travellers known as ‘God fearers’.

The emotional vacuum began to be filled with designer-religions from the east where rationality had no part at all. They are known as the Mystery Religions and have been described as "coming from the East these Oriental systems had over centuries first seeped into, then flooded the Empire. Spiritistic in origin; bizarre in method; immoral in manner of life; fanatical in demands; grotesque in ritual; degrading in effect, they shocked their way into the Roman world." (6) In terms of true spirituality these religions were bankrupt from their beginnings, but initiation rites supplied a sense of belonging. The stage was being set…

The heathen world was ripe for the gospel. It is remarkable how different but similar our current world is to those days. Again we have the sterile philosophical speculations of secular humanism and the bizarre practices of New Age religion. Again we have possibilities of communication on a level never before available. These, too, are days of unprecedented opportunities for the spread of the Truth. Among the people of the Old Covenant two things were poised for a unique purpose. Synagogue worship probably began in the time of the Babylonion exile. It has been said that, "Nebuchadnezzar’s battering rams breached Israel’s theology."

When Jerusalem fell in 587 BC Israel’s destiny seemed to be ruined beyond any hope of repair. David’s dynasty and all the promises that surrounded it seemed lost in the exile and humiliation of Judah’s last monarch, Zedekiah. (7) Their sacrosanct ‘son of David’, their sacrosanct city and their sacrosanct temple and priesthood disappeared in wall of flame. Every national symbol of their faith perished in that conflagration.


Beyond consolation, they mourned their loss by the rivers of Babylon. (8) But the rivers of Babylon were the scene for new beginnings too. Separated from the territorial distractions of their promised land they began a Judaism which was no longer dependent upon priest and temple; the Judaism of the synagogues. Its key workers were no longer the priests but the scribes and lawyers. It became bible-based rather than temple-based.


The Babylonian captivity was also a watershed for the development of the Diaspora; the scattered ones. (9) The people of the Old Covenant spread throughout the known world and wherever they settled they formed synagogues. (10) One legend has it that there were 394 synagogues in Jerusalem alone when Titus destroyed it in AD 70. And the vast majority of Jews lived outside their promised land. 


Between 73 & 581 BC there were six distinct deportations of the Israelites, and more fled voluntarily into Egypt and other parts of the Near East. From this time onwards, a majority of Jews would always live outside the Promised Land. (11)
 
It may be difficult for the modern reader to appreciate the size of the Diaspora. One calculation is that during the Herodian period there were about eight million Jews in the world, of whom, 2,350,000 to 2,500,000 lived in Palestine, the Jews thus constituted about 10% of the Roman Empire. (12) And wherever they settled they formed their synagogues. Synagogues which were witnesses to God’s earlier revelation to Moses.

When James the apostle had addressed the conference in Jerusalem he had been most mindful of this Jewish presence and witness throughout the world. It was with these in mind and the numerous proselytes and God-fearers that the early Christians subscribed, for love’s sake, to some simple prohibitions of diet. James had made the point very clearly in his address. For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in the synagogues every Sabbath. (13)
 
These synagogue communities constituted not only a potentially fruitful mission field for the gospel, but a rich network of contacts and associations throughout the Mediterranean area. Not only ‘mission fields’ but ‘mission bases’ from which the gospel might have spread like a prairie fire. As a mission strategy it was perfect. Wherever seekers were seeking the synagogue was the perfect starting point. Spiritual pilgrims, at whatever point in their pilgrimage, had access to those who were preaching Moses and pointing to the true God. It is no accident that the synagogue or its equivalent was always Paul’s first point of contact. (14) The stage was being set…


There is a time gap of almost 430 years between the prophecy of Malachi and the events of Luke’s histories. During this time there was, no doubt, much setting of the stage. It was during this time that the synagogues grew to such importance. It was during this time that the empires of Alexander and his successors rose and fell. It was during this time that the bloody wars of the Maccabees were fought. It was during this time that the empire of Rome rose to prominence. The stage had received most of its final preparations during this time and yet there had been a strange omission. The spirit of prophecy seemed to have died out. These were the silent years. The length of the gap is not insignificant. For a third of its history the people of the Covenant had been without a Spirit-inspired messenger.


There are four messengers in the book of Malachi; the last book of the Old Testament. The name ‘Malachi’ means messenger, so he is the first. Israel, the priest-nation was to have been ‘the messenger’ (Malachi 2:7) Then in the last two chapters we are introduced to two more messengers. There is one called ‘my messenger’ (Malachi 3:1) whose work is to prepare the way for the fourth and final messenger. The final messenger is described as ‘the Lord… the messenger of the covenant’. (Malachi 3:1)


For four hundred years they waited. The super-powers of those centuries ebbed and flowed in their control of the ‘promised land’. The people of God waited. Their hopes flamed and died away again as their nationalistic heroes began a new golden age that quickly degenerated into a sordid power struggle. They waited… False Messiah’s came with their promises awakening hopes of deliverance which all came to nothing. (15) And still they waited.


Some of those who waited are known to us by name. Simeon was one who was waiting for the consolation of Israel. Anna too knew of those who were waiting for redemption, and was quick to tell them the news of what she had witnessed. (16) Perhaps many had given up hoping, but there were those like Abraham before them who contrary to hope, in hope believed. For perhaps close on 15 centuries the people had boasted a special relationship with God, and for the last four centuries He had had nothing to say to them. All natural optimism must surely have been long dead. But this too, is just the setting of the stage…


Suddenly, without any apparent warning, there comes a flurry of Holy Spirit activity. In clear preparation for some powerful new initiative from God there is often an unmistakable preparation; the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters. (17) An angel interrupts a solemn temple service with a promise of the soon arrival of a Spirit-filled messenger to be born to the aged wife of a aged priest. (18) Six months later the same angel visits a young teenager with the message that the Spirit is about to effect unheard-of miracles within her virgin body. (19)
 
In the moment that the two potential mothers meet, the older woman is filled with the Holy Spirit; a phenomenon not recorded for the previous 400 years! Three months later her aged husband, the priest, experiences the same phenomenon. (20) And an angel visits the virgin’s betrothed husband, and soon shepherds see the skies filled with angel warriors. (21) The sense of anticipation grows. The final preparations are being completed. The stage is set. 


The ‘fulness of the time’ has come… the dayspring from on high has visited us… (22) there is born to you this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord. (23) When the fulness of the time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman…(24)


Notes:
1. Luke 3:1
2. Galatians 4:2,4
3. See Chapter 1
4. The Septuagint, often referred to simply by the Roman numerals LXX.
5. Captive Greece took Rome captive: Horace
6. H Brash Bonsall
7. 2 Kings 24:17-25:7
8. Psalm 137
9. The Disapora are the people referred to in John 7:35. Jews living outside the land of Israel.
10. Acts 13:5,14; 14:1; 17:10
11. A History of the Jews: Paul Johnson.
12. Encyclopaedia Judaica xiii 871
13. Acts 15:21
14. Acts 16:13
15. Acts 5:36,37
16. Luke 2:25,38
17. Gen 1:2 Young’s Literal Translation
18. Luke 1:11-17
19. Luke 1:26-37
20. Luke 1:67
21. Matt 1:18-24
22. Luke 1:78
23. Luke 2:11
24. Gal 4:4

Receiving Christ (Ron Bailey)

RECEIVING CHRIST

Ron Bailey 2004

The phrase has become one of the most familiar in contemporary evangelical Christianity, but what does it mean? In most evangelical groups it has come to mean a personal response to the gospel. In evangelistic meetings or personal evangelism the enquirer is encouraged to make a response to a small subset of Bible doctrines often referred to as the gospel. These are sometimes reduced to 4 steps, the concept being that agreement with these truths and the praying of a simple prayer of confession and commitment effects a transaction in which the enquirer ‘receives Christ’. I came this way, as have many thousands of others. It was a starting place and not to be dishonoured. Every genuine response to God is of vital importance and not to be mocked.

It may come as a surprise to some reading this that this concept of ‘the gospel’ and of ‘receiving Christ’ was the product of the evangelistic campaigns of the 20th Century. This pattern of evangelism has no roots in the history of the Church as we read in the Acts, nor is it in any other part of the New Testament. “But it can be a real help” says the objector. Yes, it may. The purpose of these thoughts is not to undermine or attack any. My anxieties lie in the fact that counsellors or personal workers may ‘go through the motions’ and then declare that the seeker has ‘received Christ’. This then becomes like a Catholic sacrament which is effectual as long as it is in accordance with a pattern.

As a point of reference let’s think about pre-20th Century patterns. Some churches whose traditions go back to the turn of that century may still have what is called an ‘after-meeting’. The idea was that people who had heard the truth and knew they must respond were able to withdraw from the main church service into a more private room where they could pray. Their praying was not the repetition of a ‘sinner’s prayer’ but confession of conscious sin and prayer for personal forgiveness. It some traditions ‘helpers’ would pray by the side of the ‘seekers’ until the seeker was assured that God had heard their cry and forgiven their sin. In the language of Paul in Galatians, they prayed ‘until faith came’. It is interesting to read the histories of these times. Where a contemporary account would have “12 received Christ” those older records would say “12 found peace in believing” or “12 sought forgiveness in prayer” or “12 were comforted”.

Sometimes the struggles of the ‘seeker’ could be alleviated by an occasional word of direction from a ‘helper’ pointing them to Christ Himself or to a word of promise. Later this spontaneous ‘help’ became more formalised in ‘counselling techniques’ which led the seeker through a prescribed list of Bible verses which brought them to the place of understanding and enabled them to pray the ‘sinner’s prayer’. It was much more efficient than spending hours in prayer, apparently.The Bible verses used in this formalisation often included a few verses from the gospel according to John. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (Joh 1:11-13 KJV) Seekers were then encouraged not to follow the pattern of the Jews of that time, but to follow the pattern of those who ‘received Him’. The counselling format became the means of ‘accepting Him’ and the consequential blessings which followed. The reasoning was ‘they received Christ’ and become ‘sons of God’; so you may ‘receive Christ’ and ‘become a son of God’. The pattern spread and became the norm for evangelical Christianity; to follow the counselling pattern was to ‘receive Christ’.

It became such an integral part of contemporary Christianity that to just ask questions about this methodology was to risk being labelled ‘non-evangelical’. Is that true? Not at all, but as John’s gospel is so often used in this context I will try to unpack some of these key verses so that rather than importing our practice into scripture we examine the scripture itself to see how we should behave and what we might expect.

John’s first chapter, as we have it now, is a wonderful introduction to his record and several themes begin here which can be traced through the remainder of the book. He introduces us to the person of the Word who was already present with God at the beginning of all things. He goes on to say that this Word became flesh i.e. human. As well as being an introduction it also contains a little summary of the impact of the Word, Jesus of Nazareth, upon the world that He entered, and of the response of that world to His presence. This response is detailed in a few sentences. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. (Joh 1:9-11 KJV) John is actually describing three concentric circles; we will follow his account.

He came, says John, into the world as the True Light. In the earlier verses he had carefully made the point that John Baptist was not the True Light, but a witness to it. The ideas in this section have to do with God’s witnesses. John was a witness, but the Word, Christ, was The Witness. He was the ‘Real Light’. How did the world that He entered respond to that Light? The answer came a little earlier; That light shines in the darkness, yet the darkness did not overcome it. (Joh 1:5 HCSB) There is a definite sense of conflict in this verse. The Light, which continues to shine, was not overcome by darkness. It hints at a concerted effort of the darkness to extinguish The Witness of the Light as it entered our world. (You can see how deep this idea goes in the Appendix 1: The Witness)

In the later verses this conflict is spelled out more precisely. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. The Greek word behind ‘knew’ is ‘ginoskO’; it is used in many different ways. It is often used in the sense of ‘recognition’; For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes. (Luk 6:44 KJV) and again... he was known of them in breaking of bread. (Luk 24:35 KJV) It means much more than acquiring information. The world did not ‘recognise’ Him. Was this ignorance or defiance? We sometimes use this kind of language when we say that ‘one state does not recognise another’. This is not ignorance but a settled determination to refuse specific status to another country. There may be something of that feel here too. He who created the world was in the world but His creation refused to recognise his person and authority. The world refuses to recognise His status as the Light; the True Witness. That is the widest of our concentric circles, now we can focus more precisely.

The world would ultimately not only refuse to recognise the Light but would actually attempt to extinguish it. There was one place however that God had been specially preparing; His own land . He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. (Joh 1:11 NASB) The NASB here has tried to show the distinction in the original, literally ‘He came to His own things, and His own people did not receive Him’. He came to His own things... Later He told a story with a terrible punch line; But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. (Mat 21:38 KJV) This was the heir coming into His inheritance, the fulfilment of all the prophecies and rituals. This was His land, leased to His servants. This was true of the whole world but especially true of this place and time. Another version translates it; He came to his own home, and his own people received him not. (Joh 1:11 RSVA) Surely if all the world rejected Him there would be one place He could call home, where He would be welcomed? This was the next of our concentric circles and now we come to the innermost core.

They had been chosen for this; delivered from bondage in Egypt, joined in Covenant with God, entrusted with the oracles of God, served by judges and prophets and kings. All was lost in successive deportations which took the whole nation into exile. In the mercy of God a tiny remnant was restored to their land and given a new start; the prodigal nation. Super powers rose and fell. The Babylonian exile severed their dependence on the Temple and made them people of the Book. The Greek empire of Alexander and his successors gave them the tools for world evangelism and put the Book into the lingua franca of the day. The Roman Empire tamed the piracy of the Mediterranean, built thousands of miles of roads along which the gospel could speed, and guaranteedopenaccesstotheirwholeempire. And when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law... (Gal 4) ...and his own people received him not. 

As the word ‘receive’ is important to this topic we will pause to make it as clear as we can. In this first instance in John 1:11 the original word is ‘paralambanO’. It means ‘to take to oneself, to associate with,’ Literally, the word means to ‘take to one’s side’. The negating of this then becomes ostracism. John only uses it twice, the second time will give us some idea of what the kind of ‘reception’ the word has in mind; And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. (Joh 14:3 KJV) You will see immediately that John does not have a passive reception in mind. Can you imagine the kind of welcome He has in store for us? That was the kind of ‘reception’ that might have been expected by His own people but His own people did not receive Him. The first time this particular word is used in the New Testament is also significant; But while he thought on these th ings, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. (Mat 1:20 KJV) Joseph was to take her to his side and recognise her as his very own.

This is not passive acceptance, but a deep personal commitment that places the person by the side of the one who has welcomed him. This,however, His people refused Him. The three concentric circles had no room for Him, but John then introduces another group that is defined not by space or geography or culture but by their right response to the Light.

This group is defined by the phrase ‘as many as received Him’. In his account of the gospel John will show how this group crosses every other barrier. It will include Jews and Samaritans, rich and poor, male and female. Its own defining criterion is that they ‘received Him’. In what sense did the ‘receive Him?’ If we follow the line of John’s thinking it will become plain. The preceding verses have had the Light in mind. John has carefully distinguished the Light from John who came to bear witness to the Light.

Later Christ was to call John a ‘lamp’; not the endless source but a local reservoir of illumination. It is this True Light that the world refused to recognise, and the Light that His own people refused to own. The gospel according to John is a life history of that Light. You may trace the story at your leisure; Joh 1:4-9; 3:19-21; Joh 5:35; Joh 8:12; Joh 9:5; Joh 11:9; Joh 11:10; Joh 12:35; Joh 12:36; Joh 12:46. It is a central point of John’s writings and appears again in John’s first letter; 1Jo 1:5; 1Jo 1:7-9; 1Jo 2:10.

The second section (John 3:19-21) of John’s gospel is very significant. It follows o n from the statement that the purpose of God’s sending of His Son into the world was not in order to ‘judge’ but to ‘save’. John goes on to say that the one ‘believing’ on Him is not judged: but the one ‘not believing’ on Him has already been judged as a result of his refusal to believe in the name of the only begotten Son of God. God’s judgement then is based on the attitude of men and women to His Son. This must imply a meeting with Christ. It is not the idea or doctrine of Christ we are reading of here, but the person of Christ.

This is part of the most famous part of the Bible and the ‘golden text’; For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (Joh 3:16 KJV) This is probably the best loved text in the Bible but even the best texts can become dangerous if detached from their context. For example, this single verse speaks of ‘believing’ but the kind of believing it has in mind can only be discovered by reading the preceding verses. ‘Believing’ here does not mean agreeing with facts as is usually the case in contemporary counselling patterns. The kind of ‘believing’ that John has in mind is the kind experienced by people in a unique situation; And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.(Joh3:14-15 KJV) In other words, the kind of believing that John has in mind is the kind found in Numbers 21.

The nation of Israel had sinned and the consequence of their sin was a plagueoffieryvenomoussnakes. ThecontextissoimportantthatIwillgive the whole section here; And Jehovah sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died. And the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, because we have spoken against Jehovah, and against thee; pray unto Jehovah, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a standard: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he seeth it, shall live. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and set it upon the standard: and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he looked unto the serpent of brass, he lived. (Num 21:6-9 ASV)

These people are not just sick or inconvenienced, they are dying and they know it. They also know why they are dying “we have sinned”. Conviction of sin is a work of God’s Spirit. They had not been persuaded of the facts of the case by an evangelist they knew it. In fact, they took the initiative, they came to Moses. This is much more like New Testament evangelism where theappealcomesfromthecongregationratherthanthepreacher. Theyare desperate in their plea; this sounds much more like those old ‘after meetings’ too.

They are also narrowed down to a single solution; “pray unto Jehovah, that hetakeawaytheserpentsfromus.” Theyknowthattherearenotvarious options but only one possible solution; God must intervene. This is also much more like those old ‘after meetings’. They are seeking a salvation that only God can provide. If God does not move on their behalf they are dead men. Currently their focus is upon the snakes; that must change.

Moses does as they ask and God commands him to make a fiery snake of brass and to erect it on a standard/pole. There is only to be one brass snake and it must be ‘lifted up’ on a standard so that it was in sight of everyone who had been bitten. What a vivid picture this presents. I have a beautiful colour print by Harold Copping in an old Bible. I can’t look at without weeping but let me see if I can describe it to you.

The tents of Israel spread out into the hazy distance. The scene is chaotic, people rushing out of their tents, some running, some standing . As in any panic it is difficult to make out quite what is happening. Or it would be if it were not for a tent in the foreground which is much closer and has its own tragedy unfolding. In the doorway of the tent there is a young man; face down in the sand, a snake is wriggling over his arm and on its way to the next victim. There’s an old man in the doorway, with white hair and beard, his attention is not on any of the chaos around him but is fixed on the horizon where a man holds a wooden stake with single crosspiece; it has a brass snake coiled around it.

There are others in the doorway of the tent; a man and his wife are frantically trying to rouse a young man who looks to be the brother of the snake’s other victim. The mother is cradling her teenage son in her arms, his eyes are closed; her face is pale with grief. The father is fear crazed; his eyes show white as he is tries desperately to rouse his young son from his coma. His face strains to see any signs of life in his son, and his left hand points backwards to the horizon where the brass snake coils around the stake. There are no words, but I know what he is saying; “Look and li ve... look and live”.

Young’s Literal Translation does well to catch the sense of the verbs; And Moses maketh a serpent of brass, and setteth it on the ensign, and it hath been, if the serpent hath bitten any man, and he hath looked expectingly unto the serpent of brass--he hath lived. (Num 21:9 YLT) A paraphrase might say; any man looking away from everything else and putting his whole trust in the snake on the pole, lived. This not just a wonderful story, this is a definition of ‘believing’ as used by John in John 3:16. God so loved the world that He gave His only Son so that any man, looking away from everything else and putting his whole trust in a Man upon a cross, should not perish but have everlasting life. This is John’s desperate cry to all who ha ve been bitten, and that is the whole race, “Look and live... look and live”.

It is delivered to men and women who know that we have sinned and that there is no other remedy unless God takes away the snakes. I said earlier that men’s focus must not remain upon their own condition or even its cause; not the bite and not the poison eating its way through their lives, but upon the one ‘lifted up’. It is the truth often repeated by Amy Carmichael; upon a life I have not lived, upon a death I did not die; upon another’s life, another’s death, I stake my whole eternity. That’s what the Bible means by ‘believing’.

The man who hears and will not look is judged already. This is the judgement, says John, that Light is come into the world and men loved darknessratherthanLight,becausetheirdeedswereevil. Thejudgement then is because of choices that have been made; not by Adam, but by those who do not come to the Light. Christ’s life and words constantly bore witness to the nature of His Father and the nature of men. To those who will embrace the pain of the Light and will accept God’s judgement on their deeds come to the Light and learn how to live there; This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. (1Jo 1:5-7 KJV) The effectiveness of Christ’s cleansing sacrifice is linked inseparably to ‘walking in the light and He is in the light’.

Christ is Light, The Witness, and men’s responses to His Witness determine their destiny. The contrast that John makes in the section under examination is important to note. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. (Joh 3:20-21 KJV) The contrast is not as we might have expected between ‘doing evil’ and ‘doing good’, but between ‘doing evil’ and ‘doing truth’. John’s focus is on honesty not personal merit. The Light entered and its beams disturbed the dust of darkness. Men either scuttled back into the shadow or came to the Light.

It is Christ as the Light, God’s Witness, that those earlier references in John were addressing. Those who received His testimony, received Him as the Light and the experience was open to ‘as many as’. The ending of the third chapter gathers the themes together; He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all. And what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth; and no man receiveth his testimony. He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true. (Joh 3:31-33 KJV) To set to his seal, is to give personal recognition, approval and full hearted consent to The Witness. It is the Amen of the whole of a man’s life to God’s revelation of Himself in Christ. 

We are not speaking of mental assent to doctrinal statement. Let me illustrate, for almost 60 years ago now I have believed that the Rolls Royce is the finest car in the world; I received this truth from my father, and I have never waivered in my faith. This belief, however, has never had the slightest impact upon my life. I have lived a life untouched by this truth I have believed. Biblical truth is different, and the Light which shines still in the person of Christ is not a matter of mental agreement but personal commitment; the of putting all the eggs in to one basket. Thereare no Plan B’s or contingencies; either He who was lifted high is my only Saviour, or I am lost. Either He is the Faithful and True Witness or I am lost. To those who received His Witness a door opened...The words translated ‘received’ in John 1:11, and John 1:12 are different even though they have links. Let’s dig a little deeper. Greek has two main words for ‘receive’.

1. dechomai: means to receive, but in a passive sense. The imagery might be of the outstretched open hand. The gift must be placed into the open hand which ‘receives’ it. Perhaps a suitable English word would be ‘accept’.

2. lambanO: means to receive, but in an active sense. Strong’s Dictionary compares the words by saying it means to take (in very many applications, literally and figuratively [probably objective or active, to get hold of; whereas dechomai is rather subjective or passive, to have offered to one; while lambanO is more violent, to seize or remove.

3. paralambanO:ismadeupofpara,byortotheside,andlambanO. Thayer gives its meaning as

1) to take to, to take with one’s self, to join to one’s self 1a) an associate, a companion

1b) metaphorically, to accept or acknowledge one to be such as heprofessestobe. nottoreject,nottowithholdobedience

The essence is that the basic word lambanO means to take hold of, to grip. Let’s try that in our key verse; As many as took hold of Him to them He gave authority to become... How different the sense is to the passive ‘accepting Christ as Saviour’. One is passive condescension, the other is proactive ownership. There is ano ther key feature of this verse which has been obscured by contemporary personal counselling. This verse may not say what you think it says.

The presumption in much contemporary evangelistic activity is that a response, followed by counselling and the ‘sinner’s prayer’ guarantees new birth, and they say, this verse proves it. Even when we have redefined ‘receive’ to make it clear that this means much more than ‘decision for Christ’ there is more to examine. Perhaps the presumptions come partly from the King James Version pattern of translating two quite different Greek words by one English word; the one English word is ‘power’, and people love the sound of it. The word here translated ‘power’ is not dunamis meaning inherent power or ability, empowering, but the word exousia meaning to be lawful, or authorised. A law-officer has exousia, and it he can hold up the traffic. A weigh-lifter has dunamis, and he can lift up the law-officer. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, (Joh 1:12 NASB) The consequence of men and women receiving His testimony as the Light was that it qualified them for the next stage of their pilgrimage. Receiving His testimony was a necessary event which gave them ‘the right’ to become children of God. However, it takes more than exousia/permission to make a child of God; it would require the dunamis/inward power to that. At this stage John is really only referring to the ‘right to become’ rather than the dynamic which reconstitutes men and women as children of God.

We might paraphrase these verses... John was not the Light, but was sent in order to bear witness about the Light. He was the Real Light, coming into the word and enlightening every man. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, but the world would not recognise Him. He came to His own inheritance, but His own people rejected Him. But to as many as reached out and took hold of Him, to them he gave the right to become God’s children; God’s children who were not born from a bloodline, nor from natural origins, nor from man’s determined purpose, but whose origin was God.

The question is ‘do men and women become children of God as a result of receiving the testimony of Christ?’ Becoming a ‘child of God’ or as the next verses expresses it ‘being born... of God’ is not accomplished simply by agreeing with God’s Witness. Such agreement is absolutely necessary but not sufficient, of itself, to effect regeneration. Regeneration is God’s own work and He alone can testify to its accomplishment. This is part of the weakness of the modern evangelistic format that it puts the work of ‘testifying/bearing witness’ into the hands of a helper; God will not delegate this work.

The process of regeneration, if we dare call it that, appears later in John’s gospel with a warning disclaimer; The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit. (Joh 3:8 NASB) That is to say man or woman, or counselling helper, who thinks they can pin this moment down is fooling himself. The wind, of course, can really only be described by its effects. It is a heavenly action with earthly consequences; Jesus replied, "I tell you for certain that you must be born from above before you can see God's kingdom!" (Joh 3:3 CEV) This is expanding the simple statement ‘born... of God’ used in John 1:13.

The miracle of regeneration was to be accomplished by He who comes ‘from above’. Nicodemus, the person on the other end of this conversation in John 3, was a recognised ‘teacher of Israel’. I suggest you regard him as the best man in the Bible! He was not accused of hypocrisy, nor any sin. His coming to Jesus was an act of self-humbling; the older rabbi attending the younger. He has recognised the uniqueness of Christ’s work and, unlike some of his fellow Pharisees, identifies it as God-given. I suspect we only have the bare bones of the conversation here, although enough to suit God’s purpose in preserving the record. This is a man who from his earliest days has endeavoured to live as he should; I doubt that men come much better than Nicodemus. It was this ‘best of men’ to whom Jesus stated this spiritual axiom; you must be born from above.

This ‘you must be born from above’ must not be seen as a responsibility laid upon Nicodemus, as though the Lord had said ‘you must get yourself born from above’. It was a statement of spiritual fact which applied to Nicodemus as much as to any man, even thought he was the best. If this has been a burden to you, let me express it as plainly as I can. “you must be born from above” is not a command, it is a statement of fact. First the pronoun ‘you’ is plural in the original, so this was not addressed uniquely to Nicodemus the individual, secondly the pronoun is ‘emphatic’. This gives the sense of ‘it is necessary for all of you that you be born from above’. Not only Nicodemus, but ‘all of you’ is the range of the statement. The KJV’s ‘must’ which makes it sound like a command is the Greek word ‘dei’ which simply means it is absolutely necessary. Sometimes the street preacher quotes this verse as though it were the listener’s responsibility, but you can no more make a man responsible for his heavenly birth than you can for his earthly birth.

We must not lay the burden of being ‘born from above’ upon the shoulders of the seeker or the person listening to the preaching; it is not man’s responsibility but God’s. What does God require of me? that I achieve ‘birth from above? Not at all. God requires that I believe His Witness, that I receive Christ in His office of Witness. This will open the door to God’s work; to as many as received Him (the Witness) to them He gave the right to become children of God. Well, you might say, how can a person be sure that they have been born from above? This truth is captured in the phrase ‘the witness of the Spirit’. Notice we are back into the realms of a witness. Modern contemporary evangelistic counselling relies on a linking of Bible texts to convince the seeker of their regeneration. This is what A W Tozer inveighed against when he accused evangelicalism of ‘substituting logical deductions drawn from proof texts’ for the true Biblical doctrine of the Witness of the Spirit. Let’s see how our ‘expert witness’ explains this.

This is a long passage which I will put in the words of the American Standard Version, as it avoids some technical difficulties with this passage, but mainly because it consistently uses the word ‘witness’ and shows the flow of ideas much more clearly as a result. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and the three agree in one. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for the witness of God is this, that he hath borne witness concerning his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in him(self): he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he hath not believed in the witness that God hath borne concerning his Son. And the witness is this, that God gave unto us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath the life; he that hath not the Son of God hath not the life. These things have I written unto you, that ye may know that ye have eternal life, even unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God. (1Jo 5:7-13 ASV) The repetition of the noun and verb ‘witness’ is very powerful. John opened his gospel by declaring that the Word was the True Light; God’s revelation of Himself to His world. Now he says the Spirit is Truth. The mutual witness to the Persons within the godhead by the Persons of the godhead is and undergirding of the truth of Trinity.

It is the indwelling Holy Spirit alone who can bear witness to the believer. Others may give their opinions, and we may even have our own opinion, but the last word must belong to God Himself; If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater. These verses are closely linked. God has borne witness to His Son. Those uniquely commissioned as eye -witnesses have borne witness to the Son; John is one of them. The Holy Spirit bears witness to the Son. The Holy Spirit bears witness to true faith in the heart of the believer. There are no human uncertainties here. The ‘one believing into the Son of God’ has the witness within him. This is how I may know... I will know. The Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God: (Rom 8:16 ASV).

There is an interesting post-script to this in one of Paul’s letters. To the Colossians, whom he had never met, he wrote; As ye have therefore receivedChristJesustheLord,sowalkyeinhim:(Col2:6KJV)he uses the word paralambanO that we met in John 1:11 of His own people who refused to ‘welcome’ Him. How could Paul make this statement of people that he had never met? He had received information from a reliable source that certain things were ‘true’; ...ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel; Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth: (Col 1:5-6 KJV) They had believed the witness of those who had preached the gospel to them, and had come to know the truth of God... for themselves... in truth. To these who have started well Paul says ‘carry on’. The pattern does not change. We begin by acknowledging God’s Word to us, we progress by continually receiving that same Word, and ‘walking in Him’.